Has V2 fixed Affinity's biggest issues?

[A_B_C]

If I may copy my earlier remarks from an obviously off-topic place here, as this is a better place for them, I would really love to see improvements in the “little things” along the version 2 development cycle. By “little things” I mean those usability improvements that save us clicks in frequently performed tasks, most of which have extensively been discussed on these forums. Such as

• Alt+drag to copy objects in the Layers Panel,
• Alt+click on layer’s or group’s triangle in the Layers Panel to open or close the entire subtree structure, as it is the case in macOS Finder,
• Shift+drag to constrain the aspect ratio of the Crop Tool rectangle in Photo,
• the option of having the Crop Tool remember its last-used state (make it a preference, if you don’t like to make it the default behaviour),
• the option of setting a custom default tool for an app and for embedded documents that are opened in a new tab (Photo, for instance, always defaults to the Hand Tool which is of no use if you have a trackpad),
• copy & paste of slices in the Export Persona,
• the option of adding the Snapping Options Buttons to the toolbar of the Export Persona,
• the option of holding down a key to temporarily activate a tool just until key release,
• the option of moving selected pixel content with marquee tool and Command key pressed,
• etc.

None of these improvements should really be controversial, overly difficult to implement or break any existing workflow. Let me detail just the first item from this list. In January 2015, in one of my first posts here, I had already suggested that the simple option of Alt(Opt) + dragging an object in the Layers Panel to clone the object to a new location in the layers tree should be implemented.

• https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/4006-some-layer-things/#comment-16292

To my understanding, this has never been an outlandish request. The respective option

• has been available in competitors’ apps for ages,
• should be implementable with a few lines of code that won’t break anything (don’t tell me otherwise: if the team can set up nondestructive RAW developing and vector mesh warp, this should be an apprentice piece),
• does not require the implementation of additional UI elements (it is an “invisible” improvement that does not complicate the UI and changes the UX only for the better),
• does not interfere with Alt(Opt) + clicking for solo mode, since we are talking about Alt(Opt) + dragginghere (choose a different modifier for drag-cloning, if you consider it a problem),
• should be absolutely non-controversial as a most helpful option that speeds up layer workflows considerably,
• and does not break any existing workflow (if you don’t want to use it, just leave it aside).

Considering these arguments, I think there’s really no good reason for not implementing this feature, and honestly, its implementation should also not fail due to missing workforce capacity. And it’s not that I would have been the only one asking for the feature. Here are a just a few threads that turn up in a superficial forum search:

• https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/7545-add-new-layer-above-current-object/ (April 2015)
• https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/17984-duplicate-a-layer-by-alt-drag-drop-in-layers-panel/ (February 2016 – November 2021)
• https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/28802-altdrag-layer-to-create-a-copy/ (November 2016)
• https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/163101-how-to-copy-layer-mask-and-paste-to-another-layer-in-affinity-photo-ipad/ (June 2022)

So when you look at these comments (one could compile a similar list for many, if not all of the other features I mentioned above) and when you see, at the same time, that this simple quality-of-life feature has not yet been implemented, after seven years of development time and countless beta cycles, you cannot help to think “Well, they do theirs, don’t hold your breath.” Which will, inevitably, cause frustration. 🙁

I’m not saying this in order to bash the Affinity team or diminish their efforts. I just believe that after the great process they made with the new versions, it would be time to seriously turn their attention to these small features that come at virtually no development cost and would improve our daily lives tremendously. 🙂

[Kal]

4 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

I would really love to see improvements in the “little things” along the version 2 development cycle. By “little things” I mean those usability improvements that save us clicks in frequently performed tasks, most of which have extensively been discussed on these forums.

4 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

I’m not saying this in order to bash the Affinity team or diminish their efforts. I just believe that after the great process they made with the new versions, it would be time to seriously turn their attention to these small features that come at virtually no development cost and would improve our daily lives tremendously. 🙂

I couldn't agree more!

 

4 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

Shift+drag to constrain the aspect ratio of the Crop Tool rectangle in Photo

Speaking of constraining the aspect ratio, another UI annoyance I should have mentioned in my OP is the inconsistent way grouped and non-grouped items respond to the Shift modifier. With ungrouped items, you hold down Shift to constrain the proportions, and with grouped items it's the exact opposite! It's a perfect example of bad UX, where you're forcing the user to have to stop and think, 'are these items grouped?' before performing the operation. It shouldn't matter!! I don't want to stop and think about such details while I'm working, so in practice, I just start with the Shift key down, and then let it go if it's doing the opposite of what I want it to.

[A_B_C]

6 minutes ago, Kal said:

Speaking of constraining the aspect ratio, another UI annoyance I should have mentioned in my OP is the inconsistent way grouped and non-grouped items respond to the Shift modifier. With ungrouped items, you hold down Shift to constrain the proportions, and with grouped items it's the exact opposite! It's a perfect example of bad UX, where you're forcing the user to have to stop and think, 'are these items grouped?' before performing the operation. It shouldn't matter!! I don't want to stop and think about such details while I'm working, so in practice, I just start with the Shift key down, and then let it go if it's doing the opposite of what I want it to.

