aizome

Background: I work in CMYK for print. I never specify in hex, I rarely even notice hex. Issue: A set of objects with the same CMYK fill in my original Designer file import into Illustrator with the same CMYK fill, but some have a different hex code specification. Happened with two different colours. e.g. fill of objects in original .afd Designer file is CMYK 10,0,10,0. Export to .eps, open in Illustrator and discover that altho all objects still show 10,0,10,0 'Select same fill' does not find all objects. Check individual objects not found, discover fill is CMYK 10,0,10,0, but a different hex code. Most are EBF5EC; those not found are ECF5EC. I doubt the printed copies would show the difference, but seems a bit rude.

I want to change the thickness of the 1pt roads to 1.2pt but you can't just select all the 1pt roads on the 'Roads' layer because Select All also insists on selecting the 1pt tree branches on the 'Trees' layer AND the 1pt lines on the 'Buildings' layer. If I select all the 1pt black lines I don't get the lines 'Trees' instead I get the plot boundaries. It's insane. If you want to work with unlocked layers, just... leave the layers unlocked.

^ What they said. Affinity Designer lacks absolutely fundamental features for all users (e.g. 'select' ignores locked layers, the ability to designate non-printing layers when created). It lacks absolutely fundamental features for print design (e.g. vector fills). As documented on these forums it has lacked these things -- and far more -- for years. You can find work-rounds, you can buy add-ons, but honestly, as long as you pay Affinity for what you're getting, that is exactly what you will get. There's no incentive for them to add these fundamental features. I'm awaiting a quote for repair of the mac that will run CS6. If it's not economic I will bite the bullet and pay Adobe for software that does what I need.

I'd add a +1 to the need for vector/pattern fill for me but honestly, I'm going back to Adobe. I design for print, creating items that will be scaled by the client. Lack of vector capability kills Designer stone-dead for my work. Bitmap images are totally inadequate; having to pay more than Designer itself for an add-on doesn't cut it: put the basic functionality in the software and charge us more for something that actually works. I spent *two hours* today searching for instructions to create vector fills because I could not believe something marketed as design software (as opposed to web design software) would not have this feature. The Designer forum is full of requests for vector fill and other fundamental functionalities; every time I find a fundamental feature^1 is missing (the ability to designate layers as non-printing at the time they're created; the ability to lock layers to prevent search and other functions operating on those layers; the ability to create greyscale artwork that does not have 'rich black' creeping into it somewhere) I find other people reported the lack, often years ago, and have been begging you to add it ever since. yeah, I'm a bit annoyed. I've invested several weeks in Designer. Each time I found an issue I began by thinking it was my bad, that I should RTFM. And almost every time I RTFM or ask for help I find the feature has been broken or missing for years. ^1: This leaves aside other less significant issues: why is there no 'find/change font' for those of us producing artwork that contains text? Why does the eyedropper not correctly copy *all* the attributes of one item to another? etc.

I owe you a beer. Or the beverage of your choice, because that solved it. I can finish the damned map. thank you!

ha. Ok, I will change this and see what happens. I hope, I really, really hope it solves the issue.

Just to add that while scrolling through the Publisher feedback forum I found posts saying that Publisher also fails to clearly distinguish between CMYK and greyscale images. I'm sorry, but that's a fundamental failure and means I can't use Publisher. As I said above, I often produce print jobs in greyscale only. No colour. I need to know that what I see and plan is what the client will get, without conversion in the press.

Why is the width and length of dashes/dots defined solely relative to stroke thickness? This lack of precision makes no sense. I specify stroke thickness as specific units, why do I not set dash dimensions in the same way? I can set the dimensions to scale -- or not -- when the stroke is scaled: this ensures relative size remains the same when the object is scaled. When actually creating the original stroked objects (railway lines) life would be so.much.easier. if I could just set dash length to 0.25pt, interval 3pt (or whatever) instead of having to work this out as proportion of the stroke width. ETA: I think the dash/dot setting is broken. And I am using the current (new) release. See the attached image. I am trying to create a map of railway lines. There are three stacked lines, the bottom a wide black line, the middle a narrower white line (these two create the parallel tracks) and a third that should symbolize the ties, reasonably closely-placed narrow parallel lines. I create this third line by setting the line width wider than the bottom black line, then setting narrow spaced dashes (square ends) to create the narrow parallel lines. I don't seem able to do this in Designer. Look at the dash setting in the attached images. The first has a line width 2.5mm, dash length of 1, so dash of 2.5mm. The second has a line width of 2.5mm, dash length of 0.005 (so should be 0.0125mm), and it clearly is not. That was teh last of an increasingly frustrated series of reductions in dash length, *none of which* significantly reduced the length of the dash. These lines are part of a large group on a large map (the artboard is in the third pic). If the size of the group or the artboard is breaking the functionality, that's not good either.

I produce a lot of artwork to be printed greyscale. No colour, none, never. I go to 'File' ->'Document Setup' and select 'Grey/8' or 'Grey/16' and still Designer seems to default to rich black. I have to manually check and correct the black/grey as I work. Is there a better way to do this?

If (as in Est Treding below) I select a single object in the artwork then that object/layer is highlighted *dark grey* in the Layers panel and I can scroll down to find it. If (as in Norfulc) I select a grouped object in the artwork then that object and its group layers are highlighted *pale, pale grey* in the Layers panel, almost unnoticeable if you/I am expecting the dark grey. Why the difference?

The Swatch panel also confuses me. It does not highlight colours in the way I expect. For example, in the screenshot below I have selected an object with a 10% fill and a <foo> darker grey stroke. The Swatch panel is telling me nothing about either of these. If I double click either the fill or the stroke in the small 'object colours' diagram at top left in the panel then the 'colour chooser' pops up to tell me what the fill or the stroke are. But the Swatch panel is meaningless as far as I can tell.

