Affinity Designer - First Impressions

[NFG]

Good morning!

 

Just a few quick notes as I try this program for the first time.  There's an actual question down in #6, please help!

 

1. There's an error in the installation T&C:  SERIF AND ITS LICENORS

  - I also like how the T&C says it's the final word, even if a Serif rep says otherwise in writing.  Don't trust the sales guy.   ;)

 

2. After installation, opening a file defaults to the Windows/System32/ folder, which no normal user will ever visit, let alone store files in.  Should probably default to the documents folder (or nearly anywhere else).

 

3. Forum registration uses Amazon to send emails.  Many email servers around the world, mine included, run a 'greywall' which reports a temporary failure to incoming mail.  The sending server waits a certain amount of time (set by the sending server) and tries again.  The receiver sees that it's been sent before, and allows it the second time.  This has a wondrous and drastic impact against spam.  Amazon, however, uses a rotating server system, so that it's not sent by the same server twice.  I had to manually intervene, because after four attempts it was still being refused, because four different servers sent the mail.  Not Serif's fault, but it may cause some problems, and now you know it's happening.

 

4. Wow, this is fast, and slick.  Zooming in on a blur effect doesn't take forever to draw or manipulate things, like Inkscape does.

 

5. When an item is selected, clicking and dragging anywhere within its bounding box will move that item.  Sort of weird but OK.

 

6. Weird, I can't select items if another is in front of it, even if that top object is empty.  Like, an unfilled circle will block the selection of all items under it.  That's...  Really sort of unusual.  I can't think of any other app that does that.  

For example, I cannot click on any item inside this wobbly triangle.  If I want to select that grey bit of shading, I have to move or lower every item in front of it first.  What's massively weird and the bit that convinces me that this behaviour is wrong, is that if I CUT that triangle I can click through it again.  Basically the inner reversed path that makes it transparent doesn't make the middle EMPTY.  

 

This is pretty crazy, hopefully I'm just missing a keystroke or something to select lower items.  

 

 

So far everything else has been pretty smooth.  I can't find control for a blur option, but I haven't looked too hard yet.  Everything else, grouping and changing layers and creating/editing/joining items, colour changes, etc - all proving to be fairly intuitive.  Thumbs up!

[NFG]

Also the SHIFT and CTRL modifiers are backwards to what I'm used to.  Normally holding CTRL and resizing something will lock the path to a 30-degree increment, or scale an item proportionally, and SHIFT will scale it from the centre, instead of the corner.

 

Affinity Designer is backwards in that regard.  I don't work with a heap of other applications so I can't say that this is a true Windows standard, but it's certainly backwards to Inkscape.

[R C-R]

Regarding your #5, if you select an item with the Move tool, it will move when you drag inside its bounding box. It seems to me that if it did anything else, that would be weird.  :wacko:

 

Regarding #6, I suspect your wobbly triangle is actually a "curves" or compound object, one in which the inner curve subtracts the fill from the outer one. So while it seems empty inside, it isn't really. If I'm right about that, if you double-click on it with the Move tool or select the Node tool & click on it, you should see two curve paths instead of one.

 

Either way, to select an item under another one, try selecting it with the alt key held down. (I use a Mac so I'm not sure if the Alt key is the one for Windows, but it should be something similar.)

 

For blurring things, have you tried using the Gaussian blur effect? It has a slider that controls the blur radius. 

[Oval]

6. Weird, I can't select items if another is in front of it, […]

Welcome here, NFG

 

ALT-click does not help?

[NFG]

Hey guys, thanks for the answers.  

 

Yes, alt-clicking allows me to select the thing behind the thing.  This is sort of weird to me, and I say that as a guy who's been working with vectors since like 1986.  If an item is like a donut, hollow in the middle, then I'm very much accustomed to it not having any presence where it's not visible.  In this respect AD seems to treat it like a raster with a 0% alpha component: it's there but you can't see it.  Every other app I've used treats the parts where there's no object as not being part of the object.

 

But with the alt-thing I think I can handle it.  Thumbs up!

