Rocketdrive

Yea, once You think about it it's the most obvious way to go. But You have to cancel out some of the philosophical ballast as well as resist the urge to follow every hype

The comparison between Affinity and Resolve is pretty far fetched IMO, but that's totally fine as long as it works for You . I use Affinity together with Fusion (standalone) without problems, by creating and exporting assets as PNG or EXR, and using them for compositing and animation in Fusion. As long as both companies play nice and adhere to industry standards, I can build my pipeline to my liking. About Linux ... I wouldn't mind if one day everything just worked, every driver needed was there and stable, and I had all the apps that I need without spending night after night browsing forums and hacking the hell out of the shell . Until last time I tried it there was at least one major dealbreaker, maybe nonexistent driver, wonky wacom support, and of course missing pro apps like, well, Affinity. For the time being I choose like that: which app does the job best? Which OSes does it run on? On which OS does it run best? Which hardware does the OS run on? Which hardware is the best compromise of power, stability and price?

After exporting illustrations from Photo as JPG files, I switch over to bridge and fill in metadata such as description, keywords and copyright. I thought, at some point it would be cool to add IPTC data in Photo directly, and have that attached to all files that support it, like JPG.

I have many brushes, some of which appear similar to each other in the palette, but behave differently. In order to easier differentiate them I'd like to see (and change) their names in addition to the stroke preview. In fact, I'd like to customize what I see: tip, stroke, name, and also set a size for the icons.

I didn't find a setting for that, so I'd like to ask You to add it: I often need to see which exact brush I have currently selected. I have many of them, some similar by icon, but different in behaviour.

Even if it's hard to believe: You can make Your own designs or templates. Those possibly having the advantage of not looking like the stuff that everyone else has.

Because Word sucks, most people also do not care about using it properly, i.e. using styles throughout, but rather use direct formatting. I seldom relied on direct import of Word docs, bacause it always introduced problems further down the road. For best results, I convert the content to plaintext first, then go over the entire text (be it a four page folder or a badass 200 page business report) and reformat it properly in the target application, that mostly being Indesign. When the most used styles are bound to shortcuts, formatting plain text is extremely fast, and You have very good control over it. I totally see that importing word files is important for many, but in the meantime it is still easy to get work done with little workarounds.

Currently I am developing a folder based on designs that I created in Designer. So far I like the experience. Almost everything is exactly or at least close to where I expect it to be. Now I am not afraid to retrain my muscle memory, but it's fine to know where menus and functions are. I haven't had any crashes or glitches so far, but I am also not pushing very hard - just getting accustomed. Publisher feels like Designer with multiple pages, which is basically what I first expected of it. Textframe linking is perfect, copying and pasting elements from Designer let's me reuse most of what I have already built. The different zoom behavior that is set by default reminded me of classic Adobe apps. Fortunately there is a setting to change to Affinity's "scrubby" zoom, which I prefuer so much more now. Next up on the testing list: image linking as well as exporting for print.

Nice ones!

Now that both are available on the iPad, I can say: Both Designer and Photo are perfect on the iPad for drawing and illustrating. However more traditional design work that involves a lot of mouse work goes slower on the iPad. So while a lot can be done on a mobile device, it is not always practical. It might be partially due to muscle memory, of course, so I will try to push things further on the iPad

Yep, the two buddies are running in order to get the house with the bullhead warm and cosy while it's freezing outside

Thanks, I just couldn't find it online - which means that it maybe got "just" printed

I'd copy the panorama to a second layer, and increase the brightness until the dark areas match the light areas of the original image. Then use a mask with a linear transparency gradient: the end with the now too-light areas should be 100% transparent, and the other end, now properly exposed, should be 100% opaque, covering the dark areas underneath. The gradient can further be tweaked with intermediate steps.

It's true that Macs are of high quality, durability and stability - mostly. But it is also true, that despite all the junk that is sold in the name of Windows there are also superb machines build for it. I am referring to workstation and laptops built for professional use, favouring stability and quality over hyped claims on paper for apparently little money. In short, if You want a smooth and stable, mostly worry-free system, it's probably gonna cost You a bit more, regardless which OS or ecosystem You prefer. I've learned to get along with whatever tool does the job.

Pretty thorough testing, ballardstudio. Did You run into any problems or interesting things? Would be great if You shared Your findings. Oh BTW: does Publisher support document linking for images? I managed to do my clients' print design in Designer until now, but the files tend to bloat towards epic sizes, megabyte-wise.