Jump to content

Pioof

Members
  • Content count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Hi. Back on this thread for a check, I found MEB's above 'explanation'. Thanks for that. It seem to vindicate my earlier hypothesis that devs initially chose a data structure that makes selection by attributes very impractical (thus very slow). Sorting this mess out would mean rewriting most of the code, a formidable task that would not offer clear benefits to the existing users of AD (compared to adding fancy 'creative' features). So my hunch is that AD 1.x will never have selection by attributes. And it's not even obvious whether AD 2.x will have the different internals that could allow it. All in all, I won't waste my time any more with AD. Too bad, on paper, it seemed cool.
  2. Same as B4ttleCat, by using Adobe Illustrator. There's no workaround to this feature. You'll have to love manually selecting a zillion of objects without mistake (an interesting psychometric task, sure). Funny I haven't totaly given up on AD and still checking this forum every 6 months or so. Seeing for how long the issue has been around, I suggest that the moderators should write a sticky post "Tomorrow, AD gets the oft-requested selection by attribute". This would save them some time (ok, not that we get feedback on the issue very often).
  3. I'm coming back to see if there had been any progress on this issue. But no. You have limited resources, right, but also wrong priorities I'm afraid. This is perplexing to me. You are probably catering to your existing user base, but you should understand that adding basic functionality would expand that user base significantly. Anyway, still on AI CS6.
  4. I'm not davision, but I'd say that the ability to rotate the canvas (rather than the object after you've created it) is not an essential functionality. Similarly, adding and editing a pressure profile curve along any path is certainly nice to have, may speed up certain effects, but its absence won't block you from using the app. The inability to do multiple selections based on color/weight/appearance/... is a showstopper for anybody working with complex documents, especially when editing these documents, not creating them. Right now AD is ok for simple layouts like web site graphics, or for some illustration projects. It's completely inadequate for even moderately technical projects, which I believe is the most frequent use of AI. They'd get more long-term customers and revenue from this population of users with a few features crucial for power users than with new brushes or texture effects. Right now I don't mind, I'm still working fine with AI CS6. When it'll stop working completely because of OS change, I'll go back to Affinity to see what they've been up to in the meantime. See, I'm even checking right now out of pure curiosity...
  5. From the AD team response, I suspect that they initially botched up by not thinking a minute about this feature and decided on a data structure that makes this kind of automated selection impractical to code or horribly slow to run. Now they have either to recode vast portions of the program or set up a dual, redundant data structure to handle this (fast but memory-hungry). Of course that's just speculation. But otherwise I don't see why after four years they still haven't implemented this obviously essential and much requested feature.
  6. "Select same...." The missing function. And if you have spare time, align on click-selected object, à la Illustrator. Much more powerful than align on first/last.
  7. I'm trying an evaluation version of AD, as a possible replacement of AI. The lack of smart selection is a deal-breaker for me. How many times did I select strokes of a given weight, or changed colors for a specific combination of weight & color... I'm usually editing EPS output from other programs that can happily spit out thousands of strokes in complex graphs. No way I'll be selecting them by hand! You may dream of a neater, grander way to implement criterion-based selection than AI's, but if it's taking too much time then in the meantime please ape their elementary solution... it's really not rocket science.
×