But this may be due to the settings you made under Preferences > Tools > Move Tool Aspect Constrain. Set this to Do not constrain by default, and you should be fine. 🙂

[Kal]

31 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

But this may be due to the settings you made under Preferences > Tools > Move Tool Aspect Constrain. Set this to Do not constrain by default, and you should be fine. 🙂

Thanks!! Done. 😊 I don't believe I ever 'made' that setting, so I'm assuming the 'Automatic (based on selection)' (i.e. inconsistent) behaviour is the default?

[tatanka]

9 hours ago, Kal said:

I'm assuming you can still use variable fonts in Affinity, but that you are just limited to a standard set of weights (normal, bold, etc). Or cannot you not use them at all? (I confess, I haven't tried.)

You cannot. Something garbled did render as I tried, but it’s completely broken and unusable.

[A_B_C]

8 hours ago, Kal said:

… so I'm assuming the 'Automatic (based on selection)' (i.e. inconsistent) behaviour is the default?

Yes, unfortunately. In general, I don’t like it when an application tries to be smarter than I am (which, in itself, may not be too difficult for any entity other than an app), so that was among the first settings I change when I installed the Affinity suite anew. 😉

[A_B_C]

Regarding variable fonts, they are unusable. While the master instances (maybe also other instances, I haven’t checked) are displayed in the style dropdown menu, the Affinity apps seem to read the metrics information for each instance from the main master. Which, of course, creates that kind of garbled mess @tatanka reported. (Other issues may be present as well.)

Concerning the text engine, it is difficult to understand why the implementation does not make use of existing libraries. What are the expected gains of trying to develop a new text shaping engine, when a reliable and time-proven system like Harfbuzz is readily available? 😟

[chessboard]

9 hours ago, LondonSquirrel said:

What I don't want to see is some users thinking they are the 'four legs good' animals ('the pros') and the rest of us are the 'two legs bad' ('ordinary' users) and our two-legged opinions count less. I still have my needs for this software.

I would really appreciate it if we could just discuss the software here and no one had to discuss themselves, feel offended by the wishes of others, or be allergic to the term "professional". This forum is about software and not about the personality of individual users, not about belief and not about the bad guys versus the good guys (may it be users or companies, especially in relation to another software provider that starts with a capital "A").

[Kal]

Oh dear, it seems I've been too generous with the love.

 

24 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

Yes, unfortunately. In general, I don’t like it when an application tries to be smarter than I am

Amen. Remember this guy…?

 

[François R]

34 minutes ago, chessboard said:

I would really appreciate it if we could just discuss the software here and no one had to discuss themselves, feel offended by the wishes of others, or be allergic to the term "professional". This forum is about software and not about the personality of individual users, not about belief and not about the bad guys versus the good guys (may it be users or companies, especially in relation to another software provider that starts with a capital "A").

It would really raise the level in here, so that would be nice.

[PaoloT]

1 hour ago, chessboard said:

I would really appreciate it if we could just discuss the software here and no one had to discuss themselves, feel offended by the wishes of others, or be allergic to the term "professional".

And to contribute to this and keep the forum clean, the Ignore button appearing when hovering over an avatar may be a great help.

Paolo

 

[François R]

6 minutes ago, PaoloT said:

And to contribute to this and keep the forum clean, the Ignore button appearing when hovering over an avatar may be a great help.

Paolo

That is ineffective symptom management. It is not individual ad hoc symptom management that he wants. He is asking for a factual and tribal warfare free debate environment.

[PaoloT]

13 minutes ago, François R said:

It is not individual ad hoc symptom management that he wants.

Unfortunately, some individuals are incurable.

 

[François R]

30 minutes ago, PaoloT said:

Unfortunately, some individuals are incurable.

They do not suffer from anything that offline life experience as employees or participants in a larger workplace or professional environment (e.g. volunteering in a larger organisation) cannot cure.

[debraspicher]

For the basics, the apps are well suited for non-power users. Someone who needs to crop, do light touch ups, exports, create a tshirt design for themselves every now and then. Not people who would ever benefit from a highly focused workflow, which is what the Affinity apps (hopefully) seem to be working towards doing skillfully.

I don't perceive they will ignore their broader base. These are the people who seem to give the more straightforward feedback (arguably more useful) as they actually will talk more openly about how they are making use of the products and from that, easier to see what they are well-suited to. So it's prudent here to focus in where it is really working.

I don't get that sense as much here on the forums how others use the programs. It is hard to tell who uses the program actively and who just bought the suite to support a "cause". Though more will say often than not what it doesn't do well comparable to other systems, not that this feedback is not also valuable, but it doesn't tell us why people use the programs and what their needs and usecases are. So I think any feedback disconnected from the purpose it serves (end user) makes it harder to determine the priority for them and potentially others sharing similar workflows. We know the suite can certainly use more fleshing out and adding of features, but if it is not fun to use, from what I can tell that loses appeal for many as there are already capable alternatives. For example, Illustrator is certainly more useful and productive, but it is soul-stealing to use for my specific workflows.

[Tia Lapis]

49 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

As I wrote, some people are wrapping up their wants and needs in the words "the professional needs" or words like that. Their needs are not more important than mine. They are not a more valuable customer as they pay the same price as me.

You should see the elitism between video editors. There Hollywood editors despise even tv guys and oh no wedding photographers... And all hate amateurs. So I can totally understand the allergic reaction to arguments that try to get more weight with "I'm a pro". I sadly don't know how to avoid this.

[chessboard]

58 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

As I wrote, some people are wrapping up their wants and needs in the words "the professional needs" or words like that. Their needs are not more important than mine. They are not a more valuable customer as they pay the same price as me.

Well, without doubt there are "professional needs". I understand this to mean, among other things, speed, reliability even on a very large scale, precision, and the ability to streamline and automate workflows. However, the existence of special professional needs does not diminish the needs of users who do not use the software for a living, but may be even the same in some parts. I don't know who said otherwise (I don't read or know each comment in this forum).

Professional or not says nothing about the quality of work that is done with the software nor the users themselves. So no need to feel personally attacked when the term "professional" is used.

[AlainP]

Real professionals don't whine all the time on discussion forums. They make suggestions and work using other tools if the ones they have don't fulfill their needs.

They usually don't cry for $50.

[chessboard]

Why not just ignore them who take themselves and their needs too seriously? I don't think Serif values their requirements more highly just because they call themselves professionals. I hardly think Serif actually keeps a list of user requests here from the forum. At least they have ignored most of them in the past years. It is still a big mystery what Serif plans to do with its suite and what suggestions and needs they will take into account. Therefore, it is completely irrelevant whether some users consider their needs to be more important than those of other users. JM2C.

[Twolane]

31 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

These programs are about £30 each. Yet supposed "professionals" are complaining.

This is what I have trouble with in all of the negative posting going on in a wide variety of threads: the price versus the complaints. I sure don't consider myself a pro by any stretch of the imagination, but...

• I use Photo for book covers, both e-book and print.
• I use Publisher to format my print books for upload to Ingram Spark and Amazon POD distributing. Thanks to this software, my POD interiors rival that of the Big 5 publishers.

V2 now serves my purposes outlined above. V1 has saved me thousands of dollars in publishing costs. I expect v2 to do the same. I will continue to chug along doing what I do best. Unsolicited advice: Perhaps the complainers should try doing the same, rather than waste time complaining about what isn't there, what should be there, what works, what doesn't work, and on and on.

Also, there is v1 to go back to if v2 doesn't make anyone happy.

/endofrant

Edited to add that I've been using the Affinity Serif products for two years. I bought the threesome on sale for around 25 bucks each, if I remember correctly. Thanks, Serif, and carry on regardless.

[debraspicher]

This conversation was quite productive until it turned into a meeting of the members of the Feedback HOA. I do not approve this surprise inspection or my appraisal. Where do I submit my protest?

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, debraspicher said:

This conversation was quite productive until it turned into a meeting of the members of the Feedback HOA.

I had to look up what possible definition for HOA might be useful in this thread. Personally, I'm going for 'High Order Aberration' or 'Horse of the Americas'—but I have to admit, 'High On ASCII' has a really nice ring to it.  

[PaoloT]

2 hours ago, AlainP said:

Real professionals don't whine all the time on discussion forums. They make suggestions and work using other tools if the ones they have don't fulfill their needs. They usually don't cry for $50.

This doesn't give a complete picture of the situation.

- The only other tool is the Adobe suite. It has a very high cost for freelancers in some countries. Some could repay it with about one week of full-time work in a year. Something more in slower years. But for lower-wages countries it is a very expensive tool.

- Even if cost is not a matter, the Adobe suite keeps your files hostage. Stop paying, and you are no longer able to see what's inside. The only way is to start paying again, or hope that the free IDMarkz viewer will still be available.

- With Adobe, you are forced to update. Even in the middle of a critical job. Even if the update removes some feature or app you are using.

- The price of the Affinity suite is incredibly low. This is something I'm personally not fond of, because it means having to share the tools with people whose job doesn't depend on them. I would like they costed more. But I understand that this would prevent Serif from selling in a much wider market. While the "pro" market is shrinking, and probably continuing to pay multi-year contracts with Adobe up to the end of the times.

Oh, maybe Serif should have two different versions of their suite: one, more expensive, for pros. And another one, costing less and with a lot of bugs, for those who don't complain for the bugs, considering the price.

Paolo

 

[debraspicher]

1 minute ago, Bryan Rieger said:

I had to look up what possible definition for HOA might be useful in this thread. Personally, I'm going for 'High Order Aberration' or 'Horse of the Americas'—but I have to admit, 'High On ASCII' has a really nice ring to it.  

Ooh yes

[debraspicher]

On topic sort of? I'm not 100% sure how this thread is being arranged topically, so let me know if it does not fit. I just got alerted of this tweet.. yeah, even Clip Studio is adding AI of some sort. Their codebase is quite old maybe? I'm not really sure. The CSP moniker is newish. It used to be known by a far more niche name (Manga Studio).