Boolean still broken and unreliable

[friedgoldmole]

Just upgraded to version 2 of Designer and really disappointed to find the boolean operations are still broken and unreliable, trying to add two shapes together, one derived from text which was first converted to curves and ungrouped, with the correct layer order and tried with both Alternative and Winding fill types both result in a black box when using the Add boolean, not the expected result. Looks like I will have to go back to inkscape for this seemingly basic feature.

 

If I try to do an intersect join with a simple box and one of the numbers as a workaround everything just disappears.

2023.afdesign

[Michail]

2 hours ago, friedgoldmole said:

Just upgraded to version 2 of Designer and really disappointed to find the boolean operations are still broken and unreliable, trying to add two shapes together, one derived from text which was first converted to curves and ungrouped, with the correct layer order and tried with both Alternative and Winding fill types both result in a black box when using the Add boolean, not the expected result. Looks like I will have to go back to inkscape for this seemingly basic feature.If I try to do an intersect join with a simple box and one of the numbers as a workaround everything just disappears.

I don't know exactly what you want to achieve and whether the Boolean operators are the right means. If your goal is to get a single object on a single layer, here's what you do:

1. In the Layers panel, drag the text layer over the penultimate layer.
2. Select the last two layers and choose Layer > Geometry > Subtract from the menu.
3. Select all remaining layers and choose Layer > Geometry > Merge Curves from the menu.

[friedgoldmole]

Hi Michail,

I should have explained better but I was trying to generate a single outline for use with a cutting machine, like a cricut etc. Attached the final result which I ended up making in Inkscape. Ignore the empty quote below. Can't find any way to delete it on my phone.

Quote

 

I will give your suggested workflow a go when I get a chance, but using the same methodology that fails in Designer as described above works perfectly with Inkscape, so assume it is a bug.

[Boldlinedesign]

@friedgoldmole has a good point here. You should be able to select all objects in this case and click on boolean merge and have the black numbers become one with the black outline shape without it filling in the many white negative spaces. This is what happens in both Illustrator and in Vectorstyler. 

This is the result when I use boolean merge:

Why are there so many filled in portions?

 

 

This is the result I get when I do the boolean subtract:

Again, it makes no sense to me. 

 

[friedgoldmole]

@michail I gave your suggestion a go but i end up with the following outline. It looks ok filled with black but is unsuitable for cutting.

The result from inkscape using boolean functions is below, I added additional patterns around the text and changed the fonts in the end, but I was unable to get this result in Affinity Designer.

[friedgoldmole]

@Boldlinedesign thank you, I should have taken the time to demonstrate those additional boolean operations as I have the same results, e.g. nothing is working as expected. If I draw a number 2 using the pen tool and use the boolean operations it seems to work as expected so I did wonder if it was an issue with the font, but it was converted to a curve and ungrouped and I inspected the nodes and couldn't see anything out of the ordinary.

[Boldlinedesign]

@friedgoldmole 

One of the big problems in Affinity Designer with booleans is that the merge boolean resembles the " union" option like in Illustrator or Vectorstyler, rather than a true "merge". If two overlapping shapes are different colors for example, then merge should essentially cut one from the other and group them. (If they are the same color then merge should unite them as one shape)  You can see from my example below, that the purple and black overlapping shapes when merged in Illustrator or Vectorstyler cut through. In affinity designer, they unite as one, no matter the differing colors used.
This hinders the effectiveness of the merge tool because one needs to divide the shapes first, then select the multiple pieces of the purple and merge them together again - lots of extra steps. Here's hoping they add a unite boolean and fix the merge issue

[SrPx]

I think...

It's a problem with it being "text", even after converted. Something internal, some "tag" or thing of its "nature" (I'm not a dev, lol).

I tried activating  that setting in Preferences that says "copys as SVG". Maybe it's not needed,  but as I do when I want to "remove" sth, some tag that is provoking the issue, I typically do similar things to "clean up". So, maybe is not needed, or maybe is not needed the following. I mean that i solved for my booleans problem, which is not the exact same case than this, but I believe is due to the same problem.

Then I pasted using  "paste special", and did choose "paste as SVG". Then, I converted to curves and as doing that special "copy & paste" as SVG seems to add a folder and stuff, so I just extract the curves of the "text", put them below a rectangle layer, also convert to curves the rectangle (as a shape is not "curves"), then I do any sort of complex subtract and it respects every thing, every detail, works perfect then.

So.... Maybe then, until this get fixed, the trick could be just doing that copy and paste, with the preference set, and "paste special" and then "paste as SVG", as it seems to work, here... Pls, if you try, would you let me know if it works?

