CLC

But it records anything within specified frame. But I understand. Another go is ShareX (if you're on Windows) at https://getsharex.com - it allows you to record a specific window.

For me LiceCAP from https://www.cockos.com/licecap/ works well for both Mac and Windows. It records to its own .lcf loseless format, but also to .gif directly (I know, color depth of .gif files isn't awesome, but it might be good enough, just try).

To me it seems (without attempting to reverse-engineer the software) that Designer internally converts the vector outlines to a bitmap and attempts to trace it, since the results seems to be exactly the same as vector tracing small-resolution bitmap images in Inkscape... I still don't get why Designer doesn't (internally) enlarge such smaller objects 10 or 100 times, do the conversion, and then resize them back. I guess it'd be better than directing users to do this routine by themselves... At least as a temporary pseudo-fix until Affinity devs find out how to do the expansion properly... since even in high-resolutions, the outline expansion is nearly never exactly the same as the original outline.

They're still not looking for an ux expert. That kinda explains a lot

Notice the red node at the bottom? I'd bet the curve isn't closed there... Try to move it, just to see if it's causing the issue.

Well, from what I gathered, this is a known issue and in the past was marked as "by design"... I don't get it either...

Since I'm on my MB Pro's and using both SSD and some Thunderbolt 3 drives, I'd also like the option to use the Thunderbolt 3 drive as my scratch drive, since it's faster than the internal SSD and would also extend lifetime of my internal SSD.

It shows, but only when you are editing the text.

Well, it's actually quite easy, it's just that shapes you create with Rectangle Tool (or the other Shape Tools) aren't curves by default, you have to convert them to curves first. It's a different workflow, but it's as simple or even simpler than in Corel thanks to snapping helpers. The reason Shapes aren't curves by default is that you can perform some shape editing (see the contextual toolbar) that way. Once you convert a Shape to Curves, you lose those abilities. See attached video.

It seems you're doing it wrong By double-clicking any object in Illustrator, you isolate the object, any other objects dim out and you're editing just the object you want to work on - no locking, no nothing necessary. Then you can edit isolated object as you wish. To exit just press Esc key or double-click anywhere outside the isolated object. Just fyi. Edit: Also this https://www.webucator.com/how-to/how-use-isolation-mode-adobe-illustrator.cfm

The new tutorials are pretty good @James Ritson - thank you, keep up good work

Indeed, but I was worried that something else, that isn't as visible as the icon toolbar might get broken, so this was imo a bit safer option But true, people don't read these days much and hit OK button whenever they're presented with any modal or a dialog, and since almost all the apps and OS' are a bit too verbose and bother people with questions all the time, one can understand...

Exactly the same happened to me with my MAS versions of both Photo and Designer, solved it by resetting user defaults (holding ctrl then running the apps, selecting two first options).

I know, mate. Been a bit sarcastic there.

I can only hope that now, when 1.7 was released, this little, tiny and very important feature is finally going to get on the feature list for the next point release, along with mesh/warp/envelope distort. These two would finally make Designer my only vector tool.

Thank you @Patrick Connor - good to know.

Hi Serif staff Got a question, I hope I'm posting it to the right sub-forum to get an answer Will pre-ordered macOS Affinity Store version of Publisher be able to use personas from sandboxed MAS Photo and Designer? Or will MAS Photo and Designer users have to wait and order also MAS version when it's ready for purchase? TIA

File submitted @Jon P

I'm having the same issue here. Created simple two sided business cards in CMYK via 2 same artboards, 85 x 55 mm with 2 mm bleed, 3 spot colors. When I export them to PDF (PDF 1X settings set to honor spot colors, include bleed and convert text to curves, add crop marks). first page is ok, the other one has width +0.09 mm (Acrobat states document size is ok, while I try to import to Photoshop, click the first page, it states width: 101,62 mm, height 71,65 mm. Second page states widht 101,71 and height is ok, 71,65 mm. Weird. When I do the same and just don't include registration marks, the document exports with correct dimensions though. So might registration marks be the culprint?

Well, here you can get a cheap (and even free) dedicated imposition software and/or Acrobat plugin: http://www.montax-imposer.com/ Enjoy.

Even users do have printers or offer printing services and they need software to get the job done. Of course, there are professional imposition softwares, and RIPs offeer such features, but sometimes, you're off the office and by a phone or mail request, you need to prepare something fast. And imposition isn't anything magical, used to do it manually back in the days - hell I even used to do stuff manually (CTF) that now CTP's do without touch of a hand. Even such people need software to get the job done.

