One app, not two

[DanH]

[Edit: someone responded with a “sad” face. Wasn’t sure why, but he came to explain his reasons. In comment below. In short, my suggestions were not one’s he would suggest as he has another wishlist. But, in case the initial way I wrote the post—direct, with some added mock demanding for fun—in case this is perceived as abrasive and contributed to his or other’s sad response, I have editited it a bit to soften things, but in the end I err on the side of being direct which might not be softly expressed. No ill feeling intended. But, to be honest, real frustrations are behind some of these suggestions, in cases where the “flow” of creating is unnecessarily hindered.]

One app instead of two would be great. Not Photo alone. Not Designer alone. Not the current form of StudioLink which doesn’t give access to all the functionality. Both combined into one app. And call it: Affinity Designer—a more fitting name for all the functionality anyway, because “design” often incorporates all kinds of image types, and “Affinity Photo” is often used for non-photo work anyway, so Photo as a name makes less sense, except for the marketing concern of matching Designer against Illustrator and Photo against Photoshop. But, you’re the Anti-Adobe, right? Why not go all in? One app without the artifical lines of separation. Or two if you like to sell Publisher separately—

—If Publisher remains a separate, second app, then make StudioLink complete, allowing access to all the functions, not just some of them. If not, then on the desktop, “Edit in Designer” works just fine. *Pop* now in Designer, *Pop* right back to Publisher, *Pop* now in Photo. Costs three seconds. Better than an incomplete StudioLink. But, there is no such easy switch via “Edit in …” on the iPad. Yes, V1 almost did this, where we could long press a file from the welcome menu, simultaneiously swipe up from the bottom of the screen to open the dock, and drop the file on top of the app we want to switch to. But, it created a copy, instead of using the same file, so that wasn’t really very useful. Maybe this why it is no longer available in V2. Unless that’s a bug.

If your financial sustainability requires you to keep the less-user-friendly upsell-ability of selling two apps, —“Oh, I need to buy Photo to access that functionality? Okay, here’s more money.” —then, okay, if you keep Photo and Designer separate, please make switching seamless on the iPad. No kludgy long pressing the file from the welcome screen and dragging and dropping to make a copy (ugh) of the file (which process does not currently work between v2 apps anyway). No “Open Document” that requires me to find the file in the file system, open it, work on it, save it, then switch apps again, “Open Document” again, find the file in the file system again, and open it to work on it. Just too slow and takes me out of “flow”. Instead, from the canvas, give us either “Edit in …” like the desktop, where the file is the same, not a copy, and it pops right on over and right on back as desired. Or give us a totally functional (not partially functional) StudioLink between Photo and Designer (not requiring Publisher for StudioLink).

While you’re at it:  can you offer us an option to use the brush context menu from v1 on the iPad (v2 sliders = low “flow”)?

And perhaps options to use any and all of the elements of the old UI we like better. And if you get really crazy, offer us some true UI control ala Infinite Painter. Ooooh, niiiice.

And easy, quick complementary colors ala Procreate’s Color Harmony feature.

And … that’s enough for now.

On my desk by Tuesday. Pick whichever Tuesday you like. Oggling my neigbor’s ArtStudio Pro and Infinite Painter in the meantime. …that looks interesting …

[Edit: my follow up comment below explains why I think these suggestions are useful and makes things smoother in case it isn’t obvious to others.]

[DanH]

Forgot a critical need: seeing the brush shape as we draw.

[Westerwälder]

Ich spreche kein Englisch!
Aber warum um Himmelswillen sollte eine so mächtiges Programm noch unhandlicher werden. Eine Diskusion sollte darüber nicht geführt werden! Es ist doch schon jetzt so, dass viele mit den Funktionen überfordert erscheinen, denn sonst würden sie nicht immer wieder das Programm mit dem Amerikanischen  PS vergleichen wollen und ihre Arbeitsweisen an diesem Teil anpassen. Nein Affinity ist so wie es ist schön und gut und es sollte so bleiben.
Auch sollten die Funktionen von Version 1 in der Versenkung bleiben. Lernen mit dem Program wie es jetzt ist umzugehen, kann Spass machen und vieles wird sich wie auch in Version 1 im laufe der Zeit einspielen!
Einen Wunsch habe ich allerdings noch: Eine eigenständige RAW Entwicklung die es leicht möglich macht, einen entwicklungsvorgang zu Kopieren und auf ein anderes Bild zu übertragen.
Dabei müsste auch die Licht und Schatten Funktion verbessert werden!
Ach übrigens ich nutze die Möglichkeit in Chrome mir das Forum in Deutsch anzeigen zu lassen!

