socapex Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I love AD, but some little annoyances have become really abrasive over time. Here is my list of things that really really get to me. After writing the list, I realize it could be read as an angry post, it is not. I am not *angry* or something, just annoyed :) AD is a great peice of software and I love it, I just wish it dealt better with the little details that affect workflow and work speed greatly (the repetitive stuff). All effects and dialogs start at 0. Why!? For example feathering, why not put a good default value like 1? Who uses feather at 0? Same goes for shadows/outlines/all effects. Why not start with a basic shadow, so we can see immediately if it fits the style? You have to triple click to select the full text of an edit box. A lot of time you don't triple click well enough. Why? There has been exactly 0 times in 1 year of usage that I've had to change a specific number, and 100% of times when I need to change it completely. Could you make the number boxes single-click select-all please? Dialogs don't auto select edit boxes. It would make workflow so much better. Apply thing > enter number > tab a few times > enter number > enter. Almost no wasted time selecting mouse. Your shortcut/input stack is a little broken, sending clicks after a spacebar-move and things like that. This is a bigger deal, but that portion of the backend should be redesigned/rethought imho. Placing an image, why do I have to rasterize it everytime? Why can't I just place an image and work? The layer creation assistant is a little funky. I do not know how or what exactly is the issue, so I'll just flag it as a sometimes annoying thing where you think you are drawing somewhere/something and your not. It is definitely useful many times. I have not yet put the finger on the use-cases that "breaks" it for me. Hope this is useful, lots of little simple things in there. Good day Fixx 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixx Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Placing an image, why do I have to rasterize it everytime? Why can't I just place an image and work? Umm.... I think you do not have to rasterize it. (Though I work more with AP than AD I think is not so different..) If you want to edit it you have to rasterize it. But I personally first want to scale, rotate and what ever it and THEN rasterize if needed. Keeps better quality that way when transformations are generated all at once, not one by one, repeating and adding incremental errors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socapex Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 Yes, that is exactly what I am talking about. The concept of rasterizing an image seems, in my humble opinion, outdated. AD can definitely work with comps of multiple resolutions, imagine dropping in images and never worrying about working at highest res, because they always are at source resolution. Everything is best-res, and the pixel preview shows you the "flattened" preview. I find, it would be sick :) [edit:] I find, I also live in a dream lol LilleG and Fixx 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspirimental Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 +1 on the tripple click to have all text selected. This really is anoying and I think double clicking on a text object would select the whole word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heldercervantes Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 Having to rasterise the image actually makes a bit of sense to me. Until you do that, the image is a link to the original, not information actually in the document, and by rasterising, you change that and make it editable. +1 for the dialogs defaulting at 0. I.e. applying drop-shadow, if you're not paying attention, your immediate reaction is that something's not working or being done properly. and +1 for text selection. I actually had one or two click frenzy outbursts trying to select text. Although to me the greatest annoyance is AF not remembering options in dialogs. But I already complained about this in other posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herbert123 Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 Yes, that is exactly what I am talking about. The concept of rasterizing an image seems, in my humble opinion, outdated. AD can definitely work with comps of multiple resolutions, imagine dropping in images and never worrying about working at highest res, because they always are at source resolution. Everything is best-res, and the pixel preview shows you the "flattened" preview. I find, it would be sick :) [edit:] I find, I also live in a dream lol Not a dream: it is indeed possible to work with the native image at the highest resolution in two alternative layer-based image editors via smart objects, for example. Node-based compositors work the same way as well. It is really a liberating and forgiving way to work, and I hope Affinity will allow for this at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.