There's no apparent way to skew an object.

[jer]

I agree that "skew" is a more appropriate term, and that it should replace "shear" in the Help text. My main point, however, was that both terms should be indexed so that anyone using either term would be able to find the Help topic.

 

I appreciate that Serif's view on this is likely to be somewhat skewed, but plumping for the less appropriate term as the only one to use in the Help strikes me as "shear" lunacy! :D

 

My biggest laugh today!!  :lol:

[Alfred]

My biggest laugh today!!  :lol:

 

Oh dear! You must be very easily amused!! Either that, or having a particularly bad day....   :o

[R C-R]

My biggest laugh today!!  :lol:

Genie: What is your first wish?

Joe: I want to be rich!

Genie: Granted! And your second wish?

Rich: I want lots of money.

[jer]

Genie: What is your first wish?

Joe: I want to be rich!

Genie: Granted! And your second wish?

Rich: I want lots of money.

 

Got to be specific in money matters and computer documentation, right? (and by be specific, I mean emulate specificity, not turn me into Rich!)  ;)

 

Good joke, by the way.

[R C-R]

"Got to be specific in money matters and computer documentation, right?"

 

Exactly my point!

[Stokestack]

Thanks for the info on this, everyone.

 

I must say that I share DavidMac's views on this issue, and I think it's symptomatic of several other major impediments I've faced using Designer. And I really, really want to use Designer, because I detest Illustrator (primarily because it lacks the only selection method I use: objects must be fully enclosed by the marquee to be selected).

 

But my work literally stops in Designer soon after I start each project, because basic functions are impossible to find. And while I think I should be able to find them after many years of using various drawing applications, I'm willing and committed to checking the documentation after fruitlessly hunting through menus and panels.

 

But the documentation has failed almost every time, lacking industry-standard (and hell, human-standard) terms for critical functions. "Skew" has been the standard term for this function as long as I've been using vector (or any graphics) apps, and that started in 1989. It seems like there are lots of these inappropriate terms in the application, and even when you use the exact terms from the UI, they don't turn up in a Help search (try searching for "snap to spread"). This came up in another thread, and the correct term in this case is canvas; that's what every other application uses and which makes sense.

 

The detachment from intuitive terminology is just one impediment to using Designer; non-intuitive design also plagues the UI. The Fill dialog is the best example I've found. We hunted around for the gradient-angle control, for example, only to find it's in a totally different part of the application's UI. Why doesn't it live where (or at least appear when) you're assigning the fill? And why does the Fill panel have a tab called "None," which has a bunch of swatches on it? That's just wack.

 

I've been a professional software engineer (on applications not totally unlike this) for quite a while. I understand that sometimes users' confusion can take developers by surprise. But you do need to take heed of it and step back and review your designs. I submitted a detailed analysis of problems with the Fill dialog and suggestions of how to fix it with a minimum of redesign, and got a defensive response and not a single aspect of this thing has been fixed. I know every user thinks his concerns are important, but I don't see how you can argue that a tab called "None" is good design.

 

Nor do I think this skew-control design is acceptable. The hit-points are invisible, tiny, and essentially undiscoverable. The cryptic "S" field on the Transform tab, way down in the corner, is not even close to an adequate substitute, since it only goes horizontally (as far as I can tell) and its increments are too coarse.

 

I really appreciate the cordial and frequent response from Affinity representatives in these forums. That goes a long way toward alleviating my annoyance and restoring my hopeful attitude toward Affinity and its products.

 

But... I urge Affinity to audit these applications for usability and fix the documentation; because now these design decisions are being propagated across two platforms, and the time to address problems is while the apps are young. If I were on Windows (and that day may be coming soon, with Apple's degradation of their computers), I'd still be using Corel Draw for sure. As it is, I have to fire up a Windows VM and do my work in Corel Draw far too often, because of something I can't find in Designer.

 

I hope that doesn't come off as too negative. I think we all want better tools, to take on the moribund offerings from Adobe. Let's go, guys!

[R C-R]

Hey Stokestack,

 

While I appreciate your point of view, I found Designer very easy to learn, I think primarily for two reasons:

 

1. I did not expect it to be the same as any other vector graphic application (& I have been using various ones for about 30 years). 

 

2. As with any other new-to-me complex app, I set aside several days for experimentation, clicking, dragging, opening menus & trying everything in them, & so on, just to see what would happen.

 

Only when I discovered something substantially different or puzzling did I start looking in the help, & soon after that reading & then participating in these forums.

