Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Exactly so! It’s definitely very regrettable and I, too, cannot fathom by any means what this "stubborn“ adhering to some weird counter-intuitive "workflow" (if you can actually call it that...) is about from Serif's resp. the developers’ point of view. They can't really mean that this manifestation of unnecessary weirdness helps winning over users from industry standard apps like Photoshop (or even keep their own eventually), can they?
  2. @walt.farrell & @LondonSquirrel: Yeah, you're right this is actually one of the reasons I didn't update yet to Catalina or even newer macOS versions. But on my Mac there are only two 32 bit apps which I have used only occasionally and which I could possibly do without. What bothers me more, however, is that so far my 12(!) year old Canon A3 format printer and EPSON scanner have – astonishingly – still been working perfectly with this Mac and Mojave (which I wouldn't have thought beforehand). I'm more than a bit worried that one or even both of them cannot be used anymore with Catalina or newer... Dropping a rarely used app is one thing but being forced to buy a new printer and scanner – especially as the current ones are in excellent shape and working order – is quite another...
  3. Ah... thanks a lot! I'll have to first upgrade my macOs, though – unfortunately, it seems, Mojave is no longer supported... (even though it's a perfectly running system here – so I wouldn't have wanted to change it otherwise).
  4. I initially missed that handy InDesign preview feature in Publisher, too, but I just found: at least here on Mac you can go to „Window > Toggle Full Screen ([control]+[cmd]+F)“ to hide the regular Mac menu bar and then use the Tab key to hide everything else of the Affinity UI (you might also have to switch off the rulers [cmd+R] separately if you had these active). Doing all this I get just the document on the background (grey, black whatever) I've chosen in the Publisher Prefs. No need to mess with that Mac standard green dot in the window's upper left corner – you can do it all with just those keyboard shortcuts. To get back to normal view just do these steps in reversed order. Hope it helps!
  5. Good you mention it: in my case I was actually referring to the Mac-version. Anybody knows if it's true for Mac as well?
  6. Is this a statement actually and officially verified by Affinity/Serif? It would be quite a disaster for me if I installed V2 overwriting V1 in the process and then get problems which I (finally) hadn't using V1... I got to admit it took me some time with V1 to have everything correctly in place and under control to get production ready "safe“ PDFs which I can confidently send to my printing providers these days...
  7. In the videos and on the Affinity website I haven't found anything so far regarding this useful feature, which I would like to be at hand in Designer, too. It has been possible to do these things in Illustrator for ages and I have to admit now that I was expecting so much more from V2 than what it actually offers... Shape Builder and Envelope Distortion are certainly cool, but these, too, have been present in competitor apps for so long that they should have also been in Designer already years ago...
  8. Yes, guides in InDesign used to be attached to the layer that was active while that guide was created. So you were (or still are) able to create a dedicated "guides layer" (which I actually often did back in the day...)
  9. Yeah, that would feel quite natural. Otherwise it would be helpful to be able to really select a guide (like in InDesign) and then delete it (or change its position via the ”Transform“ panel like with any other object).
  10. Interesting point(s), Paolo! I tend to agree, actually and it seems to support my notion that the Affinity apps should indeed put a strong(er) focus on "professional" features, which will help secure a smooth and hassle-free production process – like e.g. really foolproof colour management and (accordingly) error free PDF output. I have the impression that it is still way too easy to produce productionwise faulty PDFs using Publisher while in InDesign it used to be almost foolproof once you had set up your Creative Suite apps correctly once and for all in the initial setup (especially concerning colour spaces and profiles). Furthermore I tend to think that Adobe’s offering the possibility to entend/complement inbuilt features on quite a grand scale by helpful and powerful 3rd party plugins and scripts in Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign has really created some serious creative atmosphere or ecosystem around the apps, which had made them all the more attractive to all creative users. In my opinion you cannot for example underestimate the positive effects which some 3rd party plugins (or plugins collections) have had for the attractivity of PhotoShop to creatives over the years: KPT (back in the day), Alien Skin, Mr. Retro and many others. Or – e.g. – those by Astute Graphics for Illustrator. Having used some of these to my benefit back in the day and having learned about many others which I might have tried some day I can't help but feeling more than a bit limited every now and then after having switched to Affinity a couple of years ago... Last but not least: of course Adobe will try to make students and amateurs sort of dependent on their software, which – as you say correctly – they will have often learned to use in school or other education and have been able then to subscribe to at drastically reduced educational discounts. Many of them will obviously be hesitant to learn yet another software after having learned to feel sort of at home in CC. it If you want to make someone addicted that's the way to go I'd say...
  11. Absolutely so! It's been in Photoshop for years and years now and it's super handy to have for certain applications. We also need Affinity to have additional instances of an applied effect so that changes in the „master“ effect will reflect in all instances of that master and we don't have to do them all separately. This – as well – has been possible in Photoshop for a long time by now. Features as these can boost productivity quite a lot and I think that better than just being special or different [for difference’s sake] you really DO have to „learn from your enemies“ (or competitors) and eventually beat them at what they supposed were their advantages.
  12. I think this is a valid notion. I’m not 100% sure, however, which kind of user Serif/Affinity are really targeting as of now: do they really (still) want to lure professional InDesign (and – as market shares come into it – to a lesser extent Quark) "power users" – preferably in the print design area – away from their industry standard apps which they have maybe been dealing with for decades? Then it makes perfect sense to go for a script language these users may well have some experience with. If these users are being targeted (more than before) now or in the future the developers should, howver, certainly address several issues (which I won't repeat here) in the Affinity apps that have been requested time and time again over the last years. Scripting is just one of them.
  13. @ Nizer: well that's quite elaborate, I’d say! But honestly: it's a shame that we're still left to calculations like that. As I wrote quite some time ago: this kind of job (doing that arithmetic) is exactly what computers have been invented for in the first place and we can only hope the devs at Serif finally come to this conclusion as well... It may be comparing apples to oranges but really: this kind of everyday problem in a lot of general design jobs should certainly have been prioritized to – e.g. – enabling users to do fancy astrophotography editing (even if possibly millions of AP user would have dearly missed THAT 😉)...
  14. You're perfectly right! Although I'm happy to have left the A****-universe behind and to have found a very decent alternative with the Affinity apps I find myself despairing over the Affinity UI (and the workflow implied by it) times and times again. The handling of colours is certainly not the only but a prime example. Having worked in InDesign for many years I do know from that experience that you obviously can get colour handling right. Swapping a global CMYK colour to Spot (PANTONE or self assigned) couldn't be much easier – also InDesign’s feature to just pick a replacement colour when you delete a colour swatch is so helpful and intuitive. Unfortunately I have often got the impression that the guys at Affinity/Serif wanted to make certain things different from the A****-apps for the sake of just being different while not really caring for a smooth and intuitive user experience, which, however, should be the very foremost objective when designing a professional app. Which designer would object if Publisher's handling of colours were actually similar or even identical to InDesign‘s? It's a proven concept that WORKS and I cannot really imagine that a general way of doing things like this can actually copyrighted...
  15. I tried to verify this via their website but I honestly could not find actual proof for this. As you can obviously check overprinting by activating the proper kind of view mode one would have thought that being able to inspect colour separations would have been a point worth mentioning in the features list...
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.