IPv6

Hi,
for live filters it is expected to affect only layers below. However, in my test document the filter "Mesh Warp" affects layers above.
The issue depends on some of the layers below the fill layer. If you deactivate them, issue is gone.
 
Image 1: live mesh warp inactive
 

 
Image 2: Live Mesh Warp active. Rectangle with gradient above gets impacted (assumed bug).
File:
live mesh warp bug.afphoto

no. see the linked posting i added. this issue is well known.

Running Affinity Photo 2 on macOS still has the same issue as mentioned 2 years ago (see link below).
 
double clicking and starting a macro does not work - only sometimes. for more se this link:
 
 
 

I've experienced this many times since I started using Affinity years ago, but always found a workaround and never actually mentioned this in the forums. That being said, I recently had a big issue with a client/project due to this so I thought it ought to be mentioned. There was a tight deadline which caused me to not be able to be too meticulous with the work and I completely overlook this in the file, and the client ended up printing a ton of products which were unusable as the print came out blurry. Obviously this is technically my fault, but this isn't something I expect from an app, so I wasn't looking out for it as closely.

I've noticed that sometimes when moving/nudging pixel layers (or selecting and resizing specific areas on a pixel layer, even when sizing down) the app applies a disproportionate amount of anti-aliasing which can affect the entire layer and cause a blurry look to the content on that layer - not only on screen, but even in print. 

I have no idea why this happens, but it's rendered completed linework layers for illustrations completely useless, ending in me having to spend an extra day or two on projects of unpaid time redoing everything from scratch for clients.

Furthermore, if I merge anything down on that layer or continue to work on that layer, the same exaggerated anti-alias is applied again. So it's not just the selected portion of the layer that is affected, but the layer as a whole. 

This can sometimes happen even when 'Force Pixel Alignment' is checked. 

I completely understand that there might be some amount of anti-aliasing when resizing or rotating objects (considering all of the pixels are shifting), but the extreme amount actually causes a very visible/noticeable and unwanted blurry effect which even persists even in print.

This may be intentional to a degree, but when I worked in PS (for almost 10 years) prior to switching Affinity I never once experience anything like this.

The current MSIX installers put sandboxed applications on your computer. To access the sandboxed applications we provided execution aliases, as described above. There are bugs in some third-party applications with the App Execution Alias. To bridge the gap between 3rd party apps and the sandboxed installed Affinity Photo 2, we are providing an application AFLaunch.exe that can be called instead of the 0KB execution Alias
So try AffinityPhoto2.exe first, and if that does not work, use AFLaunch.exe.
Attached file aflaunch.zip is a .ZIP file of the current AFLaunch.exe, referred to above. This should downloaded and unzipped onto your computer.
It can then be called (linked to) from withing your Photo DAM, which will start Affinity Photo 2 to edit your Photo. 
aflaunch.zip

Pros:
MSI had an installation success rate of ~85% (and we have many requests to our tech support team for v1 install failures). MSIX promises a 99.9% success rate.  MSI requires admin privileges to install. MSIX installs per-user, but files are deduplicated so that disk space isn't wasted. MSI apps are not sandboxed from other applications, meaning other applications can break those apps (we have seen this with several third-party apps in the past). MSIX apps are sandboxed to prevent this. MSI updates require a manual download of the full ~550mb installer which must be manually installed. MSIX can perform in-app delta updates which are smaller and faster. MSI updates can only be performed one at a time. MSIX can update all three apps simultaneously. MSI cannot guarantee that an uninstall will leave your machine in the exact state prior to install. MSIX installs are segregated and don't rely on the registry or special filesystem locations meaning an uninstall always leaves you in a clean state. Installation and app data paths are cleaned on uninstall. MSI apps cannot integrate with Microsoft Photos app to provide "Edit In..." style features. MSIX can. MSI does not require a digital signature. MSIX does (this means any MSIX that appears to be from Serif, will be guaranteed to be from us and only us). Cons:
MSI can allow the user to change the installation directory. MSIX can move installed apps to different drives, but it cannot choose a specific directory (due to the sandbox). See below: MSI can allow an option to install a desktop shortcut. MSIX doesn't provide this as an option, but you can pin the apps to either the Start Menu or the Taskbar. There is also the secret Shell:AppsFolder location in Explorer that allows you to right-click or drag the icon to your Desktop for a shortcut as a workaround if you need it.  MSI has easy discovery of undocumented app locations for launching from a third-party. MSIX hides the install location due to the sandbox, but we use App Execution Alias to enable this scenario. You can find the aliases in the following location: C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityDesigner2.exe
C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityPhoto2.exe
C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityPublisher2.exe
Remembering to replace username with your Windows username. Also, those paths are already in your %PATH% variable so you can often launch them without even specifying the full path, e.g. just AffinityPhoto2.exe. There are bugs in some third-party applications with the App Execution Alias , and the next post includes aflaunch.exe as a work around if you need that instead. 
 

