Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

DarrenStarr

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DarrenStarr

  1. Thomas, Let's chalk this up to a learning experience. I know that when I press Ctrl+Y, it switches my view to strictly vectors. This does not alter the layers panel or the colors. As such I would obviously in that circumstance had to send you other information. It is clear to me that you were able to identify the issue from the screenshot I sent. If I sent screenshots of every screen I could find in the original text, I believe I'd have asked you to search for a needle in a haystack and I'd have spammed the thread relentlessly. I suppose my biggest mistake was not specifically asking "What further information could I send that would help identify the issue?" I didn't do this to be rude. I didn't do this to frustrate anyone. I actually believed I was being polite when I transmitted the only information I was sure was actually relevant to further follow up questions. I apologize for inconveniencing you.
  2. First... THANKS!!! I didn't send you more information in the previous posting because I wasn't sure what would be helpful and I made the assumption you would ask me for what you would need to solve the problem. Second... you solved the problem. I've attached the files anyway in case someone else will find this useful!!! I didn't know that there were multiple opacities. It's not a feature I consider useful for my use of the application. But, there is an opacity for the layer and I had no idea it was there. Thank you very much for your help! Above are two pieces. For layers
  3. I think I hit the wrong key on the keyboard, but the two bluish curves are identical (except shape) in every way I can see. Same stroke color, transparent brush, they're both closed etc... But for some reason, the one on the right is pale. I've tried - exiting and starting the app again. - Changing the stroke color to something else - Raising it to the front - Sending it to the back - copy and pasting it Nothing seems to make the shape appear the proper color. Does someone know what I've done which made it happen? P.S. - This is Designer 2 (it used to happen sometimes on Designer 1) on Windows 11
  4. Importing DXF files from Autodesk Fusion 360 has a scale issue. Here is an example exported from Fusion 360 When imported into Affinity Designer, no matter what DPI I import as, the result is always ridiculously small. Here, I set the DPI to 25.4 this is because Fusion will export in millimeters As you can see, it imports the file as around 4mm x 2.661mm If I scale the document by 101.252/3.994, then the dimensions are 101.252 x 67.467mm This type of behavior is consistent from all CAD programs which export DXF in terms of millimeters. This also includes FreeCAD and others. Can you please make a setting like Illustrator has which allows you to set the import unit as 1mm? This would make everything much easier. P.S. - I absolutely love that you've added this feature. When it eventually works, I'll be able to stop filtering everything through InkScape or Illustrator.
  5. First, I want to complement you on a great product. I just bought Photo from the Microsoft Store as a possible replacement for Adobe Photoshop and am considering buying Designer as well to replace Illustrator. My first impression of the software was horrifying though. As soon as I started drawing on a newly created document, I was wondering what was wrong with the pen. No matter what setting I used on the pen or even when drawing shapes, the edges were horrifying at best. I have done some Google searches and seen posts such as : This one and This one As well as quite a few others. I also see comments dating back to 2016 stating "We'll fix this when we get around it" for example. This is because you're employing bilinear interpolation or nearest neighbor for scaling. This is not a good solution for your product and makes the software feel very unpolished. Bilinear scaling for bitmap graphics inside of a paint program, especially one which is GPU accelerated is not a good solution under any circumstance. Bilinear makes use of only the 4 neighboring pixels to calculated the new pixel values for the position. And the new position is little more than an averaging calculation which completely disregards the frequency plane of the image as it's not possible to operate in frequency space with such limited input data. Generally, the algorithm is mediocre at best, and it is famous for causing banding as well as other serious artifacts while scaling. The serious problems with your software is related to the famous interpolation related staircasing effects. The algorithm is absolutely terrifying when operating on anything resembling line art. A slightly better solution of course is to employ bicubic scaling which is almost equally simple to implement, but produces substantially better results with little development cost. As a point of reference, I implemented this algorithm when I was 13 years old in the 1980's with nothing more than a book and a scanned photo to work with. It is very simple to implement and would probably get most people to leave you alone about it. As a far better solution, you should seriously consider non-averaging solutions and instead focus on frequency domain solutions such as either a Fourier solution or preferably an edge-directed interpolation solution. EDI is your best option, even where performance and quality is concerned. The algorithmic complexity is low and can be easily implemented as a GLSL or HLSL shader. See Github for some implementation of Directional Cubic Convolution Interpolation. Please spend an hour implementing bicubic and then spend a little more time implementing DCCI or similar. If you were to make an interpolation API for scaling, I'd consider implementing these.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.