is Crop to selection possible

[v_kyr]

So much for the theme of vector brushes, it's obvious that those are finally only pixel based fills and thus NO real vector brushes!

[thomaso]

1 hour ago, Andy05 said:

On the German page it's since then "a solid brush" for (intuitive and natual) drawing... Probably they changed the localised wording here, because we have strict laws in Germany concerning false advertising?

EDIT: No, you're right. Further down in the wall of text, they still call them "Flexible Vektorpinsel" (flexible vector brushes). 

56 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

This is what I was referring to earlier. That's why I was confused by some of the earlier comments about the lack of customizable vector brushes.

These "Tech Specs" descriptions are mainly non-technical and so vague that it's not only impossible to blame the sender for a certain statement but also hard to understand what Serif indeed wants to express. They seem to leave the interpretation "by design" up to the readers, to make them believe whatever they prefer. This strategy can work, but it doesn't have to work at all; its success depends on the individual reader. Some will read such fluffy wording as specifically unprofessional text, others may feel great satisfaction just when reading adjectives like flexible, full, improved, professional etc. – A while ago there was a longer dialog trying not to misunderstand the meaning of (supported) "Languages" in Serif's feature description ...

[Andy05]

26 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Some will read such fluffy wording as specifically unprofessional text, others may feel great satisfaction just when reading adjectives like flexible, full, improved, professional etc.

Agreed. But a term like "Vektorpinsel" (vector brushes") doesn't give much of room for an interpretation. I really think, a competitor might be successful, if accusing Serif for false advertising in order to gain an competitive advantage by advertising features of a product, which don't exist. You can't claim a pixel brush becomes vector just because its (pixel) source and path are editable. 

And yeah, "Weniger ist mehr" (It's adding by subtracting) sometimes, also in advertising. But I already stated this on occasion in these fora, I don't think Serif's targeting at the majority of professional photoshop users or i. e. designers in print. Their apps are more suited for hobbyists and also for the more artsy sectors of design business. So, all those fluffy expressions might appeal to those sectors more than i. e. to people in prepress production.

[thomaso]

23 minutes ago, Andy05 said:

a term like "Vektorpinsel" (vector brushes") doesn't give much of room for an interpretation.

1. They are vector concerning their curve/shape – just not concerning their fill.
2. They added "flexible" – which immediately makes the entire expression fuzzy and ... flexible.
3. They don't risk anything even if accused, they simply can change text if necessary. Their offer of free demo versions prevent them from refund requests.

However, a vague, even inflationary use of words (e.g., "professional") is common these days, not only for commercials. In addition, here in certain details it can be impossible to text unambiguous without losing readability / understanding. The combination of taste (design) + technology (software) makes it more difficult ... and more flexible. These "Tech Specs" alias feature list are not intended to replace the Help text, nor are Help, tutorials or workbooks a substitute for a reference manual. The latter would be most accurate + complete, but does not exist.

[Andy05]

Just now, thomaso said:

1. They are vector concerning their curve/shape – just not concerning their fill.

No. Their path is vector. Their shape is NOT vector. Not at all. Their shape (what you see as final output) is pixel, not vector. There's no definition of "vector brush", which would cover Serif's approach on the matter.

[v_kyr]

9 minutes ago, thomaso said:

1. They are vector concerning their curve/shape – just not concerning their fill.

The whole brush thing is treated as a bitmap when stored in a vector file format and that's what finally comes out and counts here! - Thus the term "vector brushes" is pretty misleading for those sort of brushes with bitmap fills, which aren't treated as plain vectors at all.

[thomaso]

2 minutes ago, Andy05 said:

Their path is vector. Their shape is NOT

Sorry, correct, "path" fits better here.
(weiß nicht ob die Worte wirklich eindeutig sind, auf deutsch kann die Form eines solchen Objects sowohl als Pfad, als Strich oder als Kontur bezeichnet werden, entsprechend unklar ist es für mich auf englisch). Jedenfalls ist something am vector brush indeed vector, however we name it, it exists.

[thomaso]

4 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

The whole brush thing is treated as a bitmap when stored in a vector file format and that's what finally comes out and counts here! - Thus the term "vector brushes" is pretty misleading

I understand you both and agree, though there is more than one point of view. Obviously (or apparently only?) from Serif's perspective, what comes out doesn't count here that much, rather it seems to be seen as something outside of their product. (Compare various export / printing issues, or the proprietary file formats – slightly like "none of our business".) However, unfortunately "misleading" in terms of not ambiguous seems to apply to many aspects of the overall visual design theme, mainly due to a lack of precision in human language and thinking.

[Andy05]

9 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Obviously (or apparently only?) from Serif's perspective, what comes out doesn't count here that much, rather it seems to be seen as something outside of their product.

I think, there are at least two major reasons, why they (still) call them "vector brushes". Firstly, early versions (prior to 1.7) of Affinity Designer indeed started off with some more vector brushes. You can still find them here. (The 1.6 Basic ones contain some more true vector brushes than the current apps.)

So, they started with some more of them, hence the wording was ok up to that point. After the brushes got removed, it would have made a bad impact on the advertising, if they would have dropped the term. Also, it'd be quite strange, selling a vector app without vector brushes, so they can't leave out advertising them (although they don't exist in the product any longer). Latter might be the second reason for why they still claim providing "vector" brushes in their apps (besides, there are still one or two real vector brushes, i. e. under "pens").

[bokeh-ape]

For those that keep talking about vector brushes, please create a new thread.  You are derailing this thread...