I do not speak English!
But why on earth should such a powerful program become even more unwieldy. There shouldn't be a discussion about it! It's already the case that many seem overwhelmed with the functions, because otherwise they wouldn't want to keep comparing the program with the American PS and adapt their working methods to this part. No, Affinity is fine and dandy the way it is and it should stay that way.
Also, the features of version 1 should remain in obscurity. Learning to deal with the program as it is now can be fun and much will become familiar over time, just like in version 1!
However, I still have one wish: an independent RAW development that makes it easy to copy a development process and transfer it to another image.
The light and shadow function should also be improved!
By the way, I use the option in Chrome to display the forum in German!

[Petar Petrenko]

12 hours ago, DanH said:

Not StudioLink which doesn’t give access to all the functionality.

Do you think of these two missing functionalities:

1. Photo's personas are missing when you open Photo by clicking on Photo persona in Publisher;
2. When you select an image to modify it thorugh a Photo persona in Publisher, you get only flatenned image, not all the layers it has.

[Westerwälder]

Um mit Affinity sauber arbeiten zu können, erwäge ich einen noch größeren Bildschirm zu kaufen, denn der 27 Zoll, also die wie es richtig heißen müsste 60cm X 34 cm Bildschirm, ist mir mitlerweile zu klein! Deshalb würde ich auch niemals ein Steve Jobs Gedenk Gerät einsetzen, die Probleme erscheinen mir zu groß in dem Gefängniss von dem faulen Apfel!
Auf 174,1 mm x 250,6 mm kann man keine Bildbearbeitung starten!

In order to be able to work properly with Affinity, I am considering buying an even larger screen, because the 27 inch screen, i.e. the 60cm X 34 cm screen as it should be called, is now too small for me! That's why I would never use a Steve Jobs memorial device, the problems seem too big in the prison of the bad apple!
You cannot start image processing on 174.1 mm x 250.6 mm!

[DanH]

Quote

Do you think of these two missing functionalities:

1. Photo's personas are missing when you open Photo by clicking on Photo persona in Publisher;

Yes, whatever Photo does, ideally StudioLink makes it all available.

Quote

2. When you select an image to modify it thorugh a Photo persona in Publisher, you get only flatenned image, not all the layers it has.

I am not seeing this on iPad v2 of Publisher. If I use Publisher 2 to open a Designer 2 or Photo 2 file, all layers are visible in any Persona.

I do see, however, that when I “Place…” a file with layers into Publisher, then initially, after selecting the image, the layers are not shown. Only after double tapping does it show the layers.

Not having followed through with editing like this—with a layered image inside a Publisher document—it feels quirky on initial impression. Let me explain: when placing the layered file, a window popped open asking something like “Due to the file size, do you want to link or embed it”. When choosing to embed, I can double tap the image, and the image is brought onto a solitary canvas (all pages in the Publisher doc are hidden), I can edit with layers, and then oddly, it is the arrow button on the top left corner—the one that normally returns to the welcome screen—it is this arrow that takes us back to the full Publisher document. Maybe it’s not odd, at least once understood. But I was frustrated for a couple minutes when I couldn’t figure out how to return to the pages view.

The real quirk (bug?) is when I choose to link instead of embed the placed image. Double tapping the image still brings it up for editing, but the arrow in the upper left then does not take me back to the Publisher document, instead it takes me back to the welcome screen where I now see a copy of the image that I had placed and edited inside Publisher.

Also, I twice tried the embed option, on two separate occasions, and each time the pop up window asked me whether to embed or link the image. However, the third time, I chose to link (not embed), and now, with my fourth, fifth, sixth tries, it now automatically links, no questioning me if I would like to embed it—or so I presume it is linking, since the behavior is such that after editing the layers while in Publisher, and then exiting this layer view by pressing the arrow in the upper left corner, I am taken back to the welcome screen instead of to back to the Publisher document. Just like it did when I first *chose* to link instead of embed.

And, I don’t see in preferences where to reset the link or embed option. Maybe if I choose to “Reset” all preferences. Otherwise, stuck with all images being linked even if want to embed. Bug? Design flaw? Design intelligence that I don’t yet grasp how smart it is that it works this way?

[artokmt]

+Publisher Photo persona doesn't have plugins option.

[DanH]

Quote

why on earth should such a powerful program become even more unwieldy

My suggestions are intended to make it easier, not harder to use. Missing tools or functions that require going back and forth between apps—especially the way things are currently implemented in the iPad version—are to me something that is unwieldy. If it works perfectly for you, that is so, so great, and I am happy for you. 

Perhaps there was something lost in translation, because, I am not sure how my suggestions make things harder instead of easier.

Perhaps because you are not using the iPad version is why you don’t see these suggestions as smoothing the process. On the desktop, “Edit in …” works ok to me for switching apps, as it generally acts mostly well enough like “one” for my needs on the desktop—although having to switch to Photo to create and use a preset for an adjustment layer makes no sense to me, or switching to Designer to create an Artboard—just two examples of obviously artificial lines of separation between the two apps.