*Bump*. Because having items on locked, hidden layers change when I do a 'select all' for items on ONE LAYER is driving me mad. I'm sorry, I know this software is cheap, relatively speaking. I'd rather pay more and have it do the basics, seriously. Locked layers are untouchable. The ability to set non-printing layers.

YES, at least if I understand what you're saying. Selecting an object should result in that object's layer being highlighted in the Layers panel so we can see where it is in relation to all the other objects.

Why does 'Select Same Stroke Colour' find lines on layers that are a) hidden and b) locked? Why does 'delete' actually *delete* these lines from layers that are both hidden and locked? Is there any way to genuinely lock a layer to prevent actions from occurring on that layer? What does the lock prevent if not that? Why can we not designate a layer as 'non-printing' even when it is visible? I am working from artwork (tracing, sketching, whatever) that I keep in a reference layer that must be visible but NEVER print.

No (or at least not always). The line in my screenshot upthread was created using the Pen tool in Illustrator CS6. It is a single vector line in Illustrator. AFDesign imports it as a long thin path from both .eps and .pdf files.

I have the same problem as Old Bruce. Affinity crashed c. 1625 (5 mins ago) as in the Affinity working window for the file I was working on disappeared from the desktop and is not hidden in the Dock. No crash report appeared on the monitor so I checked Console. There was nothing under Crash Report or Error reports. I screenshotted the relevant portion of the system.log, attached below. Despite the loss of the working window Affinity is still running. I'm quitting out and restarting the mac mini (OS11.5.2)

I'm 99.5% sure it's an accident in Designer. From what I've read – I've been doing a lot of reading of AFDesigner stuff since my old iMac died a couple of weeks ago -- AFDesigner's brushes are actually bounded shapes (paths) masquerading as vector brush strokes. AFD is just really good at showing them as brush strokes. So it makes some warped sense that the AFD engine interprets Illustrator pen strokes (single stroked lines) as shapes (paths bounding a long thin shape) when it opens a file created in Illustrator. But it's an awful, horrendous, scary bug for me, who does a massive amount of work using vector lines for mapping and vector brushes for hand-painting illustration. However, the good news is that I have discovered the 'Break Curve' tool. So, for future reference, if anyone else needs to convert what were vector lines from AFD's bounded paths back into vector lines the answer is: Select the two anchor points that form one end of your long thin was-a-line using the white anchor point working tool thing. When both points are selected, use the 'Break Curve' button, on my machine it's the first one of the 'Action' buttons in the contextual menu bar across the top of the document. Select the two anchor points at the other end of the long thin shape, break that curve too. The path magically becomes two parallel strokes. Delete one of them. It's not perfect -- the new vector line is not precisely the same shape as the original, but it's damn close. And will suffice for this project. But I may have to scrap any half-finished illustrations because I don't believe the pressure sensitive shape of the brush will be preserved/retained if I do the same to the shaped paths that replace my Illustrator brush strokes.

I still have access to Illustrator on my old laptop. If there was something I could do to the original Illustrator file before saving as PDF or alternative, I can do that.

The structure doesn't change when I do that: the line is still a very very long thin path defined by a continuous vector path border. Screenshot below. Note that what was a single 0.5pt vector pen line is now a filled path. If I simply swap fill for outline I get a pair of parallel lines with a thin area of fill between them. If I could actually *delete* one half of the path I could perhaps stroke the remaining line? But when I delete an anchor point using the white arrowhead pointer AFD rejoins the two anchors to each side of the one I deleted with a straight line. below. For emphasis: these were drawn as vector pen lines in Illustrator CS6. In the image below you can see the blue wireframe edge of what became a filled path when imported to AFDesign.

I have searched for an existing answer in the forums; it seems possible that this is related to my creating the original illustrator art using a stylus on a pressure sensitive Wacom tablet, even though the Illustrator tool was not capable of pressure sensitivity. The vector pen lines are NOT pressure-sensitive in Illustrator and there is no prgssure-sensivity setting for the Illustrator pen tool. Is there anything I can do in Illustrator CS6 or AFDesigner to prevent this or convert the paths back to vector lines? My half-finished maps will be a nightmare if not.

I had to come to the forums to verify that hidden layers do not print. PLEASE let us specify layers as 'non-printing'! Or at least add the fact that hidden layers DO NOT PRINT to the Help file.

My partner is running Windows in that way, so I'd thought of that; I've also thought of keeping an old machine around to dedicate to CS6 apps, as I once did for OS9. But those are stopgap measures even if the gap is a couple of years0. I'll look at Quark again (switched to indd back in the 1990s), and consider sticking with Indd via subscription. But I'd rather support someone other than Adobe.

You can open the PDF, it looks ok and and you can edit the text, but the ex-indd high res PDF I opened in Publisher opened at the wrong size: pages c. 50mmx70mm instead of 210mmx297mm, and I can't find a way to correct that.

I've just opened a couple of 'press quality' PDFs generated in Indd. Congrats on the quality of the import - the editable text is where it should be, which is helpful if I'm trying to recreate the indd document. But the file resolution is way too low: specifying an import resolution of 300dpi (as for images) yields pages c. 50mm x 70mm instead of 210 x 297 (UK A4 paper). How do I tell Publisher the document should be high resolution?

Just to say that I'm another possible Publisher user with 20+ years of Indesign legacy files (currently using CS6), most important of which is an academic journal. Every printer I deal with works from PDF now so I don't need an idml-compatible export, but I really, really don't want to have to re-create all those documents. I note the possibility of import from PDF, but the next big MacOS upgrade will break the CS6 apps (are you seeing increased interest recently?) so I won't be able to go back to CS6 to create a PDF for import in a couple of years.