psiclone

For some reason, I can do this in Photoshop and many other "lesser" programs.  I also need this capability, as it is a format that game artists use or have to use often enough.  It shouldn't be a question as to why we need it at this point, but that it's a requested feature over the years and should be easy enough to implement.

Wow, this thing has gone on for 6 years and is still not implemented?  I like AD, but honestly there's so much that can be done in Adobe's products that it makes it harder to justify going to an Affinity product, aside from price.  Don't get me wrong, I don't like how Adobe is handling things with their pricing structure or support in general, but their products do generally have a better workflow.  Not the same thing, but similarly I'm often CNTL+ clicking on a layer thumbnail expecting a selection of the layer's objects, but it all depends on what profile you're in.   Very awkward.  Too many steps.

Wow, this thing has gone on for 6 years and is still not implemented?  I like AD, but honestly there's so much that can be done in Adobe's products that it makes it harder to justify going to an Affinity product, aside from price.  Don't get me wrong, I don't like how Adobe is handling things with their pricing structure or support in general, but their products do generally have a better workflow.  Not the same thing, but similarly I'm often CNTL+ clicking on a layer thumbnail expecting a selection of the layer's objects, but it all depends on what profile you're in.   Very awkward.  Too many steps.

3 years later and still no angle to gradient in any obvious form.  Is it really that hard?  I can do this in InkScape no problem.

Try this:
 
1. New document.
2. Click once on the Rectangle Tool (or type "M")
3. Click the square to the right of "Fill:" in the upper left corner of the window.
4. Click on the "Gradient" tab.
5. Note there is no field to set the ANGLE.  Please add that.
 
Why?  Because Illustrator has one and for good reason.
 
Yes, you can set the angle by going outside the Gradient panel, choosing the gradient tool and then manually doing it.  But if one is already working inside the Gradient tab (especially for matters of precision), it is only logical that an ANGLE setting should be in there too.
 
Thanks!

I'm never clear on which of these (Designer vs Photo) are directly aimed at competing with Photoshop, but even Photoshop can do simple animated gifs, etc.  I would think that's a feature that should be added.

Wow!  Such a huge benefit to all to draw upon (no pun intended) your experience.  Thanks!

Wow!  Such a huge benefit to all to draw upon (no pun intended) your experience.  Thanks!

One could also see this as an evolution on both sides.  First, we had beta available for us to test and help Serif identify and work out bugs to get a functional program out to the public.  Now that it's released, choose whether or not you want to pay for it.  I, for one, am happy to jump at the chance to ditch Adobe and go for a good contender that offers a perpetual license for a one-time cost.  If by "premium," you mean to say that it can't hold a candle to Photoshop, I can't really address this, as I've not gotten familiar enough with Affinity to say.  That said, if by Serif asking us for feature requests means that we get their product to evolve into something we feel really is a true contender to Photoshop or some other Adobe product, and they act on those requests, then both sides win.  Even if they add features and call it Affinity <insert product name here> 2.0 and sell it at the same price again or at an increased price, then we still win.  It sure beats the heck out of a subscription.
 
That said, as it stands for me, Photoshop is still on top (time will tell as I get more familiar with Affinity), but I've already found free alternatives to Illustrator, Dreamweaver, and Acrobat that I find more capable.  Photoshop and InDesign are really the only products left that I find are worth keeping, until something better comes along.  I also only use my CS3 for now, as I don't and won't bother with subscriptions and skipped the later versions.  As soon as I can ditch Adobe I will and it won't matter if they go back to perpetual licenses (which I know they won't).  I would gladly pay a little more (or in this case, a little less) not to have to deal with Adobe again.
 
The notion that people don't want to pay for premium is rather off.  Sure, some won't pay more than they can afford or would otherwise pay and, for that matter, some would even steal it if they can.  Most of us who pay and work professionally with programs like this would actually consider paying more, but we didn't set the price and are likely glad to see we're not getting shafted by paying a lot for a program that's likely to evolve greatly in the coming months/years.

I could see this feature being very useful, especially since some game engines (E.g. Unreal Development Kit) require textures in power of two sets.

I downloaded the Affinity Photo beta and just to see what it can do for me in this particular project and while it does offer absolute dimensions without resizing, I'm realizing that also being able to resize it with those dimensions should also be added...as in a checkbox that says "crop and resize."   Thus, when I crop with dimensions, I can also have it resize the item affected to adjust size automatically.
 
Here's what I'm after.  I have a photo and I want it to be 129px by 194px, but the photo is of a different size and aspect.  So, I go to crop, tell it I want a 129px by 194px crop, but the subject of the photo is still just out of range of that size.  So if I then could check "crop and resize," I would expect the crop box to keep it's 129 by 194 aspect ratio, but allow me to size it up to encompass the whole subject of the photo I'm after.  Then it would crop the photo and adjust it to fit the subject in question.
 
I realize that there could be many cases where this just simply wouldn't work, but could work very well for a photo of a person who has a lot of background imagery that just isn't important.  If the box ends up cropping outside the photo, then the crop could simply add in background to make the thing fit.  That might also be another checkbox or perhaps a prompt, "The image cannot be cropped and resized.  Would you like to add background to fit?"  If yes, then let the user choose the background color, use an image or to make it transparent.  If not, then they simply need to figure out another path ahead.
 
Thoughts?

Thank you.  It sounds like that capability is in there, but I don't see the Mode dropdown you're referencing.  It seems I've already found a bug in that the context toolbar doesn't show the right stuff when clicking on the crop tool.