Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Recommended Posts

I would like to have linked layers like Affinity Photo has. This would be tremendously valuable for linking layer visibility and transforms in a complex document.

I often work on complex city size drawings, which require me to work with one artboard due to performance issues. Given that I make multiple separate drawings on the same base maps, I would like to link their visibility (since layers and effects may be scattered across the layer tree) so I can more easily export the drawings individually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Intuos5 said:

I would like to have linked layers like Affinity Photo has.

Menu File, Edit in Photo... 

Affinity Store (MSI/EXE): Affinity Suite (ADe, APh, APu) 2.4.0.2301
Dell OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080, Windows 11 Pro, Version 23H2, Build 22631.3155.
Dell Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080, Windows 11 Pro, Version 23H2, Build 22631.3155.
Intel NUC5PGYH, Pentium N3700 2.40 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics, EIZO EV2456 1920 x 1200, Windows 10 Pro, Version 21H1, Build 19043.2130.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see, having this natively would allow me to check whether layers are linked or not. If I work in different Personas or in Designer/ Photo/ Publisher, then I can't see this info. And would have to switch Personas or program to expose this info again. That's also quite error prone, which is why I am requesting the feature, not a workaround.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then again, I have linked the layers in Photo in this occasion. But back in Designer there really is no way to tell that they are indeed linked/ associated. I also don't use symbols for this, since the layers have completely different contents.

 

Imagine getting such a file from a co-worker, you'd lose your mind over it if you didn't know it contains linked layers that were added in Photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, N.P.M. said:

You know Serif is a commercial company and wants us to pay for options and features.
These restrictions are there for some reason,don't you think?

No sorry, I disagree. It's nonesense.

I have paid for the entire suite and this is very much crippling each of their programs. It is not a restriction but a design oversight. In no way should a company pursue a business model in which you have to make additional clicks, click all over the UI (switching personas is at the other end of the layers panel if I have my layers on the right) just for the sake of saying: look we have personas. If I paid for this, I don't pay for a business model that allows me to work slower, have to click more, etc. I pay for software that allows me to get my work done in the most convenient way possible. Not to mention, it takes about a second each time I switch personas to load the UI. This could be fixed and should be fixed by adding linked layers to Designer too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I am saying is some features should be available across the other programs of the suite. It makes sense to have them from a workflow perspective. It adds benefits that are bigger than what's available through persona/ program switching.

It's not black and white. And I am not advocating for one big bloated program either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Intuos5 said:

And I am not advocating for one big bloated program either.

But without "one big bloated program" there will always be some functions that some set of users want to see in a different application. 

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

But without "one big bloated program" there will always be some functions that some set of users want to see in a different application. 

That's a slippery slope argument. As in, if you add this you have to add all of the other things users want, so we better not add this one thing. That sort of argument leads to nowhere.

The linked layers workflow, however, also applies to vector layers.  It is a feature that Illustrator does not have, so it gives a competitive advantage. Symbols, for instance, do not allow you to set visibility parity between layers.
Not to mention most of the code for this request is already there, if not all of it.

E: I was convinced to buy the Affinity suite partially on the presumption of having Linked Layers work in Designer as well. I was impressed with the Photo workflow video and saw innovation I hadn't seen in a while on Adobe's end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Intuos5 said:

I was convinced to buy the Affinity suite partially on the premise of having Linked Layers work in Designer as well

And where did you find documentation or evidence to indicate that was true?

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Intuos5 said:

*Presumption, not premise.

Fair enough.

But we see a lot of people presuming functions will be present, rather than looking to see if they are or making use of the Trial period.

In any case, the "slippery slope" argument is a valid one, I think, because if you look at all the forum topics, you will find many functions that some subset of users want to be included in the other applications. And if Serif did all of them, they would have one huge, bloated application.

But you are certainly free to ask for it, and I can see that it could have advantages. And I cannot pretend to understand all the reasoning behind the way that Serif has chosen to partition functions between the applications.

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

In any case, the "slippery slope" argument is a valid one, I think, because if you look at all the forum topics, you will find many functions that some subset of users want to be included in the other applications. And if Serif did all of them, they would have one huge, bloated application.

In this case, it adds another studio, that's it. Which is why I don't think the slippery slope argument applies here. The feature could easily be ignored without even being in the way, because the Studios are nested quite deep within the menu (View > Studios > Linked layers). All of the functionality is embedded in the Studio, so it's not overflowing into other parts of the software.

This should be looked at case by case imo, instead of generalising every request from every user. There's a lot of differentiation and context missing in the presumption that if a couple features were to be added it would immediately result in bloated software. I disagree. It's always about whether there is a problem currently — which there is — and if there were a valid solution — which there is and Serif designed it already for this particular case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.