simonlayfield

Yeah sorry this is what I meant when I said it's possible to replace all by replacing symbol contents. But, say, if you only want to replace some (not all) of them, then it's fiddly work.
In my case, I want to try different colourways for designs, with multiple artboards containing multiple instances of that design. Once I have a full set of boards in one colourway then I want to duplicate those artboards and change the colours of the design (Symbol). But I can't do this without detaching the Symbols, recreating a new Symbol and repositioning it in each place on the new Artboards.
If I was able to replace a Symbol with another, then I could keep the new Artboard symbols positioned as is, duplicate the original Symbol as a new one and then (drag and replace?) the new Symbol to replace them individually (or even better select in Layers panel, right click, Replace Symbol).
Does that make sense?
 

Hi @simonlayfield,
Your layer position is using fractional values. Set them to integer values and you will be fine  

You could try grouping the masks and adjustment layers so you have the artboard and the group.

Hi team,
I was just wondering if there's a way to replace multiple Symbol instances with a different Symbol? I can't find a way to do this, to basically swap out a selection of Symbol instances.
Obviously I know that you can detach and recreate a Symbol, thus effectively duplicating it and then replacing the content of that Symbol - but this doesn't quite provide the same control as being able to swap multiple existing symbol instances with a different Symbol. An example of this would be swapping a number of icons (existing symbols) in a UI with a different icon, maintaining proportion and position on the Artboard - rather than dragging, resizing and repositioning a different icon from the Symbols panel.
I'm not sure if this feature has already been requested, or if it's been, or being, considered.
Thanks

The first version will be very simple but functional - along the lines of Illustrator, as mentioned by MikeW. It will not be a Find + Replace, that will come later. It will be, as stated, a 'Select Same' with a number of variants and easily assignable to keyboard shortcuts for productivity's sake...

You can right click on those specific layers and choose "Exclude from snapping"

From my point of view, if I select any path with a brush applied, it should contextually show me which brush was used. It doesn't have to select it, but if I use a variety of different brushes for some artwork, it's useful to keep track of what is being used where.
I also agree that if you switch tools from the brush tool, the selected brush setting remain sticky; returning to the brush tool should have everything as was previously shown and selected.
Those would be my preferences, at least.

From my point of view, if I select any path with a brush applied, it should contextually show me which brush was used. It doesn't have to select it, but if I use a variety of different brushes for some artwork, it's useful to keep track of what is being used where.
I also agree that if you switch tools from the brush tool, the selected brush setting remain sticky; returning to the brush tool should have everything as was previously shown and selected.
Those would be my preferences, at least.

I'd be keen to know if there's any plan for this experience to be enhanced. I can't quite work out from this thread if it's a bug or if this is expected, but if you need to retroactively find the name of a brush used on a path it's basically...well, it's a serious challenge.
Here's that experience in a video:
https://www.loom.com/share/febf4dfd5e0d478e8309cdb4351b5cba
Am I missing something? Is there a way of knowing which brush was used on a path either by name, or by seeing it selected in the panel (which isn't ideal if you have to rummage through a large number of brushes to find the one that's selected but hey ho - better than nothing).
 
 

@VectorVonDoom It's true - and I wasn't suggesting this is a sufficient replacement for that feature. Select by same colour/fill/stroke appearance is powerful because it allows you to perform number of options once selected. I thought it was worth posting because it covers one of the many use cases that might apply, and global colours are a feature perhaps not everyone would know about.

I'm hanging out for the feature requested in this thread because I've felt the pain of having to select a crazy number of shapes and curves in order to make document-wide amends to complex artwork.
Yeah, this involves some manual management of global colours. If it helps, you can show global colours as a list and then rename them to more useful/descriptive terms. See below:


The only caveat here is that if you end up using the 'Face Tone Dark' global colour for something that isn't part of the face then semantically it can get confusing. It really depends on the complexity and level of granular control as to what naming system is most useful.
 

@madtho If you happen to be creating a project from scratch you can workaround having to change colours in multiple places by using global colours within a Document Palette. If, when creating new objects the global colour swatch is used as a fill or stroke colour then you can change this colour later and it will update whereve it is being used in the document. See below:


The only thing to be aware of is that a global colour isn't a global colour in the strictest sense - the swatch actually has to be active when you're creating new objects. It will, however remain 'attached' to the object if a shape is duplicated (as above).

Of course this isn't the same as selecting by same fill/stroke/appearance but as far as amending colours in a document goes it saves having to essentially go through the same manual process of selecting a huge number of shapes and curves (which would have to be selected separately by whether the colour of the stroke or fill needed changing).
Hope this helps

 
 

What you can do is ALT+click on the nested layer. This makes it visible in it's entiety. The drawback is that this turns of every other layer so you'll not see the context. I assume this is not what you are asking?
d.

Agree, the need to exchange one symbol for another is essential to a complex illustration with oft repeated items.
Editing a symbol and permeating it throughout is fine, but when you want to, for example, select several and exchange them for a variant it is currently lengthy and manual (I am currently discovering! )

Hi team,
I was just wondering if there's a way to replace multiple Symbol instances with a different Symbol? I can't find a way to do this, to basically swap out a selection of Symbol instances.
Obviously I know that you can detach and recreate a Symbol, thus effectively duplicating it and then replacing the content of that Symbol - but this doesn't quite provide the same control as being able to swap multiple existing symbol instances with a different Symbol. An example of this would be swapping a number of icons (existing symbols) in a UI with a different icon, maintaining proportion and position on the Artboard - rather than dragging, resizing and repositioning a different icon from the Symbols panel.
I'm not sure if this feature has already been requested, or if it's been, or being, considered.
Thanks

I'd be keen to know if there's any plan for this experience to be enhanced. I can't quite work out from this thread if it's a bug or if this is expected, but if you need to retroactively find the name of a brush used on a path it's basically...well, it's a serious challenge.
Here's that experience in a video:
https://www.loom.com/share/febf4dfd5e0d478e8309cdb4351b5cba
Am I missing something? Is there a way of knowing which brush was used on a path either by name, or by seeing it selected in the panel (which isn't ideal if you have to rummage through a large number of brushes to find the one that's selected but hey ho - better than nothing).
 
