Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dazzler

  1. You can actually do this in Photo.
    Select the layer with the two rectangles on, and then from the top menu select Layer > Geometry > Separate Curves. That will give you the rectangles on two individual curve layers.
    Now select both of those and select Layer > Geometry > Add. That will combine the two shapes into a single object that you can then fill with a single fill.
    Obviously you lose the editability of the individual rectangles, but you can still move the points around if you wish.

    Edit: and yes this is much easier to do in Designer!

  2. I'm not entirely sure why they haven't put this tool on the tool panel by default. It's a great tool and actually allows some quite complex stuff that other software doesn't do, so why they've left it hidden away is a mystery!

    Also, note that you can move the centre point around and then pivot/scale/transform the rest of the shape around the pivot, but with the added bonus of the point you drag snapping to other objects. So, for example, if you have a rectangle that you want to fit into the inside curve of a circle , you can drag the centre point to one of the nodes, then drag the shape up to the curve until it snaps, then select another node and drag it around the centre point (hold CTRL for no scaling), and then when that node is brought over the curve it'll snap too. Now you now that both points are snapped exactly on the curve. If you want to fit a shape into a specific gap you can just let it scale by not holding CTRL.

  3. If you use the point transform tool you can get it to do this. Oddly, that tool is not present on the toolbar by default, so add it in (View > Customise Tools...). It looks like a center point with a diagonal dotted line leading out to a red cornerpiece. When you use that tool there are a lot more neat things that happen! It's useful for aligning things to other objects (angles etc).

  4. I've just had another thought, which may be a much quicker method. Simply click on the cog in the layers panel (Blend Ranges) and in the Source Layer Ranges box drag the right hand node right down to the bottom. That seems to do a fairly decent job by itself.

    You might also find that moving the left node across to the middle of the top gives a stronger contrast and leaves more ink showing. You can also turn off the linear tickbox and drag another point between the other two to get a curve that will give you a lot more control.



  5. You can achieve the same type of thing without using an extra channel. If you set up an adjustment layer to adjust the levels  (or whatever) you can then use the gradient tool directly on the adjustment layer to make it affect the picture in different amounts according to the gradient. It's very a very similar technique to what you are currently doing in PS, just with a hidden channel built into the adjustment layer. You can also paint onto adjustment layers and the effect is fairly identical to painting on a channel in PS.

  6. If you stop and think about it, a generic bunch of evenly spaced lines coming from the two vanishing points wouldn't be that useful. What you actually want are lines coming from the extremes of your verticals within the scene. So you'd only want a basic setup to start with (the two vanishing points, horiztonal and lines for say for top and bottom of a building) , then you'd add your own lines for things like windows and tops of doors etc. So for perspective you're better off using your own handmade guides anyway. Also, if you want to get a feel for the perspective you can stretch your guide layer horizontally to move the vanishing points outwards (you can go right off the sides of canvas area)  giving a less extreme perspective or inwards to emphasize the perspective. Less is better here I think.

  7. Hi Abulail,

    Go to
    File > Document Setup > Colour tab
    There's a checkbox for Transparent Background. Make sure that's ticked. You should then see the checkerboard pattern in the background. If you export as PNG now it'll have the transparency.
    As for the pixels, that will depnd on your resolution. A PNG is a raster format and so your design will be pixelated, however you can solve this issue by changing the DPI of the document (back in the dimensions tab of the same dialogue box), choosing 'Objects will: Rescale' to prevent them from changing size on the page. Note that you can type a DPI into the box as well as choosing a preset one if 400 DPI isn't high enough.
    Use the pixel view mode (buttons along top of the window) to preview how pixellated your shape is going to be.

    Hope that helps!

  8. I think you're right R C-R, selecting nodes prior to joining seems to make no difference to which nodes are joined.

    So the results of joining those two lines on your test file in different orientations is :-
    Top line red node on left, bottom line red node on right = Joins left side
    Top line red node on right, bottom line red node on right = Joins left side

    Top line red node on right, bottom line red node on left = Joins right side
    Top line red node on left, bottom line red node on left = Joins right side

    I'm on Win10 version 1.8

  9. I think the search may happen on the raw text input rather than it's post wrapped state in the text frame. It seems it will only pick up things that are physically placed into the text, such as paragraphs, frame breaks, line breaks etc. You can see a list of these if you click the search magnifying icon > Special Characters, when typing your search terms. I can't get it to detect any of  the automatic formatting at all.

  10. Thanks for taking the time to write this Tony. You could've just gone and said nothing, which leaves nothing for the dev team to work wtih. At least they will know why now.

    There are gaps and a few bugs in the Affinity suite, but it's still fairly early days for Affinity, and hopefully they are making the right decisions and prioritising the stuff that really matters, building it in a way that is intuitive and sensible. I applaud them for taking on the challenge - it can't be easy to walk into a market that has such a strong industry leader, and bring products that are on par with that. I am completely happy with Photo as it suits all my personal needs and gives pro-level editing capability for hobby-like prices.


