Evan D

Agree that this feature never benefits me. It's not just a matter of 'getting used to it' either, it's bad UX. It *might* be useful if your workflow involves only two tools, but I think that's probably very uncommon. Most users change tools a lot and don't remember the last one they used. Plus your cursor doesn't always change in appearance when you change tools so you often have no quick or intuitive way of knowing which tool you're currently using. 
I vote to get rid of this entirely, but the option to disable it seems like an easy fix that would please everyone.

Ah, ok.  That works.  It's pretty counter-intuitive, but it solves my problem.  I don't suppose it's too much to ask for a way to specify a ratio, rather than a pixel size? Say I want to select a 4x3 box, but I don't know what pixel dimensions?

I just installed and started up Designer for the first time and opened an illustrator created document. and Find and replace was literally the first thing I looked for when I opened this illustrator document for my work. I had design some package labels for a series of Automotive fuses and they print them out 16 on a sheet of Avery Labels, so my document has 16 of the same stickers. Product A is different from Product B, so using two different sheets for those requires 54 different text changes. 3 per sticker. Using designer for this wold turn my 5 second task into, possibly 2 hours, because I'd do a little. Get up, walk around. Do a little, complain, check the fridge for food, do a little...you get the idea. 
 
PLEASE add a find and replace text feature. $50 a month to Adobe is killing my soul. 

Ping this back up. It's not only large swatches of text that need "Find & Replace".
 
Making buttons, and any small text entities that need lots of different versions with different words can benefit from using Find & Replace, too. Please do it!

Thanks everybody for clarifying this ...
Just a little suggestion to serif from my side: Since the transformation panel supports absolut and percentage values it would be no hassle to make a difference between entering absolut values for width and hight (300mm original value, duplicate, 290mm new value and CMD/CTRL J each time reduces by these 10mm difference) or relative values (300mm original value, duplicate, "w=w*0,95" "h=h*0,95" or "0.95%" and CMD/CTRL J reduces by a relative value). Even better would be the option to change the radius as a separate parameter to the transform panel ...  instead of each time changing width and hight.

Just my 2 cents ...

Why would crop to selection have to be destructive?
I am missing this feature as well and I read about this numerous times here on the forum.
 
Of course, there are ways around it, but if you
- use this frequently or
- use it in a specific manner*,
it can save quite some time.
 
*Personally, I like to select multiple areas which I know I want to include in the image and then crop so that the image includes the selections. This seems rather hard to do with the current crop tool.
 
I am actually quite surprised this isn't implemented yet, since it seems like rather straight-forward to implement.
Of course, this depends heavily on how the developers integrated the current crop functionality, but I could imagine a simple approach like this could already solve this with just altering the input of the current crop tool (Mode -> Absolute Dimensions):

CropSelection.cs

I know what you're talking about. I am aware of the non-destructive approach Serif chose for their cropping tools, which I think is quite useful. And while Adobe may use destructive cropping for crop to selection (I'm not positive), Serif doesn't have to implement the tool in the same manner.
 
Also,
 
- including this feature, even if destructive, would add functionality many users would care about (non-destructive cropping is nice, no doubt, but that's just icing on the cake. If the cake is missing, you don't want any icing?) 
 
- The sample code I included would approach cropping to selection in a non-destructive manner, since it basically uses the already existing crop tool and enhances its spectrum of application.
 
 
Not renaming, but defining a different custom input for the tool and give that input a name.
It could be implemented as a cropping mode ("To Selection"?) for the current cropping tool.
Writing the last selected cropping mode as preference to disk would be nice as well. So you don't always have to change modes when you use one a lot.
 
 
Exactly!

Hey @Chris B not sure if this is should be a separate post but how about this idea: what if Affinity apps using Brushes have an automatically generated and pinned category at they top of the brush studio called Recent Brushes, where users’ brush changes are logged, like Brushes History? 

William, I couldn't agree more. I didn't realize the file was closed when using File/Edit in Photo... in Designer.
 