 

As for #5, it's related to the alt-clicking thing.  Basically, if I click where there's no object, I do not expect to grab that object.  If I've previously selected it and click off the object (but still within the bounding box) I do not expect to grab that object.  Blah blah 30 years of mucking with vectors, it's weird behaviour.   (OMG I'm so old).  

 

The blur thing: I haven't actually FOUND it yet, was the issue.  I figured it must exist because SVG images imported into AD handled the blur just fine.  =)

[R C-R]

Yes, alt-clicking allows me to select the thing behind the thing.  [...]  In this respect AD seems to treat it like a raster with a 0% alpha component: it's there but you can't see it.  Every other app I've used treats the parts where there's no object as not being part of the object.

Staff member MEB mentioned something recently in another post that might make this seem less weird, at least conceptually: in Affinity a layer is just a container object, which can contain many different things, including a hierarchy of other layers, each potentially with its own groups, masks, clipping layers, etc.

 

So when you click on a layer, you are actually selecting everything it contains, often including a great many 'things behind other things.' To drill all the way down to one thing, you can use the alt-click method or the Layers panel.

 

Regarding the age thing, I am almost 70. I have been using vector apps for more decades than I can remember. (Sadly, that is literally true.) They all had a learning curve; every one of them seemed a little weird at first but not so much after I used them for a while. I think you will find Affinity is no different -- once you use it for a while, the weirdness will vanish ... mostly.  :blink:

[NFG]

Well, to be clear, I never use layers in vector art.  I've never really needed to, since the objects are layered already.  So yeah, not really sure if that applies or if I'm misunderstanding your point.

 

...or are you suggesting every object has its own layer?  That's interesting, and certainly a little different than what I'm used to. 

I did notice that moving an object up or down causes it to cycle through -every- layer, where inkscape will move an object below only the ones that it's actually next to.  So it won't take 10 steps to go beneath the item you see if the other 9 items aren't located near the selected one.  Ahem, moving on.   ^_^

 

Not being able to click an empty space to select the object under the mouse really seems more like fundamental logic error, more than new software weirdism.  If I can click the clear space outside an object, I should be able to click the empty space inside it.  

 

--

 

Where did all my tool palettes go?  They're all gone but the colour select box.  I can't figure out how to bring them back again.  <panics>

EDIT: Found them.  They'd slid around and were stacked on top of each other for some reason.  

[Oval]

It is weird that Affinity does not communicate things that are not obvious. No problem for professionals but for the usability and for beginners that need a real manual.

 

If the triangle would be a bit open or made of two or more objects, ALT would not be needed to select objects in its hole. 

[NFG]

If the triangle would be a bit open or made of two or more objects, ALT would not be needed to select in its hole. 

 

That's the part that makes no sense.  If I cut it, it works.  If it's two items grouped, it works.

 

The way it's handled now seems entirely arbitrary, more of a "we've always done it this way" sort of thing, instead of something that makes sense.  (I don't wanna sound like I'm harping on this particular issue, but it's really sort of a big one.)

[Oval]

That's the part that makes no sense.  If I cut it, it works.  […]

 

Beginners don’t understand why they need an additional click and have to press an additional key if they want to select small objects lying into a whole. Same story with the Expand Stroke bug. New features seems to be much more important than correcting and improving very basic features. Sorry, but this is only one opinion of users that need other apps for some basic features or better usability. If there would be a “Working on bugs list”, it would be no problem that you need more clicks and keys in addition for some years of “coming soon”.

[R C-R]

...or are you suggesting every object has its own layer?  That's interesting, and certainly a little different than what I'm used to.

I am saying that a layer is like a box. It can contain all kinds of objects, including other boxes. The objects in those boxes can be put into other containers inside the boxes to sort them into one or more groups, like you might find in an Ikea product box with bags for different kinds of hardware. The boxes & any containers in them can be stacked in different ways to make it easier to get to some of them. An object can consist of more than one part, so it would have to be separated or disassembled to work on or replace just one of them, just like a desk lamp or other things we usually consider to be one object.

 

This is a very powerful concept. It allows you to treat a hierarchy of many different objects as if it was one object when that is convenient, & to do that in any part of the hierarchy, all the way down to the individual parts of a single object.

