Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Affinity Studio now free

    (www.affinity.studio)
    1199 points dagmx | 12 comments | 30 Oct 25 15:54 UTC | HN request time: 0.3s | source | bottom
    Show context
    pentagrama ◴[30 Oct 25 17:21 UTC] No.45762521[source]▶
    I used Affinity for several years, so to add some background here:

    Serif is the company that originally built this software.

    --------

    2014–2024

    Serif developed the Affinity suite, a collection of three independent desktop apps sold with a one-time payment model:

    - Affinity Designer: vector graphic design (Adobe Illustrator equivalent)

    - Affinity Photo: digital image editing (Adobe Photoshop equivalent)

    - Affinity Publisher: print and layout design (Adobe InDesign equivalent)

    They were solid, professional tools without subscriptions like Adobe, a big reason why many designers loved them.

    -------

    2024

    Canva acquired Serif.

    -------

    2025 (today)

    The product has been relaunched. The three apps are now merged into a single app, simply called Affinity, and it follows a freemium model.

    From what I’ve tested, you need a Canva account to download and open the app (you can opt out of some telemetry during setup).

    The new app has four tabs:

    - Vector: formerly Affinity Designer

    - Pixel: formerly Affinity Photo

    - Layout: formerly Affinity Publisher

    - Canva AI: a new, paid AI-powered section

    Screenshot https://imgur.com/a/h1S6fcK

    Hope can help!

    replies(16): >>45762570 #>>45763276 #>>45763555 #>>45763695 #>>45763766 #>>45763807 #>>45764042 #>>45764560 #>>45765389 #>>45765538 #>>45765942 #>>45767528 #>>45769728 #>>45769747 #>>45770368 #>>45770565 #
    1. bovermyer ◴[30 Oct 25 19:12 UTC] No.45764042[source]▶
    Thank you for the context. I was an Affinity Suite user for a long time after I dropped Adobe.

    I now use a mixture of GIMP, Krita, and Inkscape for visual things. I don't have a good alternative for InDesign - even Affinity Publisher wasn't one. Since my tabletop RPG business closed, I haven't had a need for a powerful layout application. I just use Typst or LaTeX for my personal projects that need a layout engine.

    replies(5): >>45764644 #>>45768451 #>>45769118 #>>45769398 #>>45769619 #
    2. smrtinsert ◴[30 Oct 25 20:02 UTC] No.45764644[source]▶
    How is modern gimp compared to ps or affinity wrt photo editing? Thinking things like color correction, shadow highlights, maybe generative fill?
    replies(3): >>45765281 #>>45765984 #>>45769021 #
    3. bovermyer ◴[30 Oct 25 20:59 UTC] No.45765281[source]▶
    I haven't used it for that purpose much, but it seems to lag pretty far behind Photoshop/Affinity Photo.
    4. pwatsonwailes ◴[30 Oct 25 22:08 UTC] No.45765984[source]▶
    Nowhere even close
    5. insane_dreamer ◴[31 Oct 25 04:31 UTC] No.45768451[source]▶
    > don't have a good alternative for InDesign

    There really is none, at least not that is comparable. InDesign is perhaps the one product where Adobe really shines.

    Aldus PageMaker and Quark XPress were worthy predecessors; I used both back in the day, but Adobe bought PageMaker and discontinued it. As for Quark, not sure what happened to them but they're not around anymore.

    replies(1): >>45769133 #
    6. mamonoleechi ◴[31 Oct 25 06:38 UTC] No.45769021[source]▶
    Color correction has been there for a long time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbU8FqTI-A4 but it was destructive (on the video it is gimp 2.10, but it was there before)

    They added non-destructive adjustment layers in gimp version 3.0 that can do the same

    7. mediumsmart ◴[31 Oct 25 07:02 UTC] No.45769118[source]▶
    I only needed InDesign to generate print files for some publishers and Scribus fills that gap for me.
    8. timc3 ◴[31 Oct 25 07:06 UTC] No.45769133[source]▶
    I used Quark XPress, and it really felt like it had a monopoly on the professional market in the UK at the time. It didn't really innovate, it was slow and clunky. Then InDesign came along and it was a breath of fresh air.

    Took many years for the transition to happen, but a lot of people in my circle wanted to see the back of Quark.

    replies(1): >>45770987 #
    9. smokel ◴[31 Oct 25 08:00 UTC] No.45769398[source]▶
    It doesn't come close to InDesign, but for some purposes Scribus [1] might be a viable alternative. I use it (in combination with a lot of Python scripting) to produce a printed diary every year.

    [1] https://www.scribus.net/

    10. spiffx ◴[31 Oct 25 08:34 UTC] No.45769619[source]▶
    After using InDesign CS6 for many years, (small-scale print/publishing), and trying Affinity Publisher for a time, I stumbled across VivaDesigner a while ago: https://viva.systems/designer/

    I don't know how it compares to QuarkXpress, but it's a pretty good commercial replacement for InDesign / Publisher in my personal opinion: it has decent typography, styles, and good options for PDF/X-4 export (with FOGRA39 as a destination etc). I've also successfully imported .idml

    They have various perpetual / subscription options (I'm on a commercial perpetual licence), a decent trial version, and they even do a Linux version, which works great for me on Mageia9.

    I've contacted their support a few times, and they've been very responsive, professional and helpful, which was a pleasant surprise.

    11. zvr ◴[31 Oct 25 11:49 UTC] No.45770987{3}[source]▶
    Don't forget FrameMaker, who was also very much in use for structured, long documentation.
    replies(1): >>45785527 #
    12. macintux ◴[01 Nov 25 21:23 UTC] No.45785527{4}[source]▶
    When I worked in desktop publishing (35 years ago, sigh) we used Ready, Set, Go extensively. Certainly seemed like a more intuitive UI than what little I've seen of Quark, at least.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready,_Set,_Go!_(software)