I understand this functionality demonstrates the strength and unusual capability of Affinity products being able to seamlessly open and modify files from other Affinity products. This capability could be useful, however this functionality is not normally the desired behavior. Perhaps the File menu option should remain as it is, possibly with Designer/Publisher being closed rather then leaving Designer/Publisher open with no files open.
 
Upon further testing I better understand what is happening.
I realize the current functionality looks similar, though was designed with a different purpose in mind.
I respectfully, and completely disagree.
 
Though the current implementation could be useful, the primary desired behavior is to be able to select a/an image(s) within Designer/Publisher, open the image(s) within Photo for modification, and close Photo with the modified image(s) transferred back into Designer/Publisher for further work on the parent document. [Feature implementation may require only 1 image could be transferred to Photo for editing.]
 
The purpose and use of the above described behavior is significantly different from what is currently implemented and should be considered as a new feature enhancement.

Yes totally agree with William, with Adobe you can select the image in either Illustrator or Indesign and it will only open the particular image in Photoshop to be edited. Very straight forward. At the moment with ADesigner you have to first identify the image, 'find in Finder' open in Aphoto then correct and update, way too many moves.

I don't want to edit my whole document in Photo. I only want to edit the selected image. Things get kind of fuzzy when I select "Edit in Photo" because this command forces my whole document to be opened in Photo.
 
Scenario: I select an image in Designer and select "Edit in Photo". My intention is to change the color format for the targeted image to Grayscale. Guess what happens? The whole document is converted to Grayscale! When I select "Edit in Designer", the whole document opens up in Designer as Grayscale, where as I only wanted to affect the single image.
 
I prefer the Adobe way: select an image in an Illustrator document and choose edit and the image (not the whole document), opens up in Photoshop. Do your edits and save. The image updates in the Illustrator document. Simplicity.
 
Please Affinity act on this enhancement.

I'm using Affinity Designer 1.8.3 on OSX Catalina. 
Selecting a font size from the pre-populated font size dropdown in the text toolbar, I often find that the available size increments are either too small or too large.
I want to be able to click and drag left or right on (or next to) the font size parameter field to increase/decrease the font size. You can currently do this with other parameters in the character panel, but not the size. A slider would be another option that would give me the control I want.

Hi @Evan D,
you can move your mouse just above the font size read out and use the scroll wheel (if you have one) to increase or decrease the font size in 1pt steps. You don't even have to click or drag. CTRL+scroll (on Windows) changes by a tenth of a point, SHIFT+scroll changes by 10x increments.
d.

It's already implemented in the 1.7 beta.

In the version 1.7 beta there’s a Preferences setting for this.

I just bought Affinity Designer and Photo, but there's a "feature" that throws me off all the time: when I for example press 'N' to select the pencil and then press it again, it selects the last used tool. I guess it makes sense to cycle tools if there are multiple tools in the same group, but I often press a shortcut just to make sure I have the right tool selected, so this behaviour is very annoying. I couldn't find the option in the preferences and the built-in Help didn't bring any results.

Hello Everyone,
Well i know this have been asked for long time by many but also wanted to add my request into the long long list
How come Affinity Designer can't do this kind of simple stuff Inkscape can do using it's interpolate extension and Ai can do with it's tool ?
i mean, i'm not asking affinity to be like Ai nor Inkscape but the mesh you will see attached here was created in less than 30sec on a very old laptop running Linux Fedora 29 beta with inkscape installed.
Please guys not only this tool but make it happen with more tools straight from your Knight Bag, make me smile like you did with the new thing you have added to the pen tool of APublisher thus making it 10 times better than the Pen tool implemented into ADesigner ... Well this one still need to grow to where APub stand  but ... get it done guys and ... make me smile.
BTW it's free to use for anyone who feel it may be of interest both Personal & commercial, the SVG you can use to recolor with ADesigner or APhoto. Enjoy !
drawing.svg