Expand stroke REALLY needs to be fixed for Affinity Designer

[ToniV]

I created this in Affinity designer (for Mac). A lot of circles with strokes. It would have been handy to just create circles with strokes and use "expand stroke", but that does not work. It creates insane paths. Instead ,I had to create two circles for every circle, and cut a hole into them using the other. Like in 1999 with  Adobe Illustrator. Please, fix this!

[Alfred]

5 minutes ago, ToniV said:

I had to create two circles for every circle, and cut a hole into them, using the other

No, you didn’t have to do that. You could have used the Donut Tool or the Pie Tool.

[ToniV]

1 minute ago, αℓƒяє∂ said:

No, you didn’t have to do that. You could have used the Donut Tool or the Pie Tool.

Please explain a bit more.

[ToniV]

What I tried with donut tool, it does not work in my situation. Every stroke is same. And if you expand stroke, it still creates insane paths. So it's not helping. The problem is still there.

[Alfred]

The ‘Expand Stroke’ command converts a stroke into a filled shape. When you use the Donut Tool or the Pie Tool you create a filled shape directly, so there’s no need to expand any strokes: simply set the parameters (hole radius, start angle and end/total angle) to whatever you want.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, ToniV said:

A lot of circles with strokes. It would have been handy to just create circles with strokes and use "expand stroke", but that does not work.

I haven't done much with this, so I may not understand what you're trying to do. However, why not just create the circle using the circle tool and make a wide stroke from the very beginning using the stroke properties popup?

[Wiredframe]

Expanding strokes is very important, especially when converting icons. So PLEASE fix this.

[JET_Affinity]

Quote

Expanding strokes is very important....

Exactly. It's not just about circles. Or icons. Far from it.

Quote

…why not just create the circle using the circle tool and make a wide stroke from the very beginning…

Because although it's not traditionally been called that, being so basic a feature, stroke weight is really just an effect rendered at output.  Effects don't cut it for anything requiring actual path geometry.

Ordinary Boolean path operations (subtraction, union, intersection, exclusion, etc.)—required for all kinds of common drawing constructs—are all based on the actual path geometry, not on the merely visual appearance of a stroke weight.

Anything destined for physical reproduction via NC cutters, plotters, routers, etc., also must be actual paths that the tool follows, not just appearances painted on your monitor or rasterized by a RIP.

We all want more sophisticated and functional vector-based brushes in drawing programs. Those constructs and their interfaces are entirely program-specific proprietary. But we all also have to transfer our vector-based artwork to other programs. So such features are pretty much useless if artwork employing those features cannot be reliably normalized to basic paths that survive export to common exchange formats. Having to resort to rasterization in order to reliably keep shape is not acceptable.

Back when drawing program first started acquiring the ability to "convert" text to paths, the differentiating factor was this: Some programs (properly) did it by actually accessing the outlines contained in the font. Others didn't. As I recall, one example was Quark XPress. At the time it was the "standard for professional quality; the industry leader" (i.e., all that jazz Adobe devotees like to say about Illustrator nowadays). But its first conversion of text to paths was hideous until corrected.

That's similar in principle to the now expected quality of "outlining" stroke weights. One of the first things experienced vector graphics users check when evaluating a new program is the quality of expanding strokes and other effects. If it results in excess nodes and visible changes in the shape, it is a very poor implementation and can be a deal-breaker if not soon rectified. It is a very serious problem in Affinity Designer, but I believe the developers have acknowledged it and probably planned for addressing it.

JET

[Krustysimplex]

Quote

One of the first things experienced vector graphics users check when evaluating a new program is the quality of expanding strokes and other effects. If it results in excess nodes and visible changes in the shape, it is a very poor implementation and can be a deal-breaker if not soon rectified. It is a very serious problem in Affinity Designer, but I believe the developers have acknowledged it and probably planned for addressing it.

I certainly hope so. Affinity Designer's inadequacy here is probably the biggest issue that keeps me using Illustrator for most work.