Jump to content
Tazintosh

Wasted 209,33€ because of —your— app bug!

Recommended Posts

Just to share a bad experience, even after almost 20 years in the creation process…
Hope this can serve someone else than me.

Hi dear Affinity Team,

Almost since the beginning of your adventure, I'm a big fan of your apps.
Bought them all, trash any single piece of Adobe files on my system, I just love your work.
 
Well… until today…
A few days ago, I've designed an Affinity Designer file, which contain 3 very precisely scaled shapes planned to be laser cut (document set in cm).
The laser company needed separated files, so, for each of the three shapes to be cut:
• I copied the group shape and pasted it on a new document (⌘ ⌥ ⇧ n).
• Saved the new document for reference and exported it to PDF.
• Sent it to cut to the company.
 
I paid 209,33€ for the job (inox plates, 2mm thick)
 
Today, I received the plates, and they are too small!!! I immediately checked my exported files, and indeed, they are too small!!!
So:
Yes, this is my fault for not having double checked the exported files and the company has made no mistake, so their is nothing I can complain
 BUT, YOU changed the scale during the copy/paste process!!! Why such a bug exist??? I was trusting you, didn't pay attention… This bug can be reproduced at will, cannot believe it!!!
 
I'm absolutely revolted right now, both against me by my excess of confidence in the quality of your work, and by you because your lack costed me so much money!
 
I don't know what to think anymore.
 
Regards

WebSite.pngTwitter.png500px.pngFlickr.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once made a mistake in a drawing and ran 1000 units. A bit more wasted cost than 209,33€. It was a different mistake in a different software. But totally my fault. The shop doing the cutting's moto is "We make it exactly like your file." And they did. I have always checked my output files before and since...but the mistake I made slipped through.

I don't know why the scale was different between your two files. The only time I have had size weirdness in Affinity software was related to the document DPIs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MikeW said:

I don't know why the scale was different between your two files. The only time I have had size weirdness in Affinity software was related to the document DPIs.

Without seeing the files, a difference in the document DPIs does seem the likeliest explanation.


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.3.481 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.3.155 • Designer for iPad 1.7.3.1 • iPadOS 13.2.2 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"because of —your— app bug!"

Why do you say - in application is bug? The fact, that the application behaves differently than you expected and did not verify the result, is just your fault.


Affinity Store: Affinity Suite (ADe, APh, APu) 1.7.3.481.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1909, Build 18363.476.
Dell Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
Dell OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever a new trainee is assigned to work with me, there are two things I always teach them:

1. Where the restroom is

2. Don’t take anything for granted

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
1 hour ago, Pšenda said:

"because of —your— app bug!"

Why do you say - in application is bug? The fact, that the application behaves differently than you expected and did not verify the result, is just your fault.

Evidently there is a New from clipboard bug 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pšenda said:

"because of —your— app bug!"

Why do you say - in application is bug? The fact, that the application behaves differently than you expected and did not verify the result, is just your fault.

« Sorry that you have experienced this issue, it is one we are aware of and it's been passed over to the developers to investigate further. »
--> My yesterday e-mail answer.

Wait, did I said it wasn't my fault (too)?
Funny…

From now on, since any new document is default created at 96dpi, I'll make sure to never ever change that in case I've some copy/paste to handle (plus checking triple… as I was always doing before in the end…).

BTW Affinity team, when you'll fix this bug, please also keep the unit preferences, color, etc. When you're working on a "mm" unit document, and ⌘ ⌥ ⇧ n to create a new one, make sure to keep those units set on the new document. Chances are quite high the user will have to continue working following the same document definition.


WebSite.pngTwitter.png500px.pngFlickr.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Tazintosh said:

Wait, did I said it wasn't my fault (too)?

No, in title your topic no.

59 minutes ago, Tazintosh said:

when you'll fix this bug

Sorry, but I still don't think it's a "bug". Does Serif somewhere claim to copy images from the System Clipboard at the same resolution as they were inserted? It is certainly impractical for users, but unfortunately quite logical - the OS (through which the Clipboard is data copied) works at 96 DPI. However, Serif acknowledges the impracticality of this procedure and modifies/improvement it.