 

[SrPx]

Because I am having issues with booleans when handling text (even converted to curves), but not with regular shapes only, converted to curves also. That's why I tried the above.

[SrPx]

Right now I'm a bit dense (slept very little last night), so, I might not be understanding what you wanted to do...

Is it  that the rectangle and the text didn't really "melt"  "join"? . If so, I think it works with  the trick I just mentioned.

But yep, need to set "copy as svg" as marked, in Preferences/General, otherwise does  not appear the option after the "special paste" in edit menu.

Attaching the fixed file, at least to know if I am understanding what was wanted.

2023_copy-paste-svg.afdesign

[SrPx]

So... What I did was :

- Preferences/general : Copy as SVG -> marked.

- Edit: Of course, convert to curves your text layer first. I also convert to curves the shape (rectangle, etc), so that it's apples to apples.

- Select all the layer's letters. In the canvas, right click/Geometry/combine curves.

- Move your rectangle layer above the text layer (actual curves as you had them, of course), in the layers list panel. I don't know if this affects, though.

- With the whole thing ("2023" text) now as one, and selected, I right click -> "copy".

- Top menu, Edit, then "Special Paste".

- Choose "Scalable Vector Graphics" (SVG)

- As it makes a layer group in the layers list, move the  "text" layer out of the group, above it, and delete the empty group.

- The paste is not placing it exactly over  the original text, in its exact position. But if you configure carefully the snapping options (up on the triangle besides the magnet icon, in the top toolbar), is one second to make it snap in place, snapping with the original "text" layer.

- Now that it's placed in the exact location, you can delete the "original" "text" layer, to avoid visual confusion and mess.

- Now just select both layers, hit the boolean  "add"  icon. It then makes the boolean union (or subtract, etc) not leaving the garbage in the border, but doing a real boolean union with no artifacts.

 

If it's what I think you wanted, it is working here doing this. 

But as sleep deprived as I am, I perhaps understood it badly.

In any case, whether if I understood well your case or not... there's "something" internal in the text shapes, that persists after a convert to curves, and that generates the boolean artifacts. Apparently I get rid of it with activating the copy as SVG feature and pasting it also as SVG (there's no file export involved! ) . So.. maybe it's easy for them to just remove that thing (tag, property, etc) simply in the moment of converting to curves, avoiding all this. 

Again, I'm half sleep, so...

 

EDIT: I forgot... No need to restart the app for any of this. It takes the "copy as SVG" preference setting on the fly. So, you even can change the setting back after the fact, if prefer so for some reason.

[Rudolphus]

I tried it and @SrPx is right, his "copy/paste-as-SVG" workaround works.

Well, yet another workaround to the stack...

[SrPx]

Thank you very much for reporting that, as I am clueless about how it would work for others... As indeed seems for Mac users doesn't happen (and I don't know if I just read that neither happens in Windows 11, but am not sure...)

[friedgoldmole]

@SrPx thanks for the workaround, only issue I have here is paste special doesn't seem to come up with any sort of dialog box even after enabling Copy as SVG and restarting (which I know shouldn't be needed) when copying the 2023 numbers (which I have previously used right click/geometry/merge curves on).

Was it working for you on my example document, maybe the font I used is cursed and I need to start again. I rely so much on Boolean union type joins so hopefully your suggestions above will work in other situations so thanks for the steps!

For reference I am doing this on a Windows 11 PC.

[friedgoldmole]

@SrPx so in lieu of Paste Special not doing anything at my end, I tried exporting the 2023 numbers merged curves to an SVG, then re-importing them using the File/Place command, opening the embedded svg layer, navigating through the layers to the curve layer, copying and pasting back into my original document and then using the Boolean Add function, and this worked as expected, so this seems to suggest your above solution would work for me, if only Paste Special was working. 

At least I have a viable workaround, though at this point it seems quicker to just use Inkscape until this is fixed.

[SrPx]

Well, if it ends up working for you (that dialog), and I wouldn't discard that,  it is quite fast, and I kind of prefer to do it all in the same app, for avoiding other issues and for the sake of speed. But I have used a lot Inkscape in the past, as a helper tool. Indeed, I love to have always many tools/apps, and I do 'hybrid' workflows. But the more I can do in the "main", the better (but that's me).

If it ends up working for you, is like a regular copy & paste, almost as fast.

I'm surprised that you are not seeing the option.. I have some Affinity v2 apps in Windows 11, but in my laptop, which I am not using for work, lately. I'm testing all this in a Windows 10 desktop.

