Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So I'm overall loving the way Affinity handles masking but one thing slightly puzzles me.

 

We can make a compound path but when we use that as a Layer mask you can no longer edit the nodes.  Am I doing something wrong here or is this currently a limitation?  Ideally I'd prefer not to combine my shapes for ultimate control but it seems it might be necessary.

 

p.s. to the Devs, Designer is a beautiful piece of software and is a joy to use, even with these kind of limitations.  Looking forward to 1.7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MikeMo,

Welcome to Affinity Forums :)

Currently you have to un-nest the compound in the Layers panel (move it to outside the object layer it's masking) to be able to expand the compound layer and access/edit the shapes nodes individually. I would like yo see this improved as well. Currently the only way to edit the nodes directly (while the vector shape is nested and used as a mask) is if instead of a compound you simply Add (boolean operation) both shapes "destructively". Check this file: sample_file_2.afdesign.

 

Moving this to the Feature Requests section.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response, I had previously added the shapes destructively like you said when it occurred to me that compound shapes would be a better way of doing it, which is when I came across this issue.  

 

Fingers crossed this becomes a thing, as masks are a very powerful thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying out V1.7.0.367 hoping that compound vector mask editing would be implemented.  Sadly not but I'm hoping that it will be something that the Affinity team could add.

As it stands Masking seems really unintuitive to me. Is it even possible to use a shape to negatively cut out from another shape?  I can't find a nice way to do this.

If this is not possible then we're left with needing compound vector masks which have to be un-nested, tweaked then re-nested.

 

This is a terrible workflow.

 

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

×