 

It is also how we conceptualize real world objects. Things are always in other things: your car keys could be in your house, in any of several different rooms, in any of several different things in those rooms; or in another house or an office, or in your car, & so on. We routinely take them out of one thing & move them into another, traveling up & down the conceptual hierarchy of container "things," even though we rarely think about it such abstract terms.

 

We literally have "always done it this way" for almost everything. There is nothing really weird about this in Affinity, other than it probably isn't how you have thought about it before now.

 

If you do, things should start making a lot more sense. For example, moving something up or down depends on where it is in the layers container hierarchy. It will always step through the same level of the hierarchy, for example in its group or layer "parent" container, when you use the Order buttons in the toolbar or the keyboard shortcuts or the commands on the Layer menu item. But it won't move out of that level with those controls; for that you need to drag it up or down in the Layers panel.

 

This makes it easy to work with very complex documents, ones with hundreds or even thousands of objects, without having to select every individual one of them you want to move, hide, change the attributes of, etc. That would be a painfully slow process totally unacceptable in an professional workflow.

[NFG]

Hey!  Stop derailing my thread!  ;)

 

I am saying that a layer is like a box. It can contain all kinds of objects, including other boxes. The objects in those boxes can be put into other containers inside the boxes to sort them into one or more groups, like you might find in an Ikea product box with bags for different kinds of hardware. The boxes & any containers in them can be stacked in different ways to make it easier to get to some of them. An object can consist of more than one part, so it would have to be separated or disassembled to work on or replace just one of them, just like a desk lamp or other things we usually consider to be one object.

 

This is a very powerful concept. It allows you to treat a hierarchy of many different objects as if it was one object when that is convenient, & to do that in any part of the hierarchy, all the way down to the individual parts of a single object.

 

I dunno, maybe I'm not reading you right, but you're not describing anything that I don't think I can already accomplish with groups and standard vector item stacking heirarchy.  Not to say that you're wrong, but rearranging the vertical order of items, grouping them, and etc is...  standard stuff.

 

But this selecting-clear-space-only-if-object-is-closed is damnably weird.  It's not at all consistent with the obvious care and attention heaped upon the rest of the app.

 

As for moving things up or down, inkscape has a definite edge to user friendliness here.  When I want to move an object below the one it's currently obstructing, it's unfriendly to ask me to do it 30 times because there are 29 objects somewhere else in the design.  Having it drop all layers required to clear the one I'm obviously trying to avoid...  I just don't see a good reason to want to have nothing happen 29 times.  When would this behaviour be desired?

 

Anyway, to be clear, I really like AD.  I don't think I've come anywhere near scratching the surface of what it'll do, but I plan to buy it.  This is good stuff and I want to encourage its development.  

[R C-R]

"But this selecting-clear-space-only-if-object-is-closed is damnably weird."

 

I don't know what you mean by that. Like I said several posts ago, I think the reason you were having trouble selecting a layer behind the distorted triangle is because the triangle is either a compound object or a boolean combination.

 

Likewise, I don't understand what you mean about having to move an object 30 times or drop all layers.

 

It might help if you would attach an AD document to a post so we can see what you are talking about -- not a screen shot but an actual .afdesign document.

[JimmyJack]

But this selecting-clear-space-only-if-object-is-closed is damnably weird.

 

I agree 100%. An object with a subtracted interior should have an empty interior. And be clickthroughable ( :D )... hey you used "damnably".

Booleans have had issues for more than awhile now. They're aware, and are chipping away at it. Divide in the current 1.5 Beta 6, in certain situations, has been disabled. Perhaps, fingers crossed... that means it's getting some love.

 

Edit: Oh yeah, and.... Welcome aboard!

[R C-R]

Divide in the current 1.5 Beta 6, in certain situations, has been disabled.

In what situations has it not been disabled? I can't find one (although I have not looked very hard for that).

[JimmyJack]

Well now I see there's a Beta 7....

 

But in 6, Divide is still operational in most situations. 

1) Overlapping objects that hang over an edge.... which it's always done well with.

2) Completely enclosed overlapping objects.... it's available but still not right, imho.

