Gradient ‘On The Curve’ (so to speak … )

[Dr_No]

As stated by ELP: “Welcome back, My Friends / To the Show That Never Ends!” … and today’s Mystery Question may have a simpler resolution than I'm capable of imagining.

To begin:

To add a gradient, I usually create a new pixel layer, select the Gradient tool, drag out a gradient, edit it, and move to the next task. Occasionally, I've needed to return to edit the gradient and - so long as the Gradient tool was selected - the earlier gradient remained editable. But that was then …

Now, once I depart the gradient layer  and return later (with the Gradient tool active), the layer is only a gradient pixel layer, and uneditable as a gradient layer. If a new / edited gradient is to be had, it has to be created from scratch. 

Can someone please ’splain me what rezackly be’s happenin’ heah … ? Any editable gradients (FWIW) are usually elliptical in nature. Gradients which are linear are generally no longer editable once the layer is clicked off to move to a diff'rent one. All thoughts and inputs are welcomed and appreciated …

[iconoclast]

Hi Dr_No!

As far as I see, gradients on pixel layers can't be edited afterwards. But instead creating a gradient on a pixel layer, you could create a vector layer by dragging a rectangle shape. Gradients on vector layers stay editable (the same with text layers). - If we are talking about Affinity Photo.

[Dr_No]

Hi and thanks … that may be the solution, then! I'll give it a go and see if it holds up IRL when I change layers and come back to it again. If it's still editable via the gradient tool, then All Is Right With The World again. Thanks for the tip.

[Dr_No]

Ah. I just caught the caveat that the Vector Layer Solution is for Affinity PHOTO … well then: The game's afoot, yes … ? I'll see if that advice also applies in Affinity Designer … ohpleaseohpleaseohplease …

[walt.farrell]

You can also use a Fill Layer, rather than a rectangle.

[Dr_No]

Thanks, Walt … that's an option I hadn't considered. It'll be implemented in the Next Major Work … [sic]. To date, Iconoclast's suggestion does the trick nicely, and there may be advantages with using a Fill layer not available with the vector layer solution. So many options, so little thyme …

[NotMyFault]

There are some pros and cons of vector vs fill layer:

vector layer properties 

• works in all apps (Photo and Designer)
• you can start with any shape or curve, no need to fill complete canvas
• you can add pixel mask or vector mask
• works mostly as expected when nested or put in groups
• you can use layer fx on top

fill layer properties 

• only available in Photo
• Has inherent mask, no need to add separate mask layer
• Has some special properties when changing crop or size (infinite size)
• Open bug affecting layer blending in case of semi transparent colors
• may act unexpectedly when put in groups and playing with blend modes, or using layer fx

For simple tasks, both are equally suited. For complex tasks, the difference may matter.

[Dr_No]

NotMyFault … thanks for your input. In my experiments using the suggestions made here, I've concluded that the vector layer approach is the one most applicable to the way I work. I was surprised at the results of the fill layer when I used it, but it's the only way to learn what needs to be learnt, yes? Thanks again to all who contributed to finding this solution.