MGBJAY
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MGBJAY
-
-
It is for this reason ... that I as a fully paid owner and past user ... and fully enthusiastic supporter of the cool abilities of Serif Affinity software ... have gone back to Lightroom.
No asset management - no need to double my workload.
Jay
-
On 12/11/2018 at 12:41 PM, CreativApartheid said:
I voted "no" as I currently use XnView MP to view and organise my files. It has built in support / thumbnail support for almost any file you can think of (including Affinity files) and I have been using it for years ...
If you've never heard of XnView MP, you can find it here: https://www.xnview.com/
PS: IMHO
I appreciate your response, however, uploading & displaying "place holders" is not the same as, nor is it "evidence" of the ability you claim for XNVIEW.
Images displaying actual filename ... now that's evidence, i.e., "imageofsomething.afphoto"
Sorry for my skepticism, but I've been through the experience mill on this and have not yet discovered anything that actually functions in the way it is advertised absent associated "work-arounds", and I have had it with "work-arounds". They take up too much time in the middle of a workflow, and they're not reliable.
Your response is appreciated.
SERIF just needs to get off its butt, and respond to its customer base. Frankly, they've caused this lack and they ought to bring the solution to it. Their customer base deserves it.
MGBJAY
... SORRY for this late response, however, I have just visited the XNVIEW site, and the listed supported image file formats DOES NOT include *.AFPHOTO file support. It does not list such files under the SERIF format either, which is what I was hoping for, since the first was not listed.
Unless you can validate that XNVIEW supports the AFPHOTO format, your post requires an update, or information illustrating the fact that it does.
Current (12 MAR 2019 @ 2306HOURS) list posted at the XNVIEW site for supported file formats:
https://www.xnview.com/en/xnviewmp/#formats
MGBJAY
-
On 12/11/2018 at 12:41 PM, CreativApartheid said:
I voted "no" as I currently use XnView MP to view and organise my files. It has built in support / thumbnail support for almost any file you can think of (including Affinity files) and I have been using it for years ...
If you've never heard of XnView MP, you can find it here: https://www.xnview.com/
PS: IMHO
... SORRY for this late response, however, I have just visited the XNVIEW site, and the listed supported image file formats DOES NOT include *.AFPHOTO file support. It does not list such files under the SERIF format either, which is what I was hoping for, since the first was not listed.
Unless you can validate that XNVIEW supports the AFPHOTO format, your post requires an update, or information illustrating the fact that it does.
Current (12 MAR 2019 @ 2306HOURS) list posted at the XNVIEW site for supported file formats:
https://www.xnview.com/en/xnviewmp/#formats
MGBJAY
-
On 3/8/2019 at 5:59 AM, AiDon said:
Why don't you look at Adobe Bridge that is free ...
... because NONE of them have the ability to read the AFFINITY proprietary file format. Affinity has no intention of releasing that format information either. BRIDGE is an OK image manager, AND it can read PS layer format without any issues. Most, if not all other DAM softwares DO NOT read the Affinity file format, and as a result the end-user sees the AFFINITY LOGO in place of their image after processing in AFPHOTO. BRIDGE DOES NOT read AFFINITY file format. It returns a large pink Affinity Logo instead of the image that was just processed.
NOT OK.
SERIF, either release the information and make it available so that AFPHOTO processed images can be read by other softwares (DAM particularly) or say goodbye.
-
On 3/11/2019 at 10:23 AM, v_kyr said:
Download the Nikon NEF codec and NRW codec for Windows from the Nikon software download website, install those and afterwards IrfanView is still a fast responder for those RAW formats. - Beside that there are a bunch of photo managers etc. just a short list of some common is shown for example here. However the Net is full of those.
Unfortunately ... due to the "proprietary" nature of the AFFINITY file format, NONE of the free applications you've mentioned, nor many of the available "pay-for-play" applications available, and many of which are very capable, DO NOT read the Affinity file format natively and are therefore not really suitable choices.
SERIF really needs to step up to the plate and get their version of some form of DAM software published already. It is their lack of such that is forcing me to return to PHOTOSHOP 6 and LIGHTROOM 5.5.
Sure, they're a bit dated, but the quality of image enhancement is still high-quality and my need for the ability to manage a large library of images demands my attention in a format that I can rely on, and work with on a daily basis, without adding to an already busy workload.
If you want the base to stay with you SERIF, get on the ball and get the software released already. The original $40.00 it cost to switch to AFFINITY is not enough to not abandon it in favour of having a solution that just works, end to end.
SERIF ... WE ARE TIRED OF WAITING!
-
I am curious to know if there are many of you experienced AP users that begin your RAW image editing in the DEVELOP persona ... and often find no need to go any further into the software for additional enhancements.