Affinity Store: Affinity Suite (ADe, APh, APu) 1.7.3.481.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1909, Build 18363.476.
Dell Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
Dell OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pšenda said:

However, Serif acknowledges the impracticality of this procedure and modifies/improvement it.

Right. In that referenced thread the user claimed it's a bug. Serif said it's an area that could be improved, but did not agree that it's a bug.


-- Walt

Windows 10 Home, version 1903 (18362.356), 16GB memory, Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00Gz, GeForce GTX 970
Affinity Photo 1.7.3.481 and 1.8.0.486 Beta   / Affinity Designer 1.7.3.481 and 1.8.0.486 Beta  / Affinity Publisher 1.7.3.481 and 1.8.0.502 Beta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Tazintosh said:
A few days ago, I've designed an Affinity Designer file, which contain 3 very precisely scaled shapes planned to be laser cut (document set in cm).
The laser company needed separated files, so, for each of the three shapes to be cut:
• I copied the group shape and pasted it on a new document (⌘ ⌥ ⇧ n).
• Saved the new document for reference and exported it to PDF.
• Sent it to cut to the company.

One of the best tools in Designer is Slices. You should not have gone back and created a new document and copy and paste in to it as that can cause problems - just like it can in Indesign or Illustrator. I would assume that the resolution is the issue. I try to keep all at 300 no matter what. Never let programs guess what resolution it should be. I have a strange issue with logos between documents that sometimes the stroke will get very thick from one document pasted to another. I don't know why but it does. 

I just tried to copy and paste between documents and I couldn't get it to change size even though the documents were different resolution and size. I tried rasterizing the object and it made no difference rom copy and pasting.

Here is the solution I would do in your case:

Use artboards for each of the graphics in the same file. Name the artboard what you want the file name to be. Go to Slices and select all 3 artboards then choose the PDF for Print export (or PDF X/4) then choose export slices. It will name them all for you and keeps everything nice and neat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue that a long time ago I railed about is that there is even a document dpi. If there wasn't a document dpi as implemented, there wouldn't be this particular issue at all. If there is even a vector application with such a thing, I haven't used it. 

This applies to both AD & APub. Just damn silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MikeW said:

The issue that a long time ago I railed about is that there is even a document dpi. If there wasn't a document dpi as implemented, there wouldn't be this particular issue at all. If there is even a vector application with such a thing, I haven't used it. 

This applies to both AD & APub. Just damn silly.

Coreldraw has a document dpi, and Illustrator does not.  This makes for a very real difference in how these programs handle pixels and ppi.  Both will eventually have the right result but it can be confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kuttyjoe said:

Coreldraw has a document dpi, and Illustrator does not.  This makes for a very real difference in how these programs handle pixels and ppi.  Both will eventually have the right result but it can be confusing.

CD has a rendering resolution and only applies to images/effects contained in the file (end for exporting to an image format), which also can be changed properly at export if one wants a higher/lesser resolution. Which is the same/similar to AI's document effects resolution and its export.

Neither AI (CS6) nor CD have a new from clipboard, so the results are not really comparable to what is happening here in AD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2019 at 11:18 AM, MikeW said:

CD has a rendering resolution and only applies to images/effects contained in the file (end for exporting to an image format), which also can be changed properly at export if one wants a higher/lesser resolution. Which is the same/similar to AI's document effects resolution and its export.

Neither AI (CS6) nor CD have a new from clipboard, so the results are not really comparable to what is happening here in AD.

Resolution is always only applied to images/effects, not vectors as they are resolution independent.

Here is the big difference between the two programs.  Changing the rendering resolution in Coreldraw changes the physical document size so it's not only used for export.  Changing the raster effects resolution in Illustrator does not change the physical page size.  Functionally, Coreldraw seems to be more logical.  For example, if you create a new document in both programs that is 300px X 300px, at 300ppi, Coreldraw will present you a document which is 1" X 1", if you view it in inches.  This is logical.  Illustrator will present you a document which is 4.17"  X  4.17", which is incorrect.  You can go back and change the rendering resolution in both programs, but in Illustrator it has no effect on the document size.  Furthermore, when you export this document from Illustrator, at any resolution, you're still getting an image that is 4.17" x 4.17".  If you render it at 72ppi, you can open this file in Photoshop, go to Image Size, uncheck resample, then change the resolution to 300 and finally you will have your 1" x 1" document, which is the correct size.  This is the reason I say that they are doing things differently.  Coreldraw's rendering effects deals with both raster effects like drop shadows AND physical document size.  Illustrator only deals with the effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kuttyjoe said:

Functionally, Coreldraw seems to be more logical.  For example, if you create a new document in both programs that is 300px X 300px, at 300ppi, Coreldraw will present you a document which is 1" X 1", if you view it in inches.  This is logical.  Illustrator will present you a document which is 4.17"  X  4.17", which is incorrect.