 

I think the only scenarios where it's disabled is in trying to divide out of a previous subtraction or combine,

or when trying to separate wholly enclosed shapes (or any curves layer) on an imported eps/svg.

[NFG]

"But this selecting-clear-space-only-if-object-is-closed is damnably weird."

 

I don't know what you mean by that. 

 

I think JimmyJack makes it more clear?

 

I agree 100%. An object with a subtracted interior should have an empty interior. And be clickthroughable ( :D )... 

 

Here's an example document.  When you try to select the red rectangle, you can click through the purple object that has been cut, but not the whole one.

 

http://oz.nfgworld.com/AD-test-2.afdesign  (20kB)

 

As for the layer thing, here's another sample AD document.  In Inkscape, if you select the green triangle and move it down one level, it moves below the black rectangle immediately. In AD it first moves down past all the rainbow circles.  Now I could move it to the bottom but this sort of avoids the problem, it's quite easy to imagine a document where this behaviour isn't good either.

 

Basically, Inkscape considers the object's position and context, which is desirable behaviour IMO.

 

http://oz.nfgworld.com/AD-test.afdesign(18kB)

http://oz.nfgworld.com/AD-test.svg(5kB)

 

^ there's an SVG to load into inkscape if you so desire.  They're the same content.

[JimmyJack]

 In AD it first moves down past all the rainbow circles. 

 

 

It does? Are you hitting "Move Back One", or just "Move to Back" (sorry, had to ask)?

 

Hmmm, not an issue on my end.... moves right below the black rectangle. Maybe a PC bug?

[NFG]

Just moving 'Back One'.  It doesn't move below the black rectangle until it's shuffled through a bunch of irrelevant layers.  

If I saved it wrong, you may need to move it to TOP first, but it certainly takes 13 steps from there.

[JimmyJack]

That's gotta be a bug. The behavior is nothing like that on the Mac side.

[R C-R]

I also can not duplicate the green triangle moving past the rainbow of circles in NFG's second example. I get the same result as JimmyJack. I am using the Mac beta 6.

 

In his first example, I cannot get the Divide operation to work with the purple curves layer (which is composed of two objects).

[JimmyJack]

In his first example, I cannot get the Divide operation to work with the purple curves layer (which is composed of two objects).

 

 

Ahhh, that's not the issue at hand. (BTW, that's an example of where Divide seems to have been disabled. Divide is absolutely an issue, just not what NFG is talking about. Well at least not directly.)

The problem is:

In the upper example you can click in the middle of the purple shape and select the red rectangle.

In the bottom example you cannot. Yes we can alt click but why should we have to? An empty center should be empty.

 

Another example:

Draw a circle, no fill, with a stroke. Put a smaller shape behind it. You can select the shape behind by clicking inside the circle. Here empty is empty. But if you expand the stroke you cannot, and have to go to the alt option.

 

I suspect that NFG is correct on some level. The Boolean commands (on wholly enclosed operations) may not really be dividing or subtracting. It seems like some kind of alpha trickery.

 

(this would explain the problems I'm having taking eps's into my 3D software...... I have to re-drill. And on text, that's an unbelievable pain)

[R C-R]

Ahhh, that's not the issue at hand. (BTW, that's an example of where Divide seems to have been disabled. Divide is absolutely an issue, just not what NFG is talking about)

I am aware that is not the issue you or NFG is talking about.

 

But just food for thought: In the purple curves example, select that layer & from the Layers menu change the fill mode from "Alternate (Even-Odd)" to "Winding (Non-Zero)." It does not look so much like alpha trickery now, at least to me.

 

EDIT: I just downloaded & installed the Mac 1.5 beta 7 version. Nothing has changed for either issue.

[JimmyJack]

Actually it kinda makes me think that more now :D .

 

If a couple endpoints weren't joined maybe.... different story.

(which is something I've experienced with expand stroke....)

 

Who the heck knows (I hope somebody does....)? Whatever the reason. Please fix it.

[NFG]

1. So in your Mac version, raising the triangle to the top and dropping it one level puts it below the black rectangle?

 

2. Purple curves...  If there's a 'Fill Mode' option I can't find it.  =/