Jump to content

lsilva.m

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About lsilva.m

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Portugal
  • Interests
    abstract, scientific illustration, and sci-fi

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. it is working wonders! Best hack I could do in affinity in the last time: save a picture frame from publisher in one asset in designer! \o/
  2. It might work. But meanwhile I been trying, and I came with the following solution: create a simple `picture frame` in Publisher and then open the file in Designer, from there I copy pasted the `picture frame` to make the panels I needed. To keep the frame, I created a new asset were I have it now -- this way I can have a backup with the same aspect ratio of the saved `picture frame`. It looks like this: During the next weeks I will test it, and check it smooths my workflow. Thank you leo
  3. Hello, I am preparing some templates panels (eg 4x2) and I am stuck in the decision on what to do, because I want to use the ability of Designer to create artboards and export them at once with different names; but at the same time I would like to have the ability to place `picture frames` in my template, so I can be sure that the pictures I add have the same dimensions. I tried to make the template in Publisher, but then the `picture frame` is editable only once if I open the same file with Designer -- so, if I make a mistake and need to insert the picture again the `picture frame` would not be there. On the other way, if I make the template in Designer, and open it in Publisher I have to add the `picture frame` one by one, and export all the artboards one by one. tl:dr: What would be the best way make a template where you can have `picture frames` to add pictures in different artboards, and export the artboards with one click? Thank you in advance Leo
  4. Thanks for sharing. Interesting. As you can tell from the figures that started this post, I am not from electronics. But I am doing a collaboration with the electronics department, and oh boy, I have so many doubts/questions on electronics now.
  5. not for me -- working in MS PowerPoint to make this kind of drawings is a both interface and lack-of-fluidity pain to my brain. That is why I followed the advice of a friend I give a try to Designer -- after trying Inkscape, which was also a pain. Other than that, for example you can't (at least so easily) export ´.tiff´ or ´.svg´ formats, let alone that you can't opt what dpi use for the export. You can change the HKEYS though. Plus, there is one more thing about using MS PowerPoint: it compresses microscopy pictures, and that could add noise, and reduce quality of a picture that sometimes its already hard to interpret (biologically speaking). What I do is to make the drawings in Designer, export to ´.svg´, then add it to a MS PowerPoint slide, make it "flat" so my colleagues can edit. yes. Many. I don't know one in the life sciences that shows "Figure1.A \\ Figure1.B etc ". Here is one example from Cell (Elsevier). I think graphic designers and scientists should have coffee more often Best, L
  6. I see your point. This is to show that it is that protein that is being represented above -- the size relative to the other it's to give an idea of relative size between the proteins. in scientific papers we use the short (A) and (B) -- it's a standard in the community. The way I draw that is to represent the proteins, and by convention they are represented from the N to C, which means that we are representing them from the N-terminal to the C-terminal; that would be the alternative to "N" and "C" --> "H2N----" and "-----COOH"; or, there is another acceptable alternative that is the number of amino acids that make the protein, so that would be from left to right: "1" to "n". The boxes in the line represent domains of the proteins - that is parts of the protein that have a function. In this case the CR2 domain is competing with N-TAD for the CH1 domain. I thought about that. Originally, I only had the boxes without text, but then, for scientific rigor all domain of the protein should be represented, even if you just want to focus in one; that's why I left them grayed out. I tried to place the names inside to be more coherent, but it would bring inconsistency in font size to fit the domain box -- how would you solve that? Because I have two constrains here: (1) font size should be at least 10, and (2) the proportion of the line and the boxes needs to be kept since they represent the protein, and parts of the protein, respectively. How do you check for this in Designer? Thank you
  7. Yeah, that was one of the things they changed. They changed the size of the font, in the original the font was almost tightly fit within the object and bold for the main proteins. But I will explore that idea of more saturated colours Thanks
  8. Hi everyone, recently my group publish a review paper, and I did the final images in Affinity Designer (which were slightly edited by the journal editor...). If you can, have a look and give me your opinion -- I'm seeking constructive criticism, so I can improve Thank you
  9. agree! I think serif as a point, but before at least seems to me that it was more versatile, therefore any user could apply their own logic. Now I feel its more constrained, and personally I have to remember now that the order I select the objects matters - before I could just adjust on the fly what I wanted to align to; and this saved me mouse travelling between selecting objects and going to the Alignment tool.
  10. Yes, but that changes the position of the objects, and breaks their position. I imagined that. Will need to get used to the new tweaks then - my issue will be to understand when it is that the alignment will happen to the "first" or "last selected". Well, until I get used to this ctrl+z will be my best friends Thanks
  11. What tweaks exactly? I can't select the "Align To" to what I want to align, like I use to - is this a bug or it is suppose to be like this from now on? If so, what is the logic behind it, so I can get used to it. For example in the attached pic I can't select to align vertically to the "Last Selected" I am forced to align to the margins. Why? Thank you :)
×
×
  • 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.