WASM reminds me of Rust hype, which reminds me of HTML hype which reminded me of Ruby hype which reminded me of thin client hype which reminded me of Lawn Mower Man hype for VR etc etc etc.
C is here to stay.
Forever.
And that's Ok.
-- Embedding Lua is also light, fast and easy.
end
this is what the "for" in "make plugins for Affinity products" means. ie API access.

This doesn't give a complete picture of the situation.
- The only other tool is the Adobe suite. It has a very high cost for freelancers in some countries. Some could repay it with about one week of full-time work in a year. Something more in slower years. But for lower-wages countries it is a very expensive tool.
- Even if cost is not a matter, the Adobe suite keeps your files hostage. Stop paying, and you are no longer able to see what's inside. The only way is to start paying again, or hope that the free IDMarkz viewer will still be available.
- With Adobe, you are forced to update. Even in the middle of a critical job. Even if the update removes some feature or app you are using.
- The price of the Affinity suite is incredibly low. This is something I'm personally not fond of, because it means having to share the tools with people whose job doesn't depend on them. I would like they costed more. But I understand that this would prevent Serif from selling in a much wider market. While the "pro" market is shrinking, and probably continuing to pay multi-year contracts with Adobe up to the end of the times.
Oh, maybe Serif should have two different versions of their suite: one, more expensive, for pros. And another one, costing less and with a lot of bugs, for those who don't complain for the bugs, considering the price.
Paolo
 

This is what I have trouble with in all of the negative posting going on in a wide variety of threads: the price versus the complaints. I sure don't consider myself a pro by any stretch of the imagination, but...
I use Photo for book covers, both e-book and print. I use Publisher to format my print books for upload to Ingram Spark and Amazon POD distributing. Thanks to this software, my POD interiors rival that of the Big 5 publishers. V2 now serves my purposes outlined above. V1 has saved me thousands of dollars in publishing costs. I expect v2 to do the same. I will continue to chug along doing what I do best. Unsolicited advice: Perhaps the complainers should try doing the same, rather than waste time complaining about what isn't there, what should be there, what works, what doesn't work, and on and on.
Also, there is v1 to go back to if v2 doesn't make anyone happy.
/endofrant
Edited to add that I've been using the Affinity Serif products for two years. I bought the threesome on sale for around 25 bucks each, if I remember correctly. Thanks, Serif, and carry on regardless.

Ho
bug report..
when i drag brushes within a category to the top of the list to 'favourite' them they stay there during the session. When i reboot APV2 they are back in original order!!!
cheers…

Please stick to the facts. You claims are baseless and simply wrong.
 I Can't see anything "worse" which is a one time purchase for a full suite of 3 apps which costs less than one month of Adobe subscription.
Affinity offered the Apps on a certain price point (PC about 55€, iPad about 20€, and provided huge discounts of 25% to 50% at certain times, consistently from 2015 to 2022. V1 is available as 1.10.5 for about one year, and it is delivering a value even today if you are happy with is functionality.

You don't have to wait; you can export without waiting for the preview to render

It's just missing an option to turn off the preview. If the developers add that option users can choose to either use it or not, depending on the job.

As someone who writes CMS and other things from scratch, it's not at all that shocking. A program suite like Affinity/Adobe are not written by amateurs, but it takes almost infinite foresight to see issues that sometimes only come with experience. It's not possible for a programmer to have all the foresight of a seasoned team if they're just getting started especially. So sometimes things must be done out of order, or not the way it should be done the first time in order to properly scale. Hence the need to take the time refactor which costs obviously time & money. Even if one thinks they can foresee it, there's always other distractions and very important distinctions that don't come up until later that may lead to refactor. Users pounding the table for new features I'm sure is a major pressure. It's not as simple as many think and I have a lot of sympathy for the developers specifically for this reason, because I've been in their shoes to some degree. I know the pressure to get something delivered on time sometimes outweighs having things "properly" written. We all look at our code and constantly wish we'd written something different or more efficiently. Always.

Here are their comments re: vertical text. Might be similar regarding RTL.
 

Hmm never like separation mode in any program. As others noted it wastes to much space.

