Adding distortion

[BKite]

I can't figure out why a distortion happens to one object when I add two objects together or when I add letters together that I converted from font to curves. I think maybe I have a setting that is wrong? I need help please!

[Pšenda]

Look at Alternate/Winding Filling. 

https://affinity.help/publisher/English.lproj/index.html?page=pages/CurvesShapes/about_linesAndShapes.html?title=About lines, curves and shapes

[BKite]

Thank you. I did check that, and it doesn't seem to work to fix the problem.

[BKite]

Here's how it looks before the add and after. I tried both alternating and winding.

[Jowday]

@BKite

Could you attach an example file we can monkey around with, please ? 🙂

[MEB]

Hi BKite,
Welcome to Affinity Forums
The boolean operations were rewritten recently for v1.8. There's still a few issues in specific circumstances that fail to process correctly. Do you mind attaching the afdesign file for us to check them please? Thanks.

 

[BKite]

I was tending to my two toddlers. Sorry for the delay.

Circle.afdesign

[firstdefence]

Select both layers and go to Layer > Create Compound

Circle - compound.afdesign

[BKite]

It worked! Thank you!

[BKite]

Before, I was just able to add, so I have been trying everything (but that)!  

[firstdefence]

8 minutes ago, BKite said:

Before, I was just able to add, so I have been trying everything (but that)!  

Weird that it is kind of the same thing but maybe this is what MEB’s talking about.

 

[Jowday]

20 hours ago, BKite said:

I can't figure out why a distortion happens to one object when I add two objects together or when I add letters together that I converted from font to curves. I think maybe I have a setting that is wrong? I need help please!

Lets see what @MEB has to say.

I wonder how you made these objects. Did you use boolean operations and which? 

If I make something roughly similar in a manual and controlled workflow add works as expected:

poc.afdesign

[BKite]

I made the circle of circles with a dotted outline that I converted to curves and expanded the stroke and the solid circles are expanded strokes from an ellipse I converted to curves. 

[BKite]

The compound works for some of what I am doing, but for some things, I want it to completely be one piece that I can manipulate the nodes of that one piece. The add is a better option in that instance, and sometimes it works fine and sometimes it doesn't. It seems to be a problem with expanded strokes.

[BKite]

I even tried to make an outline of a circle using the cog tool (not the stroke), and it still made the distortion. 

(Please excuse me if I don't use the correct terms.  )

 

[BKite]

3 hours ago, Jowday said:

Lets see what @MEB has to say.

I wonder how you made these objects. Did you use boolean operations and which? 

If I make something roughly similar in a manual and controlled workflow add works as expected:

poc.afdesign

What process did you use to make the solid circle outline?

[lepr]

2 hours ago, BKite said:

The compound works for some of what I am doing, but for some things, I want it to completely be one piece that I can manipulate the nodes of that one piece. The add is a better option in that instance, and sometimes it works fine and sometimes it doesn't. It seems to be a problem with expanded strokes.

You can convert a Compound to a single vector object by using Convert To Curves, which is cmd+enter on a Mac.

By the way, a Compound (a non-destructive boolean) can be created by depressing opt/alt key when clicking a boolean button such as Add, Subtract, etc, or selecting a boolean command in a menu.

[Jowday]

21 hours ago, BKite said:

What process did you use to make the solid circle outline?

I just used the ellipse tool and duplicated them. Out of (old) habit I convert them to curves (control + enter) before manipulating them with boolean operators etc. I can't remember using compounds for much work. Always minimize complexity in whatever you do. Less problems, less troubleshooting, better output. YMMV though.

I was asking because perhaps you used the boolean operators - subtract, divide whatever - to create the patterns. At least divide still has some bugs and the result is unwanted nodes and other problems. 

[lepr]

3 hours ago, Jowday said:

[...] I can't remember using compounds for much work. Always minimize complexity in whatever you do. Less problems, less troubleshooting, better output. YMMV though. [...]

You've completely missed the point of using a Compound as an intermediate step in this thread's example where a simple destructive boolean result is required..

Destructive boolean operations were more reliable in the 1.7.6 apps than they are now (1.8.3), and a workaround until there is a fix is to use a Compound as an intermediate step toward a destructive result.

The current Affinity apps produce a mess, as was shown, when the two objects of the example are destructively boolean added. A Compound (a live non-destructive boolean) uses different code which gives the correct result, and then all that's needed is a press of cmd+enter to convert the live boolean to a destructive result.

There have been many recent reported instances of failed destructive booleans, and each time a file is supplied, I've found a Compound works correctly and then a press of cmd+enter is all that's needed to convert to a single vector object.

 

[lepr]

3 hours ago, Jowday said:

[...] Out of (old) habit I convert them to curves (control + enter) before manipulating them with boolean operators etc. I can't remember using compounds for much work. Always minimize complexity in whatever you do [...]

You added redundant complexity to your procedure with that convert to curves, then go on to advise reducing complexity to avoid a convert to curves!

[MEB]

Thanks for your report and file BKite. I've logged the issue and passed the file to the dev team to be looked at. If you stumble upon more cases where the boolean operations fail please let us know/attach an example file so we can tweak/improve the code for upcoming builds. Thank you.