Christoph Daniel

Agreed, and I think the additional examples helped get your point across.

I don't understand. First, I'm pretty sure that when I posted that, there were no screenshots in the original post yet. And second, if people are "regularly frustrated by inconsistencies / limitations of the UI," why not list some of those so the developers have some idea of what people are talking about.

I agree that this would be an interesting feature. For a document I'm working on, I'm using the same colour scheme across dozens of diagrams. However, there's one problem one would have to solve: if you send me a file that uses your application colours, how would it be displayed on my installation, where I haven't defined those colours? Doesn't even have to be me. It can be you, working on two computers, or reinstalling your computer. Again, I agree that this might be an interesting feature, but it's not obvious to me how one would solve the corner cases.

I bet it would help if you listed some more examples of those limitations and inconsistencies.

Nope, not just you. Still being new to this place, I'm regularly irritated at how people word their requests.

Walt, you're absolutely right, but that's not what I meant. Reading my post again, I should have phrased that better. Let me try again. What I actually meant to say was that having this thread moved to the feature requests area is all one can hope to achieve. I don't think Serif will ignore these requests. I haven't been around long, but I do get the feeling that they take feature requests seriously and take them into consideration when planning (and prioritizing) features that could go into the next release. Being a software developer myself, I feel that's all I can ask for (even though I, too, have posted and supported requests that are really important to me). What triggered my comment in the first place was the claim that they "are not prepared to add [the feature] to the Photo Persona." Given the above, plus the lack of insight into the actual development process, I don't think we have enough information to support that claim.

Well, the thread was moved to the feature requests area, so I would very well take that as being willing to have a look at implementing it.

The usual custom here seems to be to leave a "+1" on the thread. So, sine I'd love that feature as well: +1

Sorry, please don't take my statement as being against your original suggestion of being able to constrain selections. I'm completely with you in that I think that's a useful feature. I was just weighing in on this particular use case.

I don't see how opening an image, selecting an area to fit the aspect ratio of the monitor using the crop tool, then crop that selection is any harder. It's just a different tool than the selection tool, but it should work perfectly for your use case.

Yeah, I read that a lot about Adobe products. Being a programmer and a gamer, my computer should be running the software okay, but the bloat and particularly the price is what will most likely keep me from going in that direction. Problem with more focussed applications, such as the Affinity products, is that everyone needs a slightly different feature set. Personally, I need to draw lots of node-link diagrams (boxes connected by edges), so I need arrow head line styles. While they are already on the roadmap, it does mean that I'll have to wait for the next version until I can really switch from Inkscape to Designer. The whole decision of which products to go with is really frustrating. Affinity products are a joy to use, but still lack a few features that are important to me. Adobe products seem to be up to pretty much any task you might want to throw at them, but are bloated and ridiculously expensive. Anyway, I'll stop rambling. Thanks for weighing in with your thoughts on the subject, I appreciate it. By the way, if you want to get rid of Lightroom as well, there do seem to be interesting and affordable alternatives out there.

Interesting. Thanks a lot, mate!

How so?

I'd like to second this feature request, if I may.

Always glad to hear there's other people with similar ideas. I'm currently evaluating Illustrator as well (at least wanted to see what that is all about before deciding against shoving my money down Adobe's throat) and found that it pretty much treats nodes on a path just like regular objects as far as alignment and distribution are concerned, which is quite sensible.

I'd like to suggest a number of improvements to the alignment and distribution options. I'm currently thinking about migrating from Inkscape (which doesn't work well on Mac) to Designer. These are the alignment and distribution options I've grown accustomed to: Note the following features which I haven't been able to find in Designer: Aligning elements below, upwards, rightwards or leftwards of a given element (the options with the yellow box the blue boxes are aligned to). This is sort of an "outward alignment", if that makes sense. Distribute the left boundary, centre, or right boundary of objects instead of being limited to equal distances between objects. More extensive font alignment options. This includes aligning to font baselines, distributing text based on baselines, and the likes. An excellent feature which I haven't found in any vector tool so far (I may not have been looking hard enough, though...) would be alignment and distribution of text objects based on the box starting at the base line and ending at the cap height. If I want to centre text in a rectangle vertically, this imaginary box is what I would want to have centred. Alignment and distribution of nodes on a path. Perhaps some of those features are already there and I simply haven't found them yet, but the remaining ones I think would be helpful tools.