Tazintosh Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Hi there, Let's say I would like to do this: For the basic of this example: a 100px square that I want to reduce by exactly 10px on every duplicate. (100, 90, 80, 70, 60px, etc.) I've done this manually, it was long enough. Imagine I've to built a texture like this with hundred of them? The actual behavior of the duplicate function is in fact to apply -10% each time, which produce this (100, 90, 81, 72.9, 65.6px, etc. : Am I missing something? Any idea? Thanks your your help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gear maker Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I tried this using math statement in the Transform panel -=10 px and it still looks like it did the change using a percentage. I don't know how you get it to stop that. Sorry. Quote iMac (27-inch, Late 2009) with macOS Sierra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazintosh Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share Posted March 8, 2015 Thanks for passing here Gear maker. Based on the amount of answer, either people don't want to share ^^, either this cannot be done :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gear maker Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 I think this is important. If the transform was done using a percentage, then the Power Duplicate should use a percentage. But in this case when it's done using an absolute value the PD should continue using an absolute value. Just as if the transform was done using a rotational angle it needs to continue using the rotational angle. Which it does. Quote iMac (27-inch, Late 2009) with macOS Sierra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff MEB Posted March 8, 2015 Staff Share Posted March 8, 2015 Tazintosh, Gear maker, Thanks for reporting and bringing this issue to our attention. This is a bug. I've logged it to be looked at. Quote A Guide to Learning Affinity Software Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazintosh Posted May 29, 2015 Author Share Posted May 29, 2015 Hey MEB, Any news on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff MEB Posted May 29, 2015 Staff Share Posted May 29, 2015 Hi Tazintosh, This issue was already reviewed/checked and has been closed as "by design". That's the only information i have. Quote A Guide to Learning Affinity Software Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazintosh Posted May 30, 2015 Author Share Posted May 30, 2015 Wow, that's sad :blink: So we've to stick manually with this basic need? :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gear maker Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Tazintosh I would guess this is so it can be used to make spirals with a simple drag and drop. How about putting in a feature request that asks that the offset used be determined by the form of the offset specified. So that... if an exact offset is entered from the transform panel (+=.75 or *=2) then that exact offset is used for each iteration. If a percentage is entered from the transform panel (+=75% or *=200%) then the percentage is used for each iteration. If the copy is just dragged and dropped then that could use a percentage for each iteration. Maybe that way we could have it as it has been design but it could handle both modes of use. Quote iMac (27-inch, Late 2009) with macOS Sierra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anon1 Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 -10mm or px should act as an absolute property /1.1 should resize relative to the last transformation IMO it does not make sense that the -10mm input is seen as a relative property and resized after every transformation .... If i resize an object it could be a relative or absolute input. I would choose to leave it as a relative input. Peace (y) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Ben Posted June 1, 2015 Staff Share Posted June 1, 2015 Currently there is no way to do this. We have discussed possible improvements for the power duplicate function which we'll look into as soon as someone has the time to do it. Quote 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 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.