 

just another video, so maybe, the problem is easier to realize. 
by the way, in version 1.7.2 BETA, the problem still appears.
test2.mov

I totally agree with you @simonlayfield ... I do not understand how the dev team could let such a huge bug pass ...
The solution I use to work around the problem is to resize the document taking into account bleeds and place guides or lines but it requires to complicate life at time of export ...

Hi guys! I've been working on this template file to create social media branding material for my clients. 
I've managed to create a single file with multiple artboards (each one with it's export presets) ready for use.
You are welcome to delete the ones that you will not use (so you don't generate empty files on export).
 
It also includes flat icons from each platform just in case you might need them.
 
It's updated for 2017 according to this data from Social Sprout.
 
Hope you find it as useful as me.
 
Leave a comment if you like/use it. If you are going to post it anywhere else, please add the proper credits
 
Thanks!
social-media-templates.afdesign

Hi @simonlayfield,
Sorry for the delayed reply. 
We are aware of issues with symbols and global colour changes, and this has already been logged with our developers. 
Thanks,
Gabe. 

I have been using Illustrator for a few years to design boardgames, I discovered Designer a month ago and I have tested it designing a boardgame.
Replacing symbols is very useful when making counters and cards. It is probably the main tool I miss from Illustrator.

Yeah sorry this is what I meant when I said it's possible to replace all by replacing symbol contents. But, say, if you only want to replace some (not all) of them, then it's fiddly work.
In my case, I want to try different colourways for designs, with multiple artboards containing multiple instances of that design. Once I have a full set of boards in one colourway then I want to duplicate those artboards and change the colours of the design (Symbol). But I can't do this without detaching the Symbols, recreating a new Symbol and repositioning it in each place on the new Artboards.
If I was able to replace a Symbol with another, then I could keep the new Artboard symbols positioned as is, duplicate the original Symbol as a new one and then (drag and replace?) the new Symbol to replace them individually (or even better select in Layers panel, right click, Replace Symbol).
Does that make sense?
 

As a on/off freelancer who picks up all kinds of odd jobs - this is the ideal, but a rare occasion for me. A lot of the time, I'm the guy they call who'll do the jobs no-one else wants, and I've been supplied all kinds of nightmarish files. Are those legitimate use cases for Affinity Designer? It's tough to say in every case, but all I know is that this feature would be invaluable in making broad attribute changes to existing creative, or reverse engineering complex vector files for lack of more suitable means. So I guess Affinity can aim to be robust enough to deal with those curveballs, or deny them as legitimate/worthwhile use cases and those users will just have to find another way to get the job done.
@robinp I realise we both support this feature being added, I just quoted to add context to my own experience.
I get this - but it doesn't really hold up as a reason not to add a feature for those that would use it. For those that don't use it there's no change, no degradation of experience. For those that do use it, it's a huge time saver.

As a on/off freelancer who picks up all kinds of odd jobs - this is the ideal, but a rare occasion for me. A lot of the time, I'm the guy they call who'll do the jobs no-one else wants, and I've been supplied all kinds of nightmarish files. Are those legitimate use cases for Affinity Designer? It's tough to say in every case, but all I know is that this feature would be invaluable in making broad attribute changes to existing creative, or reverse engineering complex vector files for lack of more suitable means. So I guess Affinity can aim to be robust enough to deal with those curveballs, or deny them as legitimate/worthwhile use cases and those users will just have to find another way to get the job done.
@robinp I realise we both support this feature being added, I just quoted to add context to my own experience.
I get this - but it doesn't really hold up as a reason not to add a feature for those that would use it. For those that don't use it there's no change, no degradation of experience. For those that do use it, it's a huge time saver.

As a on/off freelancer who picks up all kinds of odd jobs - this is the ideal, but a rare occasion for me. A lot of the time, I'm the guy they call who'll do the jobs no-one else wants, and I've been supplied all kinds of nightmarish files. Are those legitimate use cases for Affinity Designer? It's tough to say in every case, but all I know is that this feature would be invaluable in making broad attribute changes to existing creative, or reverse engineering complex vector files for lack of more suitable means. So I guess Affinity can aim to be robust enough to deal with those curveballs, or deny them as legitimate/worthwhile use cases and those users will just have to find another way to get the job done.
@robinp I realise we both support this feature being added, I just quoted to add context to my own experience.
I get this - but it doesn't really hold up as a reason not to add a feature for those that would use it. For those that don't use it there's no change, no degradation of experience. For those that do use it, it's a huge time saver.

As a on/off freelancer who picks up all kinds of odd jobs - this is the ideal, but a rare occasion for me. A lot of the time, I'm the guy they call who'll do the jobs no-one else wants, and I've been supplied all kinds of nightmarish files. Are those legitimate use cases for Affinity Designer? It's tough to say in every case, but all I know is that this feature would be invaluable in making broad attribute changes to existing creative, or reverse engineering complex vector files for lack of more suitable means. So I guess Affinity can aim to be robust enough to deal with those curveballs, or deny them as legitimate/worthwhile use cases and those users will just have to find another way to get the job done.
@robinp I realise we both support this feature being added, I just quoted to add context to my own experience.
I get this - but it doesn't really hold up as a reason not to add a feature for those that would use it. For those that don't use it there's no change, no degradation of experience. For those that do use it, it's a huge time saver.