I have just made a video (attached here), to be sure we are in the same page of what I do to make the trick. And as well, so that you can tell me in more detail what does not show up for you, and  how/what is showed. And in video is easier for you  to see if you missed some small step. Much better if you maximize the video in full screen. Apologies, as menus are in Spanish, but with the position of each option, is I think it's an easy guess. To avoid confusion, Don't mind the misclick  at  the end, I clicked subtract, but then I undo, and clicked the right 'add 'operation. 

 

 

[SrPx]

Very simplistic question, but... for a chance, are you using two or mores monitors? Sometimes, Affinity (v1 did, for sure) it will place some of the panels in the other screen (with good intention in the design, as I see many people who love to work so, it gives you more free canvas space). Now , despite the screen being switched off (I mean in suspend mode, stand-by, etc) , it still can receive other panels, the cursor, etc, If  you dragged one of them there by mistake, you could even end  up having several Designer's panels in the other monitor. And as the monitor is switched off, you don't really notice/realize those  UI panels could be there. I mean, that dialog could be  popping up there. Maybe switch ON the second (and  third) monitor, just in case, at lest to discard it. It's a long shot, but I have seen that happening many times,  when having two monitors.

[debraspicher]

I enjoy hybrid workflows quite a bit, but these are details that should've been ironed out during the course of development for these functions. The benefits of vector are more than just raster applications.

The text engine for Affinity is quite unique with respect to however it was designed as it's been said by developers it'd be difficult to make modifications/additions to it. So that could be an explanation as to why it behaves differently with the convert to curves operation compared to other situations. Though the solution couldn't be too far off if a simple C&P to SVG was a valid workaround. I do respect if they leave a lot of details open to interpretation in code in the back-end by the program functionality-wise to allow room later on for developing unique programming, but it does create headaches for simpler operations and more opportunities for bugs/human error to come into the equation.

1 hour ago, Rudolphus said:

I tried it and @SrPx is right, his "copy/paste-as-SVG" workaround works.

Well, yet another workaround to the stack...

😴😴😴😴😴

[Old Bruce]

I must admit I am slightly amazed no one has suggested the Shape Builder tool yet.

Here on Mac I have no trouble building this from scratch with my own fonts. Using either the Shape Builder tool or the Boolean Add and Subtract. But that file seems seriously messed up.

[lepr]

On 12/31/2022 at 12:11 PM, friedgoldmole said:

Just upgraded to version 2 of Designer and really disappointed to find the boolean operations are still broken and unreliable, trying to add two shapes together, one derived from text which was first converted to curves and ungrouped, with the correct layer order and tried with both Alternative and Winding fill types both result in a black box when using the Add boolean, not the expected result.

One workaround is to use Document Properties to scale the document to 1 pixel wide, do the boolean operation, and then scale the document back to 210 mm wide.

[SrPx]

17 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

I must admit I am slightly amazed no one has suggested the Shape Builder tool yet.

Here on Mac I have no trouble building this from scratch with my own fonts. Using either the Shape Builder tool or the Boolean Add and Subtract. But that file seems seriously messed up.

Good point. Now it will sound a bit difficult to believe,  but when I first found the one thread that shocked me more about the booleans issue (/s) in Designer (I've laser focused on Photo v2....), the first thing I tried was the shape builder. Which , BTW, is a wonderful modern tool, great usability for actual design work. But I have several reasons to wish booleans to work well (so, I tried to think of at least sth -for now- to allow to continue with projects and stuff) :

- At least in Windows, with text layers , or layers that were formed converted to curves from text, the big issues were also happening with the shape builder (always in Windows 10). So, the problem runs deeper, I suspect it is common (text layers converted to curves; in that process. Or simply the issue is in the  text object itself).

- It is not a rare case or "that file" from this person. It is very easy to replicate with any  text and a shape, both converted to curves and etc, all done the standard, right way. In Windows 10 (Win Pro in my case). I have read mixed reports in Windows 11, though. And is a non existing issue on Mac OS, apparently.

- It's a bug, by all means, and IMO it might affect other aspects, not just these two features. So, I think it is important for them to see it. But I have to say I breathed a sigh of relief checking that v2's booleans worked (and work) very well for me with any other curves or shapes, though (but I  don't know if other people have found different issues with booleans, or if all come from this same root in code (could be!); I'm quite behind with the forums' activity)

- I don't like to discard a method that is already implemented in a graphic program, raster or vector based. Even if Shape Builder would save the day , I prefer to have workflow possibilities with both. Because then, later on, you are in the middle of a complex project in some difficult step, and the more options to solve a problem, the merrier; there might be situations where one feature won't cover every situation that the other does and viceversa. 

I hid the following under the spoiler tag. No particular reason, not off topic, but it made the post too long.

