>>455375
Do you collab?
Are you freelancer?

What sort of clientele do you have? If you've only been submitting the PNG files then it doesn't matter what software you use. It's just a matter of relearning the UI.
Me, I usually submit the full stack with the .psd/.ai/.eps AND documentation, plus the commercial printers I work with refuse to accept anything that wasn't made in Indesign.

>>455376
I'm a hobbyist. At the moment. Dicked around in GIMP with the PhotoGIMP plugin and had fun making memes and shit, but I noticed that Adobe shit the bed so maybe Affinity will get a huge boost and lots of tutorials for Affinity would be made and I'm too much of a bitch to pirate software.

So if I really sink my teeth into graphic design and consider buying software Affinity might be it.

>>455375
I've been using Affinity for my personal photos for a while now, switched because Adobe software wanted a constant internet connection + I'm not paying for a subscription license.

Affinity Photo is great (beats PS at everything except AI bullshit like genfill and subjectselect) but it's a fucking memory hog at least on MacOS. Will gladly chew through multiple GB RAM with 2 RAWs open.

Affinity Designer is the best thing ever made. Even better than Illustrator. Extremely smooth transition.

>>455375
never heard of it

>>455376
what a weird response. png files? whos asking for png files anywhere? the fuck is a 'full stack"? what printer cares about your software if you can deliver what they can print?

>>455435
i imagine any image/pixel software might groan with some big raws open until you save it as something smaller.

Can affinity designer do what indesign does?

>>455437
Affinity Publisher is their Indesign alternative. The way it handles layers is far superior to Indesign, but as >>455376 said faggot printers and other design companes have stockholm syndrome.

>>455441
fuk is wrong with you? never had a printer groan over getting a hi rez pdf

>>455441
How seamless is exporting files from Designer > Photo > Publisher?

>>455444
You have to give clients original files.

>>455446
It's the same window and settings for each app. Loads of quality options and filetypes you can configure and you can save presets.

>>455448
Just noticed there's a 7 week free trial. Gonna try this bitch.

>>455448
ive designed and prep'ed and printed a number of books and i dont kow what youre talking about

>>455464
Not saying it applied to everyone. Clients have templates / fonts / everything else all wrapped up in the Adobe ecosystem, so do printers. If you have no issues then good luck to you.

>>455466
Yeah I'm from east Asia and the boomers here are really picky. I suppose someone working for the free market in the west would have a different experience. But the industry here is very standardized, conformist, and traditional.
If they had been doing X job using Y method for 20+ years, a new player coming in submitting Z for printing would be frowned upon, inf not straight up rejected.

>>455436
>what printer cares about your software if you can deliver what they can print?

proper ones? We have to use Quark (cheap boss) and like 8 different steps afterwards so the printer can accept our magazine pdfs because everything is set up for indesign on their side

>>455495
thats just fucking weird
what 8 steps do you need to do?

perhaps your printer ISNT a proper one?

>>455495
Isn't Quark like expensive? I've always associated it with old prestige design firms, but maybe my perceptions are wrong

>>455496
8 steps was a comedic hyperbole but; we need special settings .esp for the images and graphics, then use those in Quark, then export to the pages to another kind of .eps then turn them into a specific .pdf

>>455499
he already bought it so it doesn't matter that id would only cost x/month, because why use a better software if he already paid for another one.

>inb4 why didn't i object
this happend before my time with the company

>>455500
forgot to mention that we can't even use the 2017 version of Quark because it's a piece shit software and we have to use a 25 years old version, with a dedicated PC running Windows 95 just for this reason.

>>455500
>>455501
QXP 4? That's just too wild for me, but my old design firm was still using MS office 2007 until I quit in 2017, so there's that. Old people I swear

>>455503
either 4 or 5. but yeah, avarage age at the company is around 50. The other editor uses Ps 6 because, even though we have a never one "he likes to do things manually".
Which translates into absolute bonkers workflows like not using masks, groups, hell the layers are just a huge unorganised mess, no naming, no logical structuring, and half of them are empty text layers because he accidentally created one.

