eliminating overlapping lines

[Irfaan]

hi everyone, 

I am relatively new to using vector programs so my knowledge is fairly limited. I recently purchased vector files for arabic calligraphy. I have been playing around with it and have written my name (irfaan) with the provided objects(letters)

It is a non issue if I want to print the files, however I am using a laser machine to cut out the project/engrave it. The issue im having is that certain objects have overlapping lines on them, which will cause an issue with the laser machine as it will then cut them out seperately

I've tried using boolean 'add' which did not work, as well as creating groups with the objects

Could anyone please help me out with steps I can use to eliminate the issue (if possible)

I have access to affinity designer on iPad as well as Mac. The problem objects have been marked in pink/red

Please see attached document

thank you all :)

“Irfaan” calligraphy.afdesign

[Alfred]

I think the main problem is that you have multiple nested groups, so I suggest you begin by ungrouping them. Once you’ve ungrouped everything, use the Node Tool to adjust adjacent shapes so that they overlap slightly: when you do this, Boolean ‘Add’ will give you a Curve object containing a single shape (instead of a Curves object containing two non-overlapping shapes).

[Irfaan]

Thanks for the tip. Been trying it all day with no luck but I am going to keep at it sincerely I’m not exactly the most experienced at working with vectors and nodes etc. thank you for the tip. Will post an update in 24 hours to notify all if I’ve been successful 

[firstdefence]

Made a video for you @Irfaan 

https://youtu.be/C-YBmY2PpRk

 

[Irfaan]

1 hour ago, firstdefence said:

Made a video for you @Irfaan 

https://youtu.be/C-YBmY2PpRk

 

Honesly Dex. I don’t know how to thank you. As a new comer to vector work I can legitimately say that I appreciate you taking the time to record that video. Simple tricks that I can use for a long time. All I have to do now is edit my original templates and it’s problem solved. 

 

Subscribed to your youtube channel as well 

 

thank you again 

Thank you 

[AlainP]

It's been useful to me too, thanks.

[firstdefence]

Nice words Irfaan an AlainP thank you.

[R C-R]

8 hours ago, firstdefence said:

Made a video for you @Irfaan 

You may have made it for @Irfaan but I am very glad I watched it too! That's because it never occurred to me to use the technique you show beginning at about 0:51 to avoid the problem using the Divide boolean with shapes that overlap themselves when I want a Curves object with separate inner & outer paths rather than a single path that leaves those problematic areas where it crosses itself.

I won't bore you with the details of all the lame workarounds I have tried in the past after using Divide to get a Curves object from the result, but suffice it to say that adding a path like you did is infinitely faster, easier, & more accurate. It will save me hours of frustration so I cannot thank you enough for sharing it. 

[JimmyJack]

Unfortunately, Affinity's boolean engine rears it's ugly head once again.

While I appreciate the effort, and the rest of the video, the method on the big shape leaves (at least when I did it) TEN extra nodes.... including a fully independent extra shape within the object. (all three nodes of the little triangle were on top of the top left corner)

For speed and accuracy I much prefer this method.... Faster and only () one extra node at one of the break points after recombining..... yet another recurring boolean problem, but at least it's just one . If ur unlucky maybe two.

(EDIT: if you try this on your own, please note that the original object was not closed. So I just hit that button first)

 

[Irfaan]

On 8/8/2018 at 11:17 PM, JimmyJack said:

Unfortunately, Affinity's boolean engine rears it's ugly head once again.

While I appreciate the effort, and the rest of the video, the method on the big shape leaves (at least when I did it) TEN extra nodes.... including a fully independent extra shape within the object. (all three nodes of the little triangle were on top of the top left corner)

For speed and accuracy I much prefer this method.... Faster and only () one extra node at one of the break points after recombining..... yet another recurring boolean problem, but at least it's just one . If ur unlucky maybe two.

(EDIT: if you try this on your own, please note that the original object was not closed. So I just hit that button first)

 

wow man...thank you so much for that...I will have to sit with it try and understand what it is you're doing, but thank you so much....reallhy appreciate you guys all helping out a beginner like myself 

\

truly I appreciate it