Share Your Thoughts

Hey, can anyone explain the reason, why it is not possible to add dev resource in branches? It seems to be only available in the master, which feels weird. More context: In our case working with branches means the work that is reviewed before a merge must be complete so adding the correct dev resources is very likely part of review processes but the way its currently provided is for unknown reasons prohibited. Is that a technical limitation? Why is this the case? The fix would just be to add the plus button while working in branches, someone must have actively removed it to be unavailable in branches?

UI3 erased my muscle memory on where to go to adjust a layer’s position and layout properties. They now appear at different positions depending on what type of element I’ve selected. E.g. a component with a lot of properties will cause the position and layout sections to be completely scrolled off the bottom of the panel. This adds up to cumulative slow downs and increased cognitive load while adjusting these parameters across many layers quickly. And there is no good way to restore this muscle memory because the panels are always in a different position. Would love to see these moved back to the top or a way to reorder the panels via settings or something… Thanks!

I really appreciate the new Slide Deck feature – it's a great addition! However, I noticed that it's missing a lot of the editable controls that are essential for creating polished decks. For example: It's hard to find where to adjust spacing in auto layout – I don’t see the usual controls. When adding lists, it automatically applies bullet points, but I couldn’t find an option to switch to numbered lists Maybe I missed something, but it’s genuinely hard to find where to make these edits – the right-side panel feels quite different from what we’re used to in design files.

Hi, I want to be able to create master slides for my organisations Figma Slides template. But I can’t find a way to do this. When will this feature be added?

The top bar, which takes up about 75px, was a significant shift compared to the new design. The canvas increased by only 40px, but it took up 120px at the bottom to accommodate the tool being moved there. This change created a gap: previously, we needed 300px to access the tools and layers, but now it’s around 1650px, and that’s being conservative.Shortcuts are helpful, but removing the top bar to increase canvas size doesn't solve the core issue. Moving the tool to the bottom is like reclaiming land from an island. Having the tool at the top allows for more flexibility, with unlimited nesting possibilities on either side, without being constrained by limited bottom space. Additionally, assets in the left panel with the option to expand are far more intuitive than horizontal popups, which interrupt the workflow and complicate the task.Another issue that isn’t directly related to UI3: the image editor toggles. Why can’t the values be displayed so we can see exactly how much they've been

I’m trying to understand if there’s any way to limit how many features are available to users on FigJam. I understand how to lock things onto the board, but is there any way to stop users from utilizing the many options? I’m an educator trying to see if it’s a tool that can work for me. My two classes where I’ve tried it have been chaos. Kids are either really distracted by the sheer volume of stuff available to them or they’re overwhelmed by the sensory input of way too much stuff. It’s like holding class in a carnival. I’d love to be able to pick and choose which things they can do. They don’t really need stickers. And stamps. And reactions. And to play music. And to make random polls pop up. And so forth. I might use those things all sometimes, but I’d love to limit the menu of what they can do.

I have encountered this so many times that I am wondering if there is anything that can be done. When you use a frame with an effect like a drop shadow applied within another frame, the main frame cuts off the shadows unless you add padding. If you then add padding to the main frame, the components inside falls out of the grid. I don’t know a solve but it would be great if the frames did not cut off any components with effects like a drop shadow.

When using FigJam to create UML diagrams, I’m often adding “Yes” or “No” labels to the arrows coming off of the decision diamond shapes. For ease of reading, I move these labels off their default positioning at the connector midpoint to a location on the connector near its origin where attached to the decision diamond shape. The issue is that this appears to be anchoring this text to the connector at a point relative to the length of the connector. If the connector is moved, extended or shortened, the text label also shifts and sometimes this shift is dramatic when the connector is lengthened to another part of the diagram.Connector labels positioned close to decision shape when connectors are short  Connector labels relatively positioned but further away when connectors are long The ideal behavior IMO would be for text anchored on the connector to be locked to an absolute distance from the nearest connector end point. Only when anchored to the midpoint, with a clear snap, would the te

I have a Color Style applied as a Fill on an object. If I want to temporarily toggle that fill, my only option is to ‘Detach Style’ or remove the style entirely. Then I’d have to scroll through my list of styles and find which one was applied to add it again. Instead, I want to keep the style intact but just temporarily be able to toggle it’s visibility. When a regular colour is added as a Fill, on the other hand, there is an eye icon to toggle visibility of that fill. It’s helpful to be able to quickly preview how something looks with or without a background, for example. I feel like this functionality discourages the use of Color Styles, which is counter productive. Sure, it’s minor, but it’d speed up my workflow and encourage wider adoption of Styles. Am I overlooking something, or trying to use styles in the wrong way? Anyone else stumbled on this before?