>>455437
For clarification I've also had issues with multiple rasters, even <1mb JPEGs, opening about 8 and I'm already running out of application memory.

>>455375
any tutorial makers that can get me up to speed with the Affinity?

>>455375
I like it, I mostly use Affinity Design and compared to Illustato I can get the same results with no major extra effort. Adobe has more flashy tools but not the end of the world since all that can be done in other ways. I guess the AI shit is missing but you don't really need that unless you're a hack
The major problem is getting familiar with the UI and how certain features work compared to Adobe, but nothing big, you'll get used to it.
I luckily managed to convice my boss to start using Affinity since I do all of my freelance stuff in Affinity.

>>456415
Pretty much everything is where you expect it to be in Photoshop. You can even go through tutorials for Photoshop with very little adjustment.

>>455380
For personal work use whatever you want, but if you are planning to get a job in the industry, they are going to expect Adobe experience.

You do you, but just something to consider as you develop your skills.

>>455501
wouldn't a virtual machine running windong98SE or whatever be more practical at that point?

retroomers will grab up all the remaining bottom of the barrel 90s hardware and the rest will be consumed by leaking capacitors

It seems Adobe fucked up badly, and Affinity is trying to capitalize on it. I activated a 170 (or was it 180?) free trial. Those guys are really trying. Now all they need is a documentation page like Blender does and things can really take off.

>>456685
Really? What version of Photoshop is most likely to allow for this just for the sake of making things easier for me?

Designer has satisfied my small business needs. Put your files on a cloud service (ideally self-hosted) and you can move between machines effortlessly since they support Windows, Mac, and even iPad.

Use Krita.

got you op

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A77f5pLnJlc

>>455375
I've succesfully migrated from adobe to affinity in pretty much every front, except indesign. Mainly because, yep, boomer printers love indesign and jate using a High res pdf to print. Other than that, fuck adobe all the way to hell.

>>457737
my offset printer prefers not to use pdfs and actually has a disclaimer in their contract stating that they cannot guarantee quality from a pdf.
and they arent boomers.

>>457740
What's wrong with pdfs.

>>457743
i didnt ask.

>>457746
but, my guess might be ensuring high quality images and maybe something about how the pages/signatures get laid out and folded

It's pretty good

It's pretty good

There's no presentation mode in Affinity Publisher (like crtl+shift+W in InDesign), it's absolutely over.

>>455375
Been using it for two years doing texture work for vidya game development. Only have a handful of things that I miss from Photoshop.

Affinity Photo does not have an equivalent Save for Web feature like Photoshop does. You can do some kind of "web dither" Floyd-Steinberg with no fine-tuning, but that's it. If you like doing pixel art or web-conscious work, you'll miss it in Affinity Photo. You also cannot edit videos or GIFs as you would in PS. Last thing I miss is the Generate Normal Map feature in older versions of Photoshop.

I've converted friends and peers to use Affinity Photo, though, for how good it is and how shitty Adobe is. I definitely recommend it, Anon.

>>456851
It's already got it, Anon. Offline, too.

>>455375
Apparently, I just got hired to work for a publisher in my country because I mentioned le Affinity.

I was just told they are tired of Adobe fucking with them and have been planning to move from InDesign because performance issues. So when I mentioned that I use Affinity, they got so excited(realizing now I should have asked for more money).

I started off with Inkscape for vector graphics and got used to how easier it dealt with nodes(aka "anchor points"), so switching to Affinity was so much easier because of that similarity. Started with Affinity Publisher because InDesign was just annoying to use, got into Designer this year, and now venturing into Photos.

I just hate how Adobe apps hide all the cool things deep inside menus needing extra clicks to access. In a nutshell, Affinity has a much better and more modern UI.

I'm still attached to Photoshop because of Content-Aware Fill and Selection and a few features here and there. But getting used to Affinity Photo still. And besides the AI stuff, I'm struggling to find something you can't do(arguably quicker) that Photoshop does.

Realized that almost all the cool things Photoshop hides from you are just "Tools" in Photo, so my toolbar looks like this.

>>458853
Congrats. In which country?