Jump to content
Mattyd

Feature request- snap anchor handles to grid option

Recommended Posts

Thx for visuals.

 

Allright @Ben, how - using your new snapping - would you remember and recreate fx this particular corner again and again? To the pixel? With total precision? It is an easy workflow that is also easy to remember as a formula so the corner gemoetry can be recreated. Place node on grid intersection, place one handle two intersections below, the other handle four grid intersections above. Not a perfect match - but rather a formula.

 

Once I have a curve geometry that is red line in a particular design - icons, logos, corporate design guidelines even in illustrations - how do I recreate it again accurately?

 

I use handle snapping and the grid more than any other snapping types.   

cc.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I would say, @Ben:

Even if it ends up being limiting, as you suspected, people still want to work with the limited options this feature has to offer.

Best regards!

P. D.: Having both would be nice too, what you already made and this.


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mithferion said:

So, I would say, @Ben:

Even if it ends up being limiting, as you suspected, people still want to work with the limited options this feature has to offer.

Best regards!

P. D.: Having both would be nice too, what you already made and this.

 

In some cases this limit is practical. Let's say I want to have this simple line. I know I have a 10 px increment on the grid lines, I can easily reproduce this in the future without having to estimate. I don;t always use a sketch to design something and the grid is a great reference. If not, why use any kind of snapping if it's limiting?

 

 

Snipaste_2018-01-05_16-08-47.png


Core i5 3570 @ 3.4GHz    |     8GB Hyperx Memory      |      Radeon R9 270X     |    Samsung 120 SSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, but the way I see it, Ben was worried about something: does this feature allow you to create the curve exactly how you want it to be or you just take the options it allows?

That's why I believe, having both options is great. Also, as Pathfinder said: maybe you want to repeat this exactly.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just gotten back from holidays and have been checking out all the commentary on this topic. I don't have Affinity Designer, as my evaluation period expired. I didn't buy a copy simply because of this one lacking feature, the snapping of handles to grid (or grid-lines/intersections). I'm not sure how you could argue against having this ability. I can understand usage cases where you might not want handles snapping to grid, but I feel this is easily dealt with by having a simple checkbox somewhere on the interface for "snap handles enabled/disabled". In almost all cases in my work I do want the precision of snapping. This is the default behaviour in CorelDraw and Illustrator, so I'm surely not alone in this opinion.

 

The key reason is that you can create specific curvatures that can be easily replicated, especially useful for type, logo or pattern design, diagrams/flowcharts and other non-freestyle drawing applications. By using measurements rather than doing things by eye you can draw the same matching curve shapes much faster, without the need to constantly zoom in to adjust "by eye" (especially important on small laptop screens). You can calculate how to create the same curvatures at different scales because you're just scaling up the relative distances. You can also draw inverse shapes that exactly match the perimeter of another shape. You can confidently create many separate drawing files (e.g. for a family of icons or diagram elements) knowing that curvature shapes will match even though you're not seeing them at the same time.

 

Surely the advantage of using a computer for drawing is the ability to create with total mathematical precision, replicate elements, define exact ratios, fit things perfectly, work faster? I understand that many people are just doing the equivalent of freehand illustration, but that's no reason not to cater to users with a more technical drawing requirements. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After thinking about this, now I count myself among the people that ask for this feature and I do so believing that it will benefit both sides: users and Serif.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really glad more users are showing how important this feature is to them and I hope that affinity team adds this to the roadmap soon. 

 

Currently I work between both illustrator and designer because of this feature at times. (Doing lines in illustrator and colouring in designer) (the other reason is for using astute graphics plugins - eraser tool in particular- if affinity added a tool like that as well as this request for anchor handle snapping, I’d be sorted!)

 

Im very meticulous when I design and I love to have anchor points snapping to grid (not always, but when it’s needed). 

 

It is a feature that needs to be a toggle on/off option in the snapping menu. It’s not always required but when it is, it’s fantastic and quick for when I want to be precise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it a very surprising that it is not obvious to the Affinity Design team how useful snapping of handles to the grid really is. 

 

I have used Adobe Illustrator for almost 10 years now for creating scientific illustrations and for almost every one of them I relied on precise snapping of the handles to a grid. For any kind of symmetric shape where the curve on one side should look exactly like the curve on the other side this feature is very helpful. In Affinity Designer I always have to draw one side and then duplicate and mirror it to achieve the same effect. Certain kind of regular curves I just don't know how to create precisly in AD. 

 

The attached image is an exercise for the pen tool I use in graphic design workshops for PhD students. Recreating the shapes precisely in Illustrator is very easy thanks to snapping of handles. In AD I have to eyeball it and am not able to exactly draw the same shapes. Or is there a way to do it with the snapping settings? 

 

PenTool.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snap to grid will significantly reduce you in the resulting curve shape. Depending on the density of the grid, it allows you to use only a small portion of the full range of bezier curves, which Serif / Ben has always objected to. For "exercises" perfect, for "real" use? 

Something else is sticking to the "symmetrical" position that is being worked on.

 


Affinity Photo 1.7.1.404, Affinity Designer 1.7.1.404, Affinity Publisher 1.7.1.404. Affinity Store.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1903, Build 18362.145.
Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Snap to grid will significantly reduce you in the resulting curve shape. Depending on the density of the grid, it allows you to use only a small portion of the full range of bezier curves, which Serif / Ben has always objected to. For "exercises" perfect, for "real" use? 

 

It should of course be a feature that can be switched off and turned on as needed. With your argument you might as well say "snapping to a grid in general will allow you only to draw at certain points in your document and therefore it is not useful to have a grid feature at all". 