So, making things work more as one is primarily (though not exclusively) an iPad issue for me, because on there it is not as smooth to switch a file between apps. The limitation is not created by the iPad, but by the app design.

Perhaps the following ideas are what you see as adding complexity that you consider unwieldy?

Adaptable UI: anyone happy with the default they are given is great, they can continue with it. But for those who would benefit from being be able to choose a different layout of their UI, they can do so, and to them their adapted UI will feel less unwieldy.

Option to use the v1 brush context menu on the iPad: This does not matter to you since you don’t use the iPad (as per your second comment above). But to me, the v2 brush sliders are so unwieldy as to be almost unusable. It’s not a familiarity issue, it’s just a slower to use design, and the sliders often take a few attempts to respond (perhaps too small of an area that responds to an attempt to adjust it). The old brush context menu was okay, but something better could possibly be designed, too.

Quick Complementary Colors ala Procreate’s Color Harmony feature: Affinity does already have a color harmony feature with Color Chords. But, I find it a bit clunky to use compared to how Procreate does it. Maybe both ways can be available, or some blend of them, but the slickness of Procreate’s implementation is quite smooth, whereas I find Affinity’s approach unwieldy. At least for quick picking of colors. Affinity’s approach is designed for creating a reusable palette, which is great, but not as nice for quickly picking colors on the fly. So again, intended to smooth things, not make it more unwieldy.

Seeing the brush shape as we draw:  You don’t have this problem on the desktop, as Serif only omitted it from the iPad version, so perhaps you don’t understand how this makes the drawing, painting, masking process unwieldy. Having to guess the edge of the brush when I go to draw, paint, mask …. it slows things down, increasing the undo’s substantially. Other art apps on the iPad do show the brush size while drawing. Makes such a difference in usability.

You say you don’t use the iPad, and I totally understand your desire to use a big screen. I use the big screen when I absolutely need it for its size and for the much more desirable workflow a computer provides me. But sitting at a desk for hours is as much a prison to me as the smaller screen of an iPad is a prison to you. The iPad is so, so, so, so freeing to be able to work absolutely any time and anywhere. Especially for the illustration work I primarily use it for.

Quote

Affinity is fine and dandy the way it is and it should stay that way.

After writing this you then you make suggestions for changes to improve it for your needs.  We all have a wishlist.

[Westerwälder]

@DanH _Der zwang den Appel mit vielem fordert und die unvernünftig großen Preise, sowie die fehlende Funktionalität sind eine Frechheit!
Aber wer in diesem System gefangen ist, der versucht solange es geht, diese Firma zu verteitigen!
Ich sage nochmal: „Erst das Programm lernen, die Vorteile der drei Programme als einzelne erkennen!
In ihrem Beitrag viele Worte und viele Nennungen von Alternativen! Vermutlich teure Alternativen!
Die Pinsel sollten so bleiben, wie sie jetzt sind, es war Murks in V1
Ich möchte kreativ sein und wenn es Tage dauert am Rechner zu sitzen, ist das für mich kein Problem. Während meiner Aktiven Zeit als Handwerker, habe ich auch bei 14 Stunden am Tag, immer noch die Zeit gefunden mich ins Fotolabor zu setzen, die Filme zu entwickeln und dann auf Fotopapier auszuarbeiten!
Fotografie ist schon immer ein aufwändiger Prozess gewesen! 
Daher mag ich nicht die Verwässerung von PS und Adobe, sowie Appel immer wieder anstreben! Sichwort KI
 

He forced the appeal with a lot of demands and the unreasonably high prices and the lack of functionality are cheeky!
Doch wer in diesem System gefangen ist, versucht diese Firma so lange wie möglich zu verteidigen!
Ich sage noch einmal: „Erst das Programm lernen, die Vorteile der drei Programme einzeln erkennen!
In deinem Beitrag viele Worte und viele Benennungen von Alternativen! Wahrscheinlich teure Alternativen!
Die Brushes sollen so bleiben wie sie jetzt sind, war ein Durcheinander in V1
ich will kreativ sein und wenn es Tage dauert am Rechner zu sitzen ist das kein Problem für mich. Während meiner aktiven Zeit als Handwerker habe ich selbst bei 14 Stunden am Tag noch die Zeit gefunden, im Fotolabor zu sitzen, die Filme zu entwickeln und dann auf Fotopapier auszuarbeiten!
Fotografieren war schon immer ein mühsamer Prozess!
Also ich mag die Verwässerung nicht, die PS und Adobe und Apple immer wieder anstreben! Stichwort KI

[DanH]

This is getting weird. Happy photo editing!