Thanks for your honest answer @walt.farrell. Well, I included a screenshot from 2 decades old InDesign 2 showing what I'd love Affinity was able to offer. Not just Publisher, but also Designer and Photo, since you can set text in both and it's annoying and complicated to prepare texts outside of an app that simply does have text tool, Text Studio panels and stuff... I thought it's obvious I'd like exactly the same option, no automatic feature. I'd like to be in control of that feature. No feelings hurt, I was just interested if there are any plans to implement such an option and specifically started my message by "Hi Serif" greeting, hoping I'd get an answer from the staff. I started with Photoshop version 2.5 (didn't even have layers support back then), used Page Maker, later QuarkXPress (still imo one of the best tools ever) and Illustrator since version 3. Then, when Adobe killed PageMaker, InDesign came to the town. I can't forget how version 2.0 had a huge error that doubled file size on each save. Yes, the world was way slower back then, we didn't need to rush that much and we patiently waited till Adobe released a pach that fixed this, it took over 6 months, but hey, all we had to was use workarounds and do Save As instead, incrementing digit at the end of the filename (sounds familiar right?). Nice times. Of course, since many people send me their data as CDR, I have to fire up CanadianJoke (TM) once a while and cry and whine and pull my hair out way more than with Affinity. That software is almost as old as Illustrator (talking CorelDraw! in case you missed the joke . I really like Affinity, very much. Alywas until I attempt to do any reasonable job with it. For causual photo editing, Photo is good. Loving frequency separation ie, and some nice live filters. For causual vector drawing, Designer is ok. For a professional use (and that's how it's marketed by Serif) it's sadly not that ok, imho. Anyway, I bought both Photo and Designer for Mac and PC and sometimes even use it, when I got spare time (not that often) and until both are grown up enough, I will have to pay my monthly rent to Adobe hoping that one day, maybe... However, I probably won't buy Publisher until I see here, on the forums, that people don't complain how Publisher breaks their basic ux and workflow. I've learnt my lesson. Your suggestion about Publisher's personas is very optimistic and I hope you're going to get what you need for your job to be done Cheers, CLC

Because I'm the one printing the stuff perhaps?

You probably don’t understand @walt.farrell - I’m never asking a question without “playing with the software” as you describe it, for hours first. I am not a redditor who goes to the forums to ask questions if he’s lazy to find out - I just refuse to use beta products marked not ready for production (Designer/Photo customer betas) but have spent hours attepting to work with Publisher beta to find out if it´s a possible replacement for InDesign. Not impressed so far - I feel it’s actually in early pre-alpha stage. Even automatic typographic settings are wrong here... with font size 10 pt, software should default to 12 pt line height (but Auto settings defaults to the very 10 pt, thus not leaving enough space for accented characters. Another step user has to do every time, over and over...) My question isn’t Publisher-specific, the same goes with Designer and Photo - both apps can and will be used to setup multi-language documents and should include such options, no matter if you think some other app should do the job. It’s up to an user to decide what product suits them to achieve their goal. I know, to this day, several designers who use Photoshop - yes, Photoshop - to design and complete hundred pages long catalogs, because they are visually-oriented people and dislike QuarkXPress, InDesign, or Scribus’ workflow. It’s their decision and we are not here to tell them they are doing it wrong, because there is another app they should work with. Also - I want more user control and less automatic behavior from Affinity. Nearly everytime any software does such automatic changes by itself, without my interaction, I’m pulling my hair off. I believe it’s just wrong. In this specific case, there are also many languages that are similar to each other, use very same accented characters that would suggest it’s the same language, but they use very, very different typographic conventions (curly quotes, different punctuation, different metrics and even keening values for some kerning pairs ie). Even google translate often fails to recognise them from each other - Affinity won’t ever be smarter there, no matter what you might want it to be... Such options like this should always be under users control, never automagic. Setting up a brochure (thus need for multiple quote settings) on different (and in some cases even the same) pages in 6, 10 or 12 languages within one document isn’t an uncommon scenario - quite contrary - think of user manuals, and should deffinitely be addressed by a professional layout application. Let me ask you a personal question, Walt - are you a professional working in printing industry, or a hobbyist? Disclaimer: typing this on my phone, I apologise for probable typos.

I just downloaded .337 and no issues with the download here.