Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About 4personnen

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks, I guess they don't have to explain their choices? Inkscape "trace bitmap" to vectorise has been an invaluable replacement for autotrace, although just launching the program is a nightmare... I also keep it because apparently the svg export is the best, that's what I have been consistently been told by web developpers when they ask for assets. AD coming close second, and .ai files being dreadful (don't ask me, I can't see a difference myself). It's the customers choice to see what fits them or not. I am not tied to any brand in particular but since there is a forum dedicated to this I thought I'd share the particular needs of an artworker (and I don't doubt that I am read by more people than just you and me ). Now if AD would accept macros, I would entice my partner to work on them, and hopefully could come up with features that don't make me regret illustrator...
  2. Hi @Kuttyjoe Thanks for your answer: I am both things so I think for me it was obvious to see it as a different target audience. I am not a coder, but it does seem to me that a "select similar" would be a rather simple feature to implement (it looks like a set of "filters" to me - you choose a set of parameters that can be abpllied to a path, and you filter all the paths having that same parameters). Now that's my common sense talking, maybe it's way more complicated than I think it is. But I guess to choose to implement such and such function in any new version, before what I would think as more pressing/simpler ones - for my usage (Being very selfish here ) is merely to cater for creators first and foremost. I may be wrong though... Tools exists as you said: - An auto trace can be implemented from "free to use" solutions (I really understand they'd want to invent their own solution first though, I keep Inkscape for that very purpose) - A smooth tool was part of Serif legacy software, so the solution - in theory - already is created (ie: the algorithmns are in place) - A "select similar" tool doesn't seem like the end of the world to implement (after all I see that as a "find and replace" for paths. When I see the complexity of the find and replace function in publisher!) All these 3 tools (and some others) would be the first major step in making like infinitely simpler for production artists. They would be less than useful for someone who does create from scratch from an .afdesign file (and not taking over from an .eps, with its layers created on the fly) My partner is an IT developper so I understand it's not an easy job, and I absolutely don't want to make it sound easy while I don't know what I am talking about , I am just reflecting on the particular choices from the big wigs here (most likely project managers than developpers choices though), which makes the software less a good choice for a whole chunk of the population for whom it would be most beneficial.
  3. Hello! I have had a few issues recently that seems to be performance related (serious lag and erratic behaviour of node tool and move tool) I have attached a video of a work session (sorry if it's long and tedious, it's a realistic snippet of how I, and probably many others, have to work) I don't know how to put subtitles on a video so I will put a list below with the issues I found. Now, I must say, as it have been pointed out multiple times a smooth and/or simplify option on path and nodes would be greatly appreciated. I know that I will receive comments on the fact that I should learn to be proficient with a pen tool before trying to smooth paths, because that what I have been reading a lot on these forum. I get that most people who answer here are "creators", but I suspect a lot of us Designer users are what we call "artworkers". Meaning we have to work on files given to us by others (who don't care if their files make sense or not - they don't give a crap, they couldn't be bothered, don't even try to talk to them ) The case I am presenting here is a 146 kb .eps file provided by the studio in charge of digitizing the assets from Schultz estate. They provide those files (take it or leave it) to those who buy the licensing rights. My work here is to smooth out the jagged lines, because the scan was probably done, digitized via livetrace (and converted to .eps) from a small/damaged/blurry line drawing. So if you have the patience to go through the video, you'll see that the file has 81 layers (which I tried to organise a bit prior to recording the video). You'll see that I really lack the availability to use a smooth tool or a simplify option. I tried to use the "smooth" function in the contextual menu, but it makes little difference to the end result. so the list of issues with the timecode are below: 0.06: trying to use the space key to pan the canvas, it's either slow or simply not working (it sometimes does) have to use the navigator instead 0.14: Same with using the zoom (Space bar + CTRL) 0.38: Trying to select a shape with the node tool (it sometimes works) end up using the layer panel (wading through 81 layers) 1.24: The node tool now has a mind of its own. At the particular moment I am not even touching the tablet with the pen. I am just hovering over the drawing after clicking the node and the node tool has now picked up the node and travels with it. I get the same behaviour with a mouse. (but who would use a mouse?). Again, I am not clicking, nor click/draging the node. I have to do a number of CTRL+Z to restore state. 3.10: Happens again. As I said, the original file is 810 KB. It's 146 kb when saved as an afdesigner file. Beyond the lag/performance issue, I would like to plea for artworkers workflow to be taken into account in the development of the software. When I do an inventory of all the features I'd like to add (select similar for example) I can see that these are features aimed at modifying shapes and paths as opposite as creating new ones. It seems to me that the project managers had "creators" in mind and not artworkers (simplifying here), meaning that if you are working on a generic .eps or .ai file created by someone else, it's infinitely easier do it in Adobe Illustrator (because those feautres exist in .ai), whereas I have no trouble using all the - very well - thought-out tools of Affinity designer if I want to create a design from scratch (I am someone who is naturally very neat with her layer stack, and I always name and group my layers, it's even a breeze if someone has to work on my files ). But if you decide that your software isn't aimed primarily at artworkers, then I think you're losing out (particularly given the price and licencing model, artworkers are AD natural customers. Apologies for the Sundays ramblings.... Hope everything makes sense... record_000001.avi
  4. 4personnen

