Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. If you like this check out Macula. https://www.boldmonday.com/typefaces/macula/
  2. Scripting support is not a replacement for new features. Every useful feature that a lot of people might need should eventually be in affinity designer so every artist (which is the target group here) can use it without having to download some plugin first. But with built in features you can only do about 95% of the things you might want to do. The last 5% is usually some niece functionality that very few people need. I personally would need it to do "mathematical" drawing. Power duplicate is cool but what about geometric sequences, logarithmical/exponential ones, or animating certain properties? This would be only a few lines of code but not something worth including in the app itself. I can see why scripting is not that high on their priority list, but should they get to 95% it would be happy to have it in affinity designer.
  3. As a pro app It would be great if affinity designer (and of course also photo, but I haven't used that to date) supported a linear color workflow by default. That is where the gamma is taken into account for color manipulations. Best would probably be to have a gamma setting on a per document basis. As far as I know all software with professional color management has an option for this somewhere in the settings. Especially if this is used in a production pipeline that relies on proper sRGB handling this functionality is critical. Hoping to see that soon on the feature roadmap.
  4. In my opinion Affinity designer is a remarkable tool regarding how new it is. My compliments to the entire development team. There is one point of critique, though, which is that in my opinion it is not "The first OSX vector drawing app that has figured out how to do Bezier curves correctly" (besides, what matters is being best not first). Coming from an Inkscape background and having used apps with very limited bezier drawing capabilities (e.g. the old pages) it feels natural to have "symmetrical" nodes, meaning nodes where the tangent handles are constrained to have both the same slope and length. Currently one has to use shift and snapping to achieve this result on a tangent, but moving one tangent of course does not preserve this relation. The reason one might want a symmetrical node is to achieve a "better" smoothness where the curve is not just G(1) but C(1) continuous (where the derivative at that point does not just exist but is also continuous). In my opinion this is a fundamental type of node and deserves its own button in the convert section of the node tool. Even a key binding would do if not otherwise possible. If this is an intentional design decision, I'd like to see the reasoning behind it. I hope this is not a duplicate request or has been implemented in the current beta, in that case: great job and keep going.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.