Illustrator assumes that the user knows one of the basic rules of working with computer graphics: the ppi has relevance only when you are working with physical measurement units, like inches or mm. If you're working in pixels, this means you're creating graphics for screen, where a pixel will always be a pixel no matter what the ppi of your image is. A "300px X 300px, at 300ppi" graphic is a semantical nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/6/2019 at 8:17 PM, Alfred said:

Without seeing the files, a difference in the document DPIs does seem the likeliest explanation.

6 hours ago, Fixx said:

If Designer has document set up in physical units (mm or inches), copying stuff from it should keep dimensions in such units. It is certainly a bug if it does not.

Agree with Fixx. vector objects are not related to pixels (dpi), so the size should not change when copying to a document with a different dpi.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, tudor said:

Illustrator assumes that the user knows one of the basic rules of working with computer graphics: the ppi has relevance only when you are working with physical measurement units, like inches or mm. If you're working in pixels, this means you're creating graphics for screen, where a pixel will always be a pixel no matter what the ppi of your image is. A "300px X 300px, at 300ppi" graphic is a semantical nonsense.

Speaking of nonsense.  Your whole comment makes the assumption that anyone working with pixels will only present the image on a screen. Coreldraw and Illustrator are handling this in different ways.  According to you, Corel has no idea what they're doing, after 30 years of doing it.  But I'm sure you know better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

According to you, Corel has no idea what they're doing, after 30 years of doing it.  But I'm sure you know better.

Nope. The software has to be flexible enough to let the user work as desired. The user has to be smart enough to understand the basic rules of working with units of measurement in graphic design, according to the final output.

Share this post


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

Nope. The software has to be flexible enough to let the user work as desired. The user has to be smart enough to understand the basic rules of working with units of measurement in graphic design, according to the final output.

Flexible enough to let the user work as desired?  Sounds great.  In Coreldraw, You can create a document which is 300px x 300px, which is also exactly 1inch if I change the measurements to inches.  If I press print, I get a 1 inch image.  I can also make it any other physical size directly in Coreldraw while still being 300px. 

In Illustrator, this same 300px document is about 4 inches. Nothing you can do can make it 1inch or any other size except changing changing the pixel size.  If you press print, you get a 4 inch document.  If you export it to a jpeg, you get a 4 inch document.  If you open it in Photoshop, it's 4 inches. 

Your problem is the same as most.  You're happily making assumptions about things that you don't know.  Here you continue making dumb assumptions about the final output.  The final output may be multiple destinations.  Coreldraw seems to be accommodating this.  Adobe Illustrator seems to not be accommodating this.  Of course, I can resolve this issue, once I get into Photoshop, but not within Illustrator and that's the point.  Please respond after you've tried it for yourself.  The guessing and assuming is not useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, it's not the fault of the software if you like to mix print and screen measurement units like they're the same thing. They are not.

29 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

In Illustrator, this same 300px document is about 4 inches.

4.1666 inches, more precisely, which is 300px divided by 72 ppi. The default ppi value of screens since the beginning of time.

38 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

Nothing you can do can make it 1inch or any other size except changing changing the pixel size.

Really? Change units to inches and resize the artboard to 1"x1". Export it at 300 ppi and you'll get your 300px file if so you wish.

43 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

Here you continue making dumb assumptions about the final output.  The final output may be multiple destinations.  Coreldraw seems to be accommodating this.  Adobe Illustrator seems to not be accommodating this.

 

I've no idea how CorelDraw works because I stopped using it a long time ago. Illustrator doesn't make assumptions or decisions for you. It is made for people who know what they're doing.

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

×

Important Information

These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.