To edit a comment we click on the comment first, then three dots and finally “Edit” option. The only option displayed is edit so how would it be removing three dots and directly displaying edit option?

I use 96DPI as default to create a window-based app. Figma is based on 72DPI, so the size looks broken when I upload the image.DPI conversion is desperately needed.

Thanks for making Annotations available outside of Developer Mode! However, there’s no quick way to hide them, which can be a bit frustrating. When there are a lot of annotations, they tend to clutter the layout and make it harder to navigate.

Since the last update, I cannot see the green numbers (see the attachment) in Design mode. These green numbers are convenient for me to know how many annotations are there for a particular screen. I wonder if others also lost these green numbers since the last update, or if my loss is due to my Figma settings somewhere.

Figmaの左のレイヤーを選択中の色を変更したいのですが、何か方法はありますでしょうか？

A small issue, but would love a quick way to reset my frame naming conventions back from 1, or if i bring a frame from another file and it’s frame 300 for example, it comes into my project and resets it to the numbering of my file. Somehow we’ve managed to get to frame 1293033 and it drives me up the wall that it just keeps getting higher and higher. 

For some interactions, I need a component that can nest an instance of their own component so that a part of the interaction can be repeated multiple times recursively. This request also relates to this post: How to make recursive nested components? As an example, prototyping a text field that creates a new textfield below the one you type. Currently, I am faking it by creating one component that has all the states of the textfield. Then, I have multiple components that essentially have an instance of the empty textfield and the next state of the textfield including a new empty one. The new empty one is though a component of the next instance and so on. This bypasses the recursion restriction but it does not scale (as it is limited by the amount of extra components) and is hard to maintain. If I want to make changes, I need to update many components. If recursion was allowed, one component would be enough as I could just put an instance of the variant within the same component. This w

Just switched to UI3 and everything feels so foreign. Vague icons, lower contrast, confusing UX on old features, weird placement of things...I could go on…I used to be an expert with auto layout and now it’s just a nightmare to use...Please let us stay on UI2...

The “other” slides (those not displaying to the audience) should be larger in the speaker mode. Using it for interviews, it becomes really difficult to see the content of the next slides – what question / slide is next, when a specific question / slide sits in the deck. 

Not sure why this was removed or moved, but my team and I can no longer link directly to a certain section within a page. There is also no longer a check box within the share settings allowing up to link to a section.

I notice in new UI3 there are extra space was stolen what make negative space works less effectively. This mean it is difficult to scan any icons, fonts, items, categories on the panels. Problem - extra paddings makes lower scannability and overloads space.Solution - get rid of extra paddings - UI2 has no problem such like that. Use hover to display padding and make no margin between objects. 

I notice one similar problem related to the reason why I migrated to Figma. Becouse it is a simple and intuitively clear interface to use. Why Im not happy with new UI3? Because I feel like changes was made just for changes (simple example is the target icon or some wording) It was the best application ever made for designers and for developers. Position ≠ absolute but “ignore auto layout” - it makes us designers far from devs. I wish we could talk on the same language.I suspect that it was made to get us used to it because some new grand merger will be coming soon. Summary - it became more complicated and misleading. I spend much more time getting used to it now than in 2018. (I understand a lot of features were added)For me, it is still changes for changes, they are solving nothing - only add time to thing where should I find it and why the hell is it here. New features could be realised in UI2 successfully.The better idea would be to make user tests. 

Ever since the release of UI3, Figma has not been the same. Pages load slower, the canvas is way laggier, multi-selecting multiple child components make the whole program nearly non-functional, and the endless loading wheel has become my new best friend. I’m not sure where else put this other than here.I get new features are new and exciting, but using figma has actively slowed me down in the last year simply by not having the performance it had prior to UI3 release. My whole design team is feeling the same way I am and we’re becoming increasingly less pleased to be paying thousands of dollars a year for this program if it continues on this path.I can’t attach videos here unfortunately, but I’ll be more than happy to share examples of issues I’m running into if any mod/Figma employee would like to chat further.

When you go to use a variable in the design panel, you are able to see both the variable name and its value in the current mode. As a design system manager, I also want to see the value of aliased variables in the variables interface — both when selecting the aliased variable and once the alias has already been assigned.

How do you lke this book? 

Problem: Currently, you can only have 1 plugin at a time. Having the ability to access multiple plugins like Unsplash, Content Reel, etc… would make it so much quicker when filling in dummy content or about a million other tasks. I would imagine the same type of system that Adobe integrates makes the most sense. This way you could expand/collapse plugins from the right sidebar by clicking on their icon. They could anchor like seen below. Are there any major reasons why this is not a part of the current software?