Spoiler

I kind of think this... well, I was going to say that if it is some property, tag, value or something, flag or whatever that once fixed, they get to "patch it" just by adding something to the convert to curves process... Then we're golden.   But.... as an observer (I always was the art guy, except with front-end web code) way less complicated projects, just web apps, portals, and even  (non triple A) video games, I worked in small teams-companies and yet while the complexity of the code base being smaller,  even the tiniest change meant a huge problem  (as many things depend on every change, etc, etc).  But I don't know, maybe it is not that complex to fix, so, let's hope.

I don't know... The trick I mentioned, more than being a 'hybrid' method (I know what you mean, but I want to make it clear to others that you don't need third party apps for this)... I mean, by using it we are not using any external application (the word SVG might have given the wrong idea). We are not even exporting anything. They just offer a preference-setting to copy to memory (to clipboard), as SVG,  "pasting" it in a special way, which gets probably more standard "as SVG" formatted, but it is not an export; we don't create a file or anything. I knew about it being very useful for other reasons, from an article outside here, some Affinity user/tech writer who sets "copy as SVG" always ON, as it gives more compatibility with other vector programs by copy-pasting "as SVG" (but in his case, yes, he pastes it in another application) . Partially eliminates the issues with vector formats exports (*.AI, *.EPS, etc are notorious for their issues in I/O among different applications, in every app I know, since the early 90s...) but only when all you want is just transfer your nodes and fills to other app, with not many features. Obviously, not for a serious print job, or not as the final step.  But surely useful for fast exchange with Inkscape of what is line work, nodes.

 

[SrPx]

1 hour ago, ,,, said:

One workaround is to use Document Properties to scale the document to 1 pixel wide, do the boolean operation, and then scale the document back to 210 mm wide.

Indeed!

It works, too (just checked it). 

[SrPx]

6 hours ago, friedgoldmole said:

@SrPx so in lieu of Paste Special not doing anything at my end, I tried exporting the 2023 numbers merged curves to an SVG, then re-importing them using the File/Place command, opening the embedded svg layer, navigating through the layers to the curve layer, copying and pasting back into my original document and then using the Boolean Add function, and this worked as expected, so this seems to suggest your above solution would work for me, if only Paste Special was working. 

At least I have a viable workaround, though at this point it seems quicker to just use Inkscape until this is fixed.

For this to work, be sure of: 

- Not only the letters need to be converted to curves and then, 'merge curves'. But also that the shapes you want to add should be converted to curves. I guess you added that rectangle with a hole by just doing two rectangle shapes and doing a subtract.  If I do that, somehow I get some weird result later with the letters operation. Instead, if I convert to curve  the first shape, then also convert to curves the second shape, and then is when I do the subtract to form the rectangle with a hole, then doing an "add" boolean with the  "prepared" letters made as in my "trick" above, it does provide with a good result.

When you say "Paste Special did nothing on my end"... What do you mean exactly? It does not make the boolean union automatically (after placing it to match the placement of the original copy-pasted letters through magnetic snapping, which btw, I don't know if this is a bug, as other copy paste fucntions on Affinity apps are pasted in-place of the source). After doing this paste, you still need you to select the rectangle layer, then the letters' layer too, with shift key (or ctrl). And hit  the UNION icon in the top bar.

In which moment it does not do the expected? It doesn't do the union, nothing at all, or produces artifacts... ?

Do you do it like I did it in  the video above?

Exporting and importing a SVG would be a tad slower, as a workflow.  I've done  that in the past, but imo copying and pasting needs 3 seconds. And because need to go to the edit menu to paste, but you can add a custom shortcut in preferences, so you'd lose zero time ( I just set it as ctrl < ). 

 

[Old Bruce]

14 hours ago, SrPx said:

- I don't like to discard a method that is already implemented in a graphic program, raster or vector based. Even if Shape Builder would save the day , I prefer to have workflow possibilities with both. Because then, later on, you are in the middle of a complex project in some difficult step, and the more options to solve a problem, the merrier; there might be situations where one feature won't cover every situation that the other does and viceversa. 

I completely agree. Odd though that I can build this from scratch (with my own fonts and shapes) here on Mac without any problem, yet I have no success at all with the original file. It is as though the font and or Windows' OS handling of the font is messing up the file.

An Aside: SrPx I have to ask, what on earth does that sibilant lisp means, you seem to use it a lot. I am talking about "sth"

[SrPx]

1 minute ago, Old Bruce said:

An Aside: SrPx I have to ask, what on earth does that sibilant lisp means, you seem to use it a lot. I am talking about "sth"

Hehehe , Sorry... sth = something. I really should use fewer abbreviations (or none), slang or memes. As if clarity wasn't a problem already in my walls of text, being English not my first language... 😁