 

If you need to draw freehand forms turn it off. Otherwise it can be very very useful. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't use Designer after I spent some trial with the trial version, although I thought it looked promising, super-easy to learn and certainly affordable. I still get email updates of posts to this forum, as I figured if this one feature were added I'd get a copy or two. The fact that its critical nature is even questioned makes me deeply suspicious of the programs design philosophy. I've just finished some logo jobs for which precise snapping is an absolute necessity, and which will pay for a few years of Adobe CC subscriptions.  I just don't understand what the problem with this is  - if the data for the handle position is stored in the file, we should at least be able to edit that data numerically, and surely adding an ability for optional snapping to grid is a no-brainer. If it wasn't required why do other applications allow it? I feel daft having to argue a case for this; it's like trying to explain to my children why I have to work for a living rather than stay at home playing Lego with them. If I wasn't concerned with precision, speed and efficiency I'd use a pencil and paper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This feature will be added.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Mithferion said:

Yes, it will be.  I still maintain that snapping handles to grid positions is limiting as far as control of curves goes, but people insist it is important, so I'm adding it.

 

Spanking. Looking forward to it and definitely buy one licence for some proper evaluation. Not sure how an additional feature can be considered "limiting" though - if snapping is turned off you can place the handles willy-nilly in a freeform fashion, if snapping is on then you can have exact control. Just need a checkbox somewhere (personally, I'd never have it unchecked! - if I have snapping "on" I expect both vertices and handles to snap). Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is that the feature will be there, which is good. Both positions about why it’s useful and why it’s limiting have been explained, so I don’t think is useful to keep discussing them.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2018 at 6:02 PM, Ben said:

Ok, here is a selection of videos showing handle snapping.

 

This one shows snapping the node, then constraining the handles in line with the grid axis, and finally snapping the handle lengths to match.

HandleSnapping2.mov 

 

This one shows constraining the handles to diagonals, then snapping the handle lengths.

HandleSnapping3.mov

 

This one shows how you might match up handle lengths between a number of nodes.  Note the different markers to show whether you have matched the length of the partner handle of the owner node (one bar), or the handle at the other end of the curve segment (two bars), or both (showing both one and two bar markers).

HandleSnapping4.mov

 

And, showing the last example constraining the handle direction to grid axis.

HandleSnapping5.mov

 

Note: in none of these examples is "Snap to Grid" turned on.  The grid is only displayed as a visual cue.  The constraining directions are taken from the grid axis directions and intermediates/diagonals.

 

Hi Ben,

sorry to drag up an old post, but what you're doing in these videos is exactly what I'm trying to do. However, the only handle-snapping happening for me is the length matching of the two handles on one node - I cannot hold shift or anything else to have handles snap to other handle lengths, positions or nodes. See attached video. What am I missing? I've tried turning on and off all the options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That will be because this feature has not been released yet.  It will all be in 1.7.


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this topic after lots of googling, and reading numerous other feature request threads.

Created this account to suggest that Serif hire a community manager, if they don't already have one. With the amount of time that @Ben spent being a huge pedant and invalidating everyone's examples, I'm sure the feature could have been done. Being a developer myself, I know it's not as easy as "could we just add this?", but this was beyond the pale, especially with respect to customer service.

Even if those are your thoughts, go duke it out with your product manager, not a bunch of people who paid for (and then politely requested) an extremely commonplace and useful feature. However, I'm guessing, based on how terse your replies became once you were overruled that it probably won't be an ongoing issue.

Looking forward to 1.7 (and being able to make my own alphanumeric symbols without pulling my hair out).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't being pedantic, and I wasn't overruled.  You'll also see that I repeatedly asked for the specific use case to justify the feature - but that took an age to come.  I added the feature (in the end) because the people shouting for it could not see that what they were asking for was provided in a more elegant way, and as I tried to explain at length, it doesn't play well with all our other features.  Of course, we have explained at some length that if people then chose to turn all the features it will hamper usability, but we give people what they think they want.... then they can figure it out for themselves.

 

The reason that some things are "commonplace" features is that they are just copied, lazily, from other sources - there is no thinking outside the box to see if there might just be a better way.  We are trying to innovate, not replicate.

 

...and calling people names isn't going to encourage them to do anything.

 

 


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ben said:

....what they were asking for was provided in a more elegant way...

 

 

Hello Ben,

I'm not sure I understand this. Are you saying, that it doesn't matter where the handle endpoints are, the curves will remain exactly the same shape as long as they're on the same angles? Are you suggesting it doesn't affect the shape of a curve at all if a handle is 1 mm away from the node or 1 kilometre? IF that's the case there's something intrinsically different about Affinity I don't understand, because in every other vector program I've used (since 1985) the position of the handles defines the shape of the curve. And if something defines the shape of a curve, you should be able to position it exactly, either by snapping or entering coordinates.  Would I be correct in thinking that the x/y coordinates of all handles is stored in the file? This must be the case, because they don't change position every time the file is opened. And if they have stored coordinates, then what possible argument could there be for not being able to change those coordinates to the values that the user desires?

One other point, if I'm running the corner grocery store and my best customers ask me to stock "Vegemite" as well as "Marmite" I don't query their "usage case", I just get it in stock as quick as I can. If you're American you might not get that analogy, but that in itself could be an enlightening confusion.

Cheers, Andy Q 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, lase said:

Just found this topic after lots of googling, and reading numerous other feature request threads.

Created this account to suggest that Serif hire a community manager, if they don't already have one. With the amount of time that @Ben spent being a huge pedant and invalidating everyone's examples, I'm sure the feature could have been done.

Had you searched or asked for it first, you would have known that it's already in the Publisher Beta (its versions is 1.7).

image.png.2989fd29cf9c52945053fe1bc9618332.png

A good piece of advice I can give you: it's better to ask  to be sure than to assume anything as a fact.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×