Also: Wouldn't it be useful if whilst in the DEVELOP persona - it'd be possible to have the ability to SAVE an image "under development" without having to hit the DEVELOP button and as a result of having to stop at some point for whatever reason, thereby lose your steps up to the point where you have to stop? In other words - edit an image in develop up to a point, then stop right where you are and save it ... then come back tomorrow and pick up right where you left off, with everything in place?
If this is already possible, please enlighten me and accept my apology for entirely missing how to do that.
MGBJAY
-
I will convert a few of my CR2 images and will share my experience as soon as I do that.
Not certain that I would convert all of them at this point. You are gutsy to do that all at once.
MGBJAY
-
14 hours ago, v_kyr said:
Good Morning IanSG ... Thanks for the answer. I will be using ADOBE DNG. I thought I would give it a try and see what all the scuttlebut was all about. I am currently using mostly with my CANON EOS 5D. Yes, the original from back in 2007 I believe. It has been a versatile tool, and I hope to get a good number of years out of it still.
I prefer the native CR2 file format that it produces, and am simply curious about the DNG format, and want to see how it functions.
Again, Thanks.
MGBJAY
-
Hmmm. Now that may be the most informative bit of information this entire thread has produced to date.
I will try that right now.
Thanks
-
-
Is it possible to EXPORT before I hit the DEVELOP button? I am not wanting to try this before I try to get an answer because of the time that I have spent getting this image right where I want it ... and it is right now. Just trying to discover an option ... if one is available. And I am trying to avoid "just trying it" and screw all this work up.
-
OK ... I've tried to find this answer to no specific avail ... If I choose to convert a few of my CR2 RAW images to the DNG format, will I then be able to open them into APHOTO and edit to my hearts content? I have been unable to find a straight answer to that question?
The longer that I use APHOTO, the more I find questions that I have had answers for using PS and LR ... but not so much here.
MGBJAY
-
... well saving all those presets absent the ability to actually "name" each one of them goes back to another query I posted earlier regarding "overlay brush" adjustments and not being able to name any of those. Besides that - there then follows the need to actually catalogue all of those presets which becomes another job and useless for using on another image because each image is rather different in the way each may employ a preset created for another image.
And if I understand what I have read heretofore ... choosing to go back into the DEVELOP PERSONA once committing develop ... the image that opens is "stuck" with the adjustments made in the previous version before making it an *.afphoto image - which then is the image frozen with those adjustments and unable to take them back to their original neutral choices, In other words ... one must use the newly DEVELOPed image as the baseline from which to start a new version of the same image ,,, which by definition is not the same image, but the adjusted one - leaving as I said - beginning all over with the original CR2 RAW image absent the favour of having the adjustment choices applied to the image previously DEVELOPed.
I am NOT trying to make this any more complicated than it needs to be ... but it does take a few words to be clear when trying to exactly explain what I am after.
Appreciative of (your) patience.
MGBJAY
-
If I have an image that I have processed in the Develop Persona and want to save the way that it is without hitting the DEVELOP button, is it possible to do that?
The reason behind my asking this is because I want the image the way that it is right now, and then I want to make a few more tweaks to it ... and save it that way as well without having to start all over again from the beginning ... and without losing all the adjustments that I have in the current image.
Any thoughts or workarounds available to do this , or am I stuch with hitting DEVELOP and then EXPORTING to a file type and saving and then re-opening the *.afphoto image and starting all over with that version of the image ... or instead going back the the original CR2 RAW image and re-creating the entire process from DEVELOP all over again?
I hope this is a clear question ... and thanks for whatever input might follow.
MGBJAY
-
I am sure that this may have been mentioned to date, though I've not seen it.
As has been mentioned regarding other "it would be nice if ..." issues, I thought it would be helpful and quite useful if users had the ability to name each BRUSH OVERLAY applied to an image during the DEVELOP PERSONA process.
In a recent image, I ran into this disadvantage full force with the experience of having four such overlays, yet was unable to identify which on I was looking to delete. Sure ... it can be done with some difficulty and clunky "hit and miss" efforts, but why not make the process a bit more streamlined with the advantage of being able to identify such "layers" by giving each its own name. Given the effort it takes to get the exact appearance one is striving for already consumes focus ... alleviating the "clunkiness" of such a task would be welcome.
Of course, if this naming solution could be applied to every layer one might incorporate in the editing or creation of any image during any process and under each "Persona" would be equally as helpful.
MGBJAY
-
PSD format, as well as others, are available to be opened and utilized by many different software's. A few individual elements may in fact be unavailable, but the overall format can be easily read by other programs.
And while I appreciate your responding ... making the format available is what gives "creators" the ability to freely access their information across platforms. Simply because one chooses to spend "their" money on a software, oughtn't harness one into such forever ... and the work performed in that software should remain portable. The software is only a tool, not the creative force employing the tool. The results should be available irrespective of the tool used to create it.
A baker can put the ingredients for a devil's food cake all together and mix it all up, according to that baker's recipe ... and then place that mixture into any oven and produce the result. The oven has