[lepr]

21 minutes ago, Andy05 said:

I think, there are at least two major reasons, why they (still) call them "vector brushes". Firstly, early versions (prior to 1.7) of Affinity Designer indeed started off with some more vector brushes. You can still find them here. (The 1.6 Basic ones contain some more true vector brushes than the current apps.)

There has only ever been one true vector brush in Affinity - the non-textured one - and that is little more than a standard stroke. These things which you think are different true vector brushes are merely presets of parameters for that one non-textured brush.

[Dru Kepple]

Why are we talking about vector brushes in a crop to selection forum thread?

[Patrick Gilmour]

Guys, could we keep this on-topic for Crop to Selection, please, and move the Vector Brush discussion to another thread?

I'm a Photoshop ACE/ACI (instructor), understand that there are a lot of different workflow requirements out there, but I have consistently seen Crop to Selection used by a diversity of users in Photoshop and would like to see an option in Photo that is as simple and quick to use.

The suggestion, perhaps through a Preference setting, to allow the crop tool to default to a rectangle that that contains the selection so the user can then simply press 'Return' to crop sounds like a good one. Hopefully Affinity will consider adding this as an option.

[pixelstuff]

I would like to see this too.

If they don't want to implement the standard convention in most other photo editors (Image > Crop), I would settle for choosing the crop tool and having a single button next to the cancel button that says "Selection" which immediately auto crops to the selection edges.  That would be roughly the same amount of steps as Document > Crop or whatever.

I noticed the Crop tool does snap manually to a fuzzy selection edge if you have "Snap to pixel selection bounds" turned on, but that is still fiddly compared to the quick Image > Crop feature in other programs.

[Patccc]

Am i missing something, or is this still not possible? After 4 odd years of various users asking for this feature and it's still not available?

that's a bit disappointing. 

 

[Dru Kepple]

3 hours ago, Patccc said:

that's a bit disappointing

Welcome to the party! I think the hope of some of us on this thread is that as we amass more and more voices we may actually have that voice heard.  Of course, others just want to complain.  Either way, lots of room at this party.

[Patccc]

20 hours ago, Dru Kepple said:

Welcome to the party! I think the hope of some of us on this thread is that as we amass more and more voices we may actually have that voice heard.  Of course, others just want to complain.  Either way, lots of room at this party.

Yeah, thanks. To this i could add automation. I know Affinity has macros, but macros are built on simple features like cropping to selection, regardless of how selection was made.

[Patrick Gilmour]

I'm just going to add my voice again, to say that I wish this feature existed a lot of the time when I work in Photo. It makes me almost miss Photoshop!

[Peter van Westen]

On 3/7/2021 at 7:26 AM, pixelstuff said:

I would like to see this too.

If they don't want to implement the standard convention in most other photo editors (Image > Crop), I would settle for choosing the crop tool and having a single button next to the cancel button that says "Selection" which immediately auto crops to the selection edges.  That would be roughly the same amount of steps as Document > Crop or whatever.

I noticed the Crop tool does snap manually to a fuzzy selection edge if you have "Snap to pixel selection bounds" turned on, but that is still fiddly compared to the quick Image > Crop feature in other programs.

Like mentioned here and in earlier replies, you can snap the crop area to the selection. But it is cumbersome.
So I guess all we all want is a single-click way to do this:

 

[Peter van Westen]

And yes, it is worrying that users of Affinity Photo have been asking for a simple solution for years now (this thread started in 2017) and Serif have not come to the rescue.

And no, the macro does not work on the above simple example.
(If someone has any idea on how to automate above with a macro without destroying the filters and layers)

[Vex]

Count me in for wanting a crop-to-selection functionality. This is a key feature of Photoshop that's still missing. I was happy to see a similarly key feature of Illustrator make it into Designer, so that at least makes me optimistic that the mods/admins aren't ignoring us entirely.

I've been getting into the habit of using Affinity over Adobe whenever I start something new, and this is one where it's just easier for me to go back to Photoshop to accomplish this task, rather than trying to find a convoluted route in Photo.

[Jaguda]

Hi all,
 

and my first post goes here.
Which is also a plus one for the crop to selection - functionality.

Also coming from Photoshop (where it was so dead-easy to do), I'm just wondering - after having had several situations where I wanted to do a simple crop and resize and then fiddling around and thinking "hm, there has to be a way to do this in a simple matter". And then I searched, searched and finally found this thread : )
Ok, I will manage to use some of the given tipps and workarounds here... so thanks! Nevertheless it should be possible to have that option.
 

 

 

[Patrick Gilmour]

1 hour ago, Jaguda said:

Hi all,
 

and my first post goes here.
Which is also a plus one for the crop to selection - functionality.

Also coming from Photoshop (where it was so dead-easy to do), I'm just wondering - after having had several situations where I wanted to do a simple crop and resize and then fiddling around and thinking "hm, there has to be a way to do this in a simple matter". And then I searched, searched and finally found this thread : )
Ok, I will manage to use some of the given tipps and workarounds here... so thanks! Nevertheless it should be possible to have that option.
 

 

 

I think we need to keep adding posts here in this needed feature will find its way onto the development roadmap. Thanks for adding your voice.

[R C-R]

4 hours ago, Patrick Gilmour said:

I think we need to keep adding posts here in this needed feature will find its way onto the development roadmap. Thanks for adding your voice.

The place to add your voice is not here in Questions; it is in the Feature Requests & Suggestions section. It is the only place you can be sure the developers will see it.

[Patrick Gilmour]

27 minutes ago, R C-R said:

The place to add your voice is not here in Questions; it is in the Feature Requests & Suggestions section. It is the only place you can be sure the developers will see it.

R C-R is right.

And the topic has threads already.