3 Feature requests for digital painters

[MatttDB]

Hey Guys, Firstly love the programs!

As a digital painter I find three Features that would take this software from good to incredible for digital painters IMO.

First, a dedicated rotate tool, I know you can rotate the canvas already, but the loss in resolution and over all quality whilst in a rotated state is not only off putting, but makes detailing really difficult.

Secondly, the ability to paint with transparency, this has become a massive part of my process in programs such as clip studio and it really is invaluable

Thirdly, an option to destructively adjust a layer along side the Layer adjustments, I'm aware you can dock the adj layer into the current layer but, again the slows down and breaks the flow of a painting.

[fde101]

Hi @MatttDB, welcome to the forums!

In general it is best to keep one thread to one topic - one request - rather than combining them into one thread like this.

That said I would avoid creating a new thread for the first one as it has been discussed previously in an existing thread (add to that one instead if you feel a need), and for the third one because it is already there: if you are applying an adjustment to a pixel layer you can already make that destructive simply by clicking the Merge button in the window for editing the adjustment layer.  If working this way you can consider the adjustment layer to be a temporary state while you are setting up the adjustment before applying it (read "Merge" as "Apply" / "OK").

Can you clarify what you mean by "paint with transparency"?

[Old Bruce]

10 hours ago, MatttDB said:

the ability to paint with transparency, this has become a massive part of my process in programs such as clip studio and it really is invaluable

Are you wanting to erase or do you want a colour to be partly transparent?

[KC Honie]

13 hours ago, MatttDB said:

Hey Guys, Firstly love the programs!

As a digital painter I find three Features that would take this software from good to incredible for digital painters IMO.

First, a dedicated rotate tool, I know you can rotate the canvas already, but the loss in resolution and over all quality whilst in a rotated state is not only off putting, but makes detailing really difficult.

Secondly, the ability to paint with transparency, this has become a massive part of my process in programs such as clip studio and it really is invaluable

Thirdly, an option to destructively adjust a layer along side the Layer adjustments, I'm aware you can dock the adj layer into the current layer but, again the slows down and breaks the flow of a painting.

Nothing wrong with bundling up your request for specific usage of the product, otherwise they get lost...

[fde101]

12 hours ago, KC Honie said:

Nothing wrong with bundling up your request for specific usage of the product, otherwise they get lost...

There is, actually.

When multiple requests are placed on a thread and people start responding to them the discussion of those separate items tends to get woven throughout the thread - there will be a few posts on one, then a few on another, and so on, and someone trying to follow the conversation can get lost with there effectively being multiple discussions going on making it difficult to keep track of which posts are related to which request or topic.

It also violates the guidelines outlined for this section of the forum: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature-requests-suggestions/

Specifically:

Quote

• Please just do one suggestion per thread. If your post title is “Here’s a few ideas to improve Affinity Publisher” you’ll be asked to split them up.

 

This is also related to the problem of there being multiple threads discussing the same request, which is also promoted by threads which intermix topics, as the conversation related to that request gets split up and people trying to keep track of it would need to bounce back and forth between threads to see parts of the conversation.  If some of those threads happen to be mixed inline with other requests within a thread it gets harder yet, particularly if the moderators would want to merge the threads, as they would first need to split up the thread containing multiple requests - and splitting a thread is evidently much harder than merging threads.

Thus from those same guidelines:

Quote

• Please search first, it may well be that you have a suggestion that others also want. If so add your feelings to their thread.

 

[KC Honie]

2 hours ago, fde101 said:

There is, actually.

When multiple requests are placed on a thread and people start responding to them the discussion of those separate items tends to get woven throughout the thread - there will be a few posts on one, then a few on another, and so on, and someone trying to follow the conversation can get lost with there effectively being multiple discussions going on making it difficult to keep track of which posts are related to which request or topic.

It also violates the guidelines outlined for this section of the forum: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature-requests-suggestions/

Specifically:

 

This is also related to the problem of there being multiple threads discussing the same request, which is also promoted by threads which intermix topics, as the conversation related to that request gets split up and people trying to keep track of it would need to bounce back and forth between threads to see parts of the conversation.  If some of those threads happen to be mixed inline with other requests within a thread it gets harder yet, particularly if the moderators would want to merge the threads, as they would first need to split up the thread containing multiple requests - and splitting a thread is evidently much harder than merging threads.

Thus from those same guidelines:

 

All well and fine, but his requests are linked and when broken up into separate threads lose cohesiveness...  This type of request is best bundled, honestly I don't care what the guidelines say...