This had been said, or strongly implied, in a number of posts. As I've said, there is nothing wrong with making complaints or offering constructive criticism, but everyone has a right to express "their" own views, not just those making negative comments! If some people wish to make positive comments, praising Affinity products or Serif, they have a perfect right to do so, without being dismissed or insulted in the ways I mentioned.
All I'm asking is that everyone is allowed to express "their" opinion honestly, without fear of being attacked for expressing a different view to that of the OP! These forums should be for open discussion by everyone, whatever their views (as long as they stick to the forum guidelines!)
For example, this thread is titled "V2 is a downgrade". I accept that this may be some people's honest opinion. However, I see no reason why I, or anyone else, should not be allowed to disagree and say that they think it is a valid upgrade from v1, well worth the upgrade price!
The idea of forums is to discuss things. Not just to make a statement, expecting people to agree with you, but dismissing any opposing views. It comes across very much as: "we are "experts" / "professionals" and are therefore right in our opinions; anyone who disagrees, doesn't know what they are talking about, doesn't understand, or are "fanboys", and should keep their opinions to themselves."
 

The instructions in this FAQ should help you. Some applications may work using the information in the first post. Others may need the helper .exe file from the second post.
 

Go for the package, it is cost effective as you will then have the Ver 2 for your pc, the ipad of surface pro and a mac version if you decide to get one in the future and still have V1 to use if you want to.

Some people don't seem to understand that if someone bought a piece of software when it first came out, several years ago, they had to wait for years for many updates to be added. Someone who bought the same software a few months ago already has all those updates included. "Old" purchasers and "new" ones have exactly the same version of the software, the only difference is that some people had to wait for the updates to be added, while others received the software with all those updates already included!
(By the way, personally I would not believe everything I see on YouTube or on social media!)

Such good news, JS is also a reasonable choice.
Just hopefully this scripting & extension coming in v2.x 🙂
in my opinion, affinity has a solid foundation with good popularity, once it is extendable enough, there will be a growing extension ecosystem around it...

As counterintuitive as it may seem, make sure that in Snapping Options, "Move by whole pixels" is disabled.
Because when it's enabled and your object is already misaligned, it would then still continue to move by whole pixels, i.e. actually retaining its non-integer value. For some reason (which doesn't really make sense to me) this option overrides its parent option "Force pixel alignment".
Whereas when the option is disabled, moving/resizing a misaligned object will immediately snap it to an integer pixel value.
Also, generally I'm working with 6 decimal places for all my frequently used units, including pixels: Preferences > User Interface > Decimal Places. Like that I'm always in control even with the tiniest misalignments.
The problem here being that if you set e.g. 1 decimal place, Affinity will only round up or down the display of the value in the Transform panel, but not the actual value itself. So a misalignment of 0.04 px would still display as an integer, not as 0.1 px. But even such a small misalignment is already enough to introduce slight antialiasing. 
Also to keep in mind:
You can control antialiasing on object level individually via Blend Options in the Layers panel. You can either fine tune via the Coverage Map curve, or you can select "Force Off" in the Antialiasing popup menu.

Vectors are specifically preferred for their crispiness. Pixel-hinting is the process/time it takes to move points to whole pixels (sometimes half points if warranted) in document set to pixel in units to reduce anti-aliasing. Especially for straight lines, edges, etc, it's the difference between unpolished and polished output. It's essential for icon design, UI, logos for websites to increase clarity and generally not look crummy.
Pixel preview is meant to show us what this anti-aliasing is doing in real time so we can move points to clean up output.

That may or may not be a legitimate request. I personally hate the Mac way to have no application frames and the ability to see other app palettes or windows behind the app in front and was really glad about Adobe introducing the application frames. But if it would be optional, I would have no problem with this.
I'm sorry to take your request here as a reason for another topic, but it is another example of this, that the tone here on the forum lately leaves a lot to be desired. At least a "please" would not have hurt the desire. "Give me back" reads like it was yours before and Serif stole it from you.
A great many users here are very demanding and formulate their criticism in a way as if Serif had personally insulted them with the appearance of V2.

It is a major update, they've added loads of features.. it's £90 to own, that's really affordable, Adobe suite £50 a month to rent. Astute Graphics £130 no vat, so £150 to rent (plugins not even software). Zbrush £110 a year to rent. The value of owning software is so important to me, if anything happens and you and you can't afford to pay subscriptions they take away your rights to use.. In today's world and unpredictability, I like to know I have something I can use no matter what happens.. It's affinitys biggest selling point for me and I'm so glad they've held onto that pricing model.
I've bought digital products and they went on sale the very next day! This happened 3 times, I could of saved £250 but nevermind, sometimes shit happens.. don't lose sleep over it.. You can see how most people are fine with the update because they know how expensive software can be.. affinity is very cheap.