 

This has worked out very well for me. Not only did it significantly reduce the steepness of the learning curve, it forced me to reevaluate some hoary old workflows, go back & reexamine some concepts that had grown a bit fuzzy in my aging brain, & learn some new things I never really thought about before, both about UI design in general & the technical "under the hood" aspects of how these apps work.

 

I am not saying this is the right approach for everyone but is has been for me.

[Stokestack]

Sure. I'm not arguing for always following old conventions. Some of the conventions we're saddled with from Adobe's poor decisions should be abandoned, and that's just what a fresh entrant like Affinity can bring to the market.

 

For example, I like how the default action when dragging an object's corner handle is to scale proportionally. If I want to stretch or smush another axis, I'll just grab that axis's handles. DUH! +1 for Affinity.

 

And constraints on the artboards look really cool; now all we need is a CSS exporter for them!

[verysame]

Stokestack,

 

So, it sounds you're willing to use Designer thus it's just a matter of getting used to it and then you're done, which it shouldn't take too long.

After all, once you find out where the tool you're looking for is, you're good to go. And luckily, a few tools might have a different naming convention, but not all of them.

[MEB]

Hi Stokestack,

This particular issue is already logged to be looked at. I understand that there's still some limitations and issues to address but the dev team is also relatively small and it's already working as fast as they can to fix/polish the issues reported. In programs with the complexity of these this may take some time. Please bear with us while we get there. We want them to be as good as we possibly can too.

[Fixx]

"Skew" has been the standard term for this function as long as I've been using vector (or any graphics) apps,

In Illustrator it is "shear".

[Move Along People]

-

[Stokestack]

In Illustrator it is "shear".

 

And yet Photoshop calls it "skew."

 

Hi Stokestack,

This particular issue is already logged to be looked at. I understand that there's still some limitations and issues to address but the dev team is also relatively small and it's already working as fast as they can to fix/polish the issues reported. In programs with the complexity of these this may take some time. Please bear with us while we get there. We want them to be as good as we possibly can too.

 

Thanks! I understand, and thanks for the response. Like any dev team, I'm sure it's never big enough to please everyone.

[brunzenstein]

I use the Shear/Skew function and do not find that the accessibility is as worse as some here mention.

Actually I think this is not a problem at all.

[Alfred]

Nor do I think this skew-control design is acceptable. The hit-points are invisible, tiny, and essentially undiscoverable. The cryptic "S" field on the Transform tab, way down in the corner, is not even close to an adequate substitute, since it only goes horizontally (as far as I can tell) ...

 

Skew and rotation are intimately related. If you want vertical skew, simply take the negative of the horizontal skew value and add that to the rotation value; e.g. for an unrotated object to which you've applied a horizontal skew of 22.5°, setting the rotation value to -22.5° will replace the horizontal skew with a vertical skew of the same amount.

 

... and its increments are too coarse.

 

You can type or paste precise values into the R and S controls.

[Stokestack]

Thanks for that info. But typing one value in after another, in a tedious trial-and-error routine, is no way to work. And we're supposed to do that in two fields? This is a GUI, and a graphic-design program no less.

 

Competing applications have implemented far more intuitive and efficient means of accomplishing this common task for many years.

[JayHathaway]

You have to get infinity photo to do it bro... the programs are interchangeable under "file "edit in photo"

but I have both and they have different functions but work together great... 

[ronanski]

shear isnt the same as skew. I need skew to adjust the perspective of an image. Shear just squishes it one side or the other

[lacerto]

(...)

[ronanski]

so is there no work around to be able to change the perspective?

[MEB]

Hi ronanski,
Assuming you are using Designer no, there's no vector perspective distortion tool available. You have to do it manually editing the nodes of the objects (when applicable). Affinity Photo does have raster based perspective distortion both destructive (Perspective Tool) and non-destructive (Perspective Live Filter).

[Matt Pipes]

Sheer and Skew are not the same.... I'm using Affinity Photo for IOS and I'm able to use sheering to make something into a parallelogram, which, if that's what I had wanted to do, would be great. Unfortunately I don't want parallelograms. I want the ability to skew different points to correct for parallax in a photo of an object, for example. Is this possible? and if not... why?

[Matt Pipes]

Update! You can skew.... Except it's not under transform or called "Skew". Instead it is in filters and called "Perspective". Not where I was expecting to find it, but it works great!

[impossiblecolor]

What I do is copy/paste into illustrator, skew it, then copy and paste it back. It's an extra step, but it works

[ronanski]

7 hours ago, impossiblecolor said:

What I do is copy/paste into illustrator, skew it, then copy and paste it back. It's an extra step, but it works

this literally defeats the whole point of having affinity. If I could afford illustrator I would just do everything on that.