Jump to content

Tazintosh

Members
  • Content count

    176
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tazintosh

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://tazintosh.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

580 profile views
  1. « Sorry that you have experienced this issue, it is one we are aware of and it's been passed over to the developers to investigate further. » --> My yesterday e-mail answer. Wait, did I said it wasn't my fault (too)? Funny… From now on, since any new document is default created at 96dpi, I'll make sure to never ever change that in case I've some copy/paste to handle (plus checking triple… as I was always doing before in the end…). BTW Affinity team, when you'll fix this bug, please also keep the unit preferences, color, etc. When you're working on a "mm" unit document, and ⌘ ⌥ ⇧ n to create a new one, make sure to keep those units set on the new document. Chances are quite high the user will have to continue working following the same document definition.
  2. The "⌘ ⌥ ⇧ n" is a known issue by Affinity, they just confirmed it to me… It wasn't my day, I paid hard for this bug.
  3. Just to share a bad experience, even after almost 20 years in the creation process… Hope this can serve someone else than me. Hi dear Affinity Team, Almost since the beginning of your adventure, I'm a big fan of your apps. Bought them all, trash any single piece of Adobe files on my system, I just love your work. Well… until today… A few days ago, I've designed an Affinity Designer file, which contain 3 very precisely scaled shapes planned to be laser cut (document set in cm). The laser company needed separated files, so, for each of the three shapes to be cut: • I copied the group shape and pasted it on a new document (⌘ ⌥ ⇧ n). • Saved the new document for reference and exported it to PDF. • Sent it to cut to the company. I paid 209,33€ for the job (inox plates, 2mm thick) Today, I received the plates, and they are too small!!! I immediately checked my exported files, and indeed, they are too small!!! So: • Yes, this is my fault for not having double checked the exported files and the company has made no mistake, so their is nothing I can complain • BUT, YOU changed the scale during the copy/paste process!!! Why such a bug exist??? I was trusting you, didn't pay attention… This bug can be reproduced at will, cannot believe it!!! I'm absolutely revolted right now, both against me by my excess of confidence in the quality of your work, and by you because your lack costed me so much money! I don't know what to think anymore. Regards
  4. Put me on the list. I've an stainless steel plate to get cut and cannot provide a dxf file! Actually testing one by one any online PDF to DXF I can found, but yet none of them provided a dxf that seems to work.
  5. Tazintosh

    Drawing bug with Depth of Field (DoF)

    Hi MEB, Any update from the dev team? I experience the issue (also with perspective effect, etc.) The real problem is that I cannot even export, thus the feature is useless for me and quite a problem for my needs
  6. @Ulysses & @AdrianB: thanks for the proposal of not updating. But since you took this statement without having the big picture: perhaps I need to update because I'm also into app development (UI more precisely), and I've to be able to run the last system + Xcode to compile and test our apps for you guys I'm already more than 1 year behind (already with hack, else, I'm officially more than 2 years behind), but cannot continue now.
  7. Hi folks and Affinity Team, This is 5 years (June 2014) now that Apple have dropped Aperture. Since then, I've tested everything around and Aperture simply beats hands down any single other apps in the — DAM — aspect. (I'm not talking about the adjusting tools, which luckily did evolved on competitors). And if we speak about adjustments, it was a matter of 300kB with Aperture, which was describing all in a text file + some B&W masks… I've purchased Affinity Photo in July 2015, since then, I'm reading here people asking for a DAM (many, are still on Aperture like me), and Affinity is answering, "yes", "yes", "yes", then "no", then back "yes"… So I'm sticking on Aperture, it's that simple (sadly) The day an Affinity DAM will come, I simply hope it will vaporise Aperture, which no one yet have been able the achieve. But now, the wait must come to an end. Apple have officially dropped 32bits apps, and Aperture (which still has some 32bits code), can't work on Catalina. As professionals, we need to know were to go, how and when to invest. Please answer us guys.
  8. Hi Dave, Checking "Allow advanced features" did "solved" the issue, but I never had this need before. This is curious, either the export behaviour has changed, either I never exported gradient alpha before (would be surprising), either I never paid attention till then (oO) I'll pay much more attention now. Question, how did you checked back your PDF to assume that nothing was rasterised if "the transparency group is rasterised during the import" ?
  9. Hi Sean, sorry to bump and push on this, but everything basic I'm exporting is still rendered as image (see above explanations). This is a big issue for me.
  10. Let me correct this statement for you: “I too million this request” Reading it would “unlikely” be “in the 1.x cycle” made me quite sad.
  11. Hi @carl123, I've done 95% of this yesterday, but your italic statement right after point 5 made me understand. The fact some slices are not resized is because when you drag the small slices, the big one is still selected. If you select only the small slices (and you're right, their position / size must be the same), then all of them will resize together. So this is a solution, but… sadly, it only applies on this example, were all layers are the same. In my real need, all of them are different (I should have randomised all my discs sizes, sorry). Anyway, this points out the simple feature that would solve it all: The transform panel should not be greyed out at the moment a multiple slice selection is done. Thus we could use it. Thanks for your test, now it's time for the Affinity Team to fix this
  12. Yes it is, as I've made/shown on my second artboard of the last attached document. But I've done that all manually, which is the precise point I want to avoid.
  13. No it's not ^^ As said, I've to export all slices —at canvas size—, each containing it's own layer content. Look closely to the screenshot I've initially posted. All slices are stacked on each other. This is what I mean --> see attached file SlicesTransform.afdesign
×