    Creating Assets (drag and drop)

    OK, good to know I'm not completely mad
  5. I'll have a look. Overall I noticed some strange behaviour that may (or may not) be a performance issue. For example in certain circumstances I really have trouble to access the frame text handles (either with the move tool or any text tool). I noticed that these behaviour reverted to normal when I closed the program and opened it again (but not the crash on expand). All the problems I had with slow/erratic behaviour including the one I'm reporting here had to do with the text tools/functions so far - if that helps. So it may be related. I don't have the doc where it occured anymore. If it happens again, I will report it and post a screencast here. I have 16 Gb RAM (Primary disk is a 250 Mb SSD + 1TB HDD and 2TB HDD back up drive) Do Affinity software access a scratch disk to increase memory in the same way that Photoshop does? I'll report back if it happens again... ADDING FOR CLARITY: So far none of these issues have happened with Designer (older versions or the new update)
  6. 4personnen

    Field panel not working [solved]

    OK I am answering my own question. One must double click on the word ""name" and not the word "section name", like I did for the past 48 hours It's slightly confusing for me, UI wise (but it's my fault)
  7. Hello, I think I have a problem with the field panel. What I am trying to do is to insert some section name in the master page, so I am creating a new text frame at the bottom of the page, and open the field panel and double click on the "section name" area. Now the insert text cursor appear correctly, but when I double click on the section name nothing happens (no grey tone changes, no acknowledgment of my clicking) Note that I am able to insert a page number (see screenshot) via the text>insert>field>page number, but I can't insert a page number by using the panel.
  8. 4personnen

    Creating Assets (drag and drop)

    Thanks Walt, I never tried in Designer to be honest (Never really have any use to them) so I should have tried there first before asking. (I was so proud of my first screencast as well ) The video tutorial doesn't mention a difference between Mac and Windows neither so I assumed it was meant to be the same.
  9. Hello! Not sure if it's a bug or me not understanding how it works, but I have an unexpected behaviour when I try to add a shape (in this case it's a text frame (shape converted as a text frame) that I can add to the assets panel by "add from selection" but refuses to be added by drag and drop. The shape moves" behind" the panel instead. All the windows (studio panels and canvas) are docked. I have even recorded a small video! Maybe I misunderstood the help files though.... Assets.avi
  10. Where will I fit that in my Publisher/Designer training? Thanks!
  11. I must add: I had another go in expanding the field of the master page, and it doesn't crash. So it could be only when I am trying to expand a publication page. Maybe that's the way one should do (but it should give me an error message instead then!)
  12. Hi there! I have a bit of the same. Publisher crashes on expanding the filler text, as well as sometimes just when I click on the filler text (without even left click to choose the option).. It never crashes (so far) when I click on the text with the move tool, only with the frame text tool or the artistic text tool. It never crashes with "normal text" (non-filler) as far as I'm aware. I have autorised bug reports so it should be logged somewhere.
  13. @peterD I use both Photoshop and Lightroom for my day job, so I know how they work, and I wouldn't choose Affinity Photo to replace Aperture/Lightroom. Completely different workflow (and that's why I am using both Photoshop and Lightroom for completely different stuff)... As I said, maybe at some point Affinity will disrupt the Adobe status-quo (only 100% compatibilty with my clients refrains me from changing shops at the moment - and I'm not completely disatisfied with Photoshop like I was with Illustrator). Me too I downloaded lightroom and didn't need the help files, but that's because the stuff that Lightroom does is rather simplistic. What I was saying is that they operate on a completely different level and are for completely different workflows. I get that you find it too overwhelming, but it isn't for anyone who does compositing for a living (or any other kind of complicated stuff), as they need all the shenaningan.
  14. I am not a photo user but I guess it's because Aperture is more like Photoshop Lightroom than Affinity Photo (edits saved as a sidecar file as opposite to layers saved with the document*). Remove layers from any photo editing software, and I'll track you until you beg for mercy You find it complex, because its aim is not to simply organise and do some light retouch (Like you'd do with Aperture and Lightroom) but is able to handle things that are incredibly complex and out of the scope of Aperture/Lightroom (*were* of the scope of Aperture then). I think that maybe at some point Affinity will try to fill that gap, but you can't really replace Aperture and Affinity Photo like-for-like, eventhough they both retouch photos, the UI, the functions and more importantly workflow are fundamentally different. And it's the way it should be * meaning that the original file always remains intact, only the "sidecar" bit of the file is altered, as opposite as having an original file unretouched and a retouched file with some layers like in Photoshop/Affinity Photo/Gimp