How to join points? Am I that much missing something?

[Jilly]

Because it is not faster. My example served to illustrate the issue as simply as possible. I even answered your comment in my previous one (empahsis added):
 

So snapping worked, but I don’t want to move the point away and back in for each connection. That’d be ridiculous. A common technique is to draw half, mirror it, and join. With Illustrator, that means connecting the shapes and just select-and-⌘J a bunch of times.

 
No, it isn’t faster to move each one. What it is is an ugly workaround.

Also, like I said repeatedly, my work requires extreme precision. Snapping (which I’ve also stated I don’t trust, though that isn’t necessarily Affinity Designer’s fault) isn’t precise. Inputting precise values in the big calculator that runs Affinity Designer should be precise.

[Jilly]

On an unrelated note, if I’m sounding disrespectful to anyone, I do apologise, and believe that is not my intention (the heat doesn’t help at all).

 

But I am incredibly frustrated with Affinity Designer. Even more so because I see its potential and like the team, but cannot understand how it can be so poorly made in certain areas. Most of the time I use it, I end up abandoning my work because I deeply feel I cannot trust the tool.

[R C-R]

No, it isn’t faster to move each one. What it is is an ugly workaround.

One way or another, you must move each node. Here's how I total up the steps for these two methods, including selecting each node as a step:

 

A. Enter two pairs of values in the transform panel => six steps total, four of which may require multiple keystrokes.

 

B. As I suggested, use the transform panel for one & the node tool with snapping for the other => four steps total, two of which may require multiple keystrokes.

 

I fail to see how method A is faster than method B, even without considering A doesn't actually seem to work. 

[Jilly]

I fail to see how method A is faster than method B, even without considering A doesn't actually seem to work.

Two reasons:

• You’re not reading (or not understanding) what I write. Alternatively, I’m not being clear.
• “Steps” isn’t a good metric.

Once again (I’ll emphasise other part, now):

 

So snapping worked, but I don’t want to move the point away and back in for each connection. That’d be ridiculous. A common technique is to draw half, mirror it, and join. With Illustrator, that means connecting the shapes and just select-and-⌘J a bunch of times.

 

So that means select-and-⌘J, select-and-⌘J, select-and-⌘J, until everything is connected, because we have a mirrored drawing with multiple connections. That is a fast and intuitive process with low margin of error. Grabbing (grabbing, not selecting) each node, wiggling it around and putting it back in place is a slow unintuitive process with high margin of error.

 

That is the difference. Precision, precision, precision. I’m willing to sacrifice steps and keystrokes for precision, because precision matters to my work.

 

Furthermore, your solution doesn’t matter. Affinity Designer is acting the wrong way, and the behaviour should be fixed. That is all that matters. Whatever method is faster or not is irrelevant. Whatever method you prefer or think is better is irrelevant. We’re presented with a method that should be working, and isn’t, that is what matters. Once again, I require precision. Precision is attained by inputting values directly. Affinity Designer lets us input those values, but then misbehaves. That is all that matters: something that should be working, isn’t.

[Jilly]

Proof we can’t even trust node snapping:

 
Also see complaints in another thread (with another video exemplifying the problem).

[JimmyJack]

Proof we can’t even trust node snapping:

 

 

Yes, point to point snapping can give false yellow positives. Easily missed at a distance.

(I'm about to log a bug report, although I'm sure it's a known issue....  :wacko: )

 

Vitor, you can see on the bottom pairing a teeny tiny little hop in placement. The initial snap placement (and yellow indication) I suspect is correct. But then there is a tiny move to the right (still snapping and still yellow), which results in the creation of a bridge instead. 

 

At first I thought it had something to do with the fact that you have corner attributes signed to the points of your straight lines.

But I get false positives with plain nodes as well.

[MEB]

Hi vitor, JimmyJack,

As said previously we are aware of the issues with both boolean operations and with the Join Curves command. There's no need to fill/report those issues again.

They will be looked at and should be fixed in future betas/releases as we move forward.

Thanks all for your reports and support.

[Jilly]

you can see on the bottom pairing a teeny tiny little hop in placement. The initial snap placement (and yellow indication) I suspect is correct.

The first one is wrong (but I took that into account). It is snapping to a point further down (you can see the green line that hints at it).

[manuG]

On 10.5.2016 at 5:28 PM, MEB said:

Hi vitor, JimmyJack,

As said previously we are aware of the issues with both boolean operations and with the Join Curves command. There's no need to fill/report those issues again.

They will be looked at and should be fixed in future betas/releases as we move forward.

Thanks all for your reports and support.

It's 2018... too busy with IPads and marketing? Sitting here for an hour now trying to join 2 nodes. Really disappointed.

[PixelPest]

What exactly are you doing? Seems to work pretty straight forward here: select both curves and hit, while "Node tool" is active the "Join Curves"-button. If two end-nodes are in same place they got connected or if not a new segment will be established.

 

Cheers

P.

[firstdefence]

I've never had an issue with node snapping, ever!

[PixelPest]

Well you might notice that the reply you refer is 2 years old. 

[firstdefence]

29 minutes ago, PixelPest said:

Well you might notice that the reply you refer is 2 years old. 

Needed to be said lol!

[JimmyJack]

42 minutes ago, firstdefence said:

I've never had an issue with node snapping, ever!

 

Try doing that with the two ends of one curve. (other than straight lines)

[firstdefence]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJack said:

 

Try doing that with the two ends of one curve.

You mean like this?

[JimmyJack]

@firstdefence That is destroying the curve on the moved node. 

You had to pull on the curve to reconstitute the handle.

Why should we have to essentially redraw the curve we're moving?

 

 

[R C-R]

4 hours ago, manuG said:

Sitting here for an hour now trying to join 2 nodes. Really disappointed.

If the 2 nodes are the end nodes of an open path & not coincident, use the Close Curve button to "join" them into a closed curve by adding a straight segment between them.

[firstdefence]

[JimmyJack]

12 minutes ago, firstdefence said:

 

You are not joining those curves. (your 1st example was better )

But like I said, the problem is joining the endpoints of ONE curve.

[firstdefence]

Any better lol!

[JimmyJack]

14 minutes ago, firstdefence said:

Any better lol!

 

Lol, no, not better.

ONE curve, ONE curve, ONE curve!

[R C-R]

9 minutes ago, JimmyJack said:

ONE curve, ONE curve, ONE curve!

Close Curve, Close Curve, Close Curve! 

[PixelPest]

I really don´t get what this is all about:

Cheers

P.

 

[Alfred]

28 minutes ago, PixelPest said:

I really don´t get what this is all about

 

It’s all about closing a single curve. It’s not about joining multiple curves.

 

[JimmyJack]

 The point is.......

If we can drag an end node of one curve on top of an end node of another curve and they join together nicely and both ends respect the handle of the other when they come together as one, why can't we do that with the end nodes on the same curve.

 

40 minutes ago, R C-R said:

Close Curve, Close Curve, Close Curve! 

 

So instead I have to add an extra line segment then go back and drag one node on top of another and continue on with two nodes on top of each other (which I will have to remember exist if I want, at some later point, to move it... oops sorry them. I'd rather not have to drag select all the time just in case.)?

Why, when obviously it can be done easily on two curves?

 

38 minutes ago, PixelPest said:

I really don´t get what this is all about:

Cheers

P.

 

 

 See above .