  11. I am struggling to replicate this in the same way as you are showing in the OP. I'm not sure quite how you are adding to an existing layer that is rotated. Certainly if I create a rounded rectangle, duplicate it, rotate one to get some aliasing on the edges and then merge that with the other using 'merge visible' in the layers panel, then the one that isn't rotated looks exactly the same as it did before the merge.

    However, I'm thinking this may be down to the non-destructive nature of the Affinity products, and the nesting of layers etc. but even nesting a few things I'm struggling to end up with that same level of distortion that you show in the OP.

    Depending on what you are doing you may find Designer a better package to work with as it is much more vector based meaning you don't get any pixellation until you export to a raster format at the end of the creation process. If you are working with a lot of flat colours and graphic shapes then certainly designer will be a much better choice IMHO. Plus with Affinity Designer you still get the luxury of having pixel layers to add texture etc. to those graphic shapes so for illustration it's a great choice.

  12. @Kurb if you hold Alt + Right Mouse Button (keep them held then just tap the Left Mouse Button) - that's the new behaviour that allows you to switch between different modes - once on the mode you want keep left mouse button down and drag up/down or left to right to alter the two parameters. Pretty sure that's what you've accidentally discovered!


  13. Also, to keep things clean it's probably best to 'Divide' the outline once you've expanded it (using the geometry tools at the top, or Layer > Geometry > Divide), then delete off the layers containing the inner parts (letter holes etc and inner edges of the outline), just leaving the extremities of the outline. This will get rid of the internal stuff which isn't necessary for the outlines once you've gone beyond the initial few stages and filled the internals of the letters with coloured outlines. It will make the file size smaller too.

  14. @Diane Window 10 Desktop AD I think I've just realised that you may have mis-understood what 'expand stroke' does in Affinity. It's the equivalent of Path->Outline Stroke in illustrator. It takes the stroke and makes it a shape in it's own right. With that shape you can then add another stroke (thereby making the shape bigger  - which is how you expand outwards, not with the expand stroke as you might be thinking). You can alter the stroke thicknesses to gain the thinner black lines if you like.

  15. There are probably a few ways to do this.

    One is to use the appearance panel and add multiple strokes to the text in different colours and sizes making sure the larger sizes are sat at the bottom of the stack in the appearance panel.

    Or you can do as you said convert text to curves with a stroke. Then expand stroke, then select the stroke and put a new stroke on that, then repeat. (see below for proof!)


  16. So I'm testing out the new version ( on PC WIN10, and just running through the things in the what's new section of the help. It mentions I can jump through a curve's nodes with the square bracket keys but that doesn't seem to be working for me. I'm on the node tool, and I can see a node selected on my curve, but pressing the sqaure brakcet keys does nothing at all. Anyone know what I'm doing wrong? or is this functionality missing?

  17. 31 minutes ago, GarryP said:

    If you have things that are to be used across different documents then Assets are probably a better bet than Symbols.
    However, assets don’t have the ‘clone’ functionality of Symbols.
    You could keep them as Assets but convert one or more to Symbols in each document where you need the symbol ‘clone’ functionality.

    Note: I don’t think it should be possible to add symbols to assets – making them some kind of ‘global symbol’ – as changes to a symbol in one document could inadvertently change the structure of other documents when they are reopened. That sounds like it could cause a lot of grief.

    I've just tried this out. So, you can have a symbol and make it an asset, and it still behaves like a symbol after you drag it into a document, but it looks like the symbol synchronisation is limited to the document - changing the symbol in a document doesn't have any effect on the one in the assets panel. I actually think that's probably the best behaviour. Like you said Garry, you wouldn't want to make changes in one document that affect things in another.

  18. I presume this is Designer?

    You can do this using the align tools as you mentioned. Just select the top three nodes (the apex and then the nodes on each side of it, using the shift key to select multiple nodes) then use the alignment tool and choose  'Space horizontally', using 'selection bounds' as the Align to setting. That will centre the top point to the two side ones.

  19. One thing you can try is to use the export persona to export. I find this can give a different result sometimes.
    For example I did a quick test where I added a mask in Photo to a layer, exported as PNG using the export option and it came into Photoshop as a white background with no transparency. However, if  switch to the export persona, then choose the layer with the mask and create a slice from it, then export the slice as a PNG, then bring that into Photoshop I see it with transparency.

    If you need to make a mask for the transparent areas this can be done easily by using the Select > Alpha Range > Select Partially Transparent. Then invert this using Select > Invert Pixel Selection, then click on the Mask Layer icon on the bottom of the layers panel to apply this as a mask to your layer. This doesn't come into photoshop as an alpha channel though (you just get the transparency built into the original layer), so not sure if that's an achievable from Photo, as Photo doesn't use channels in quite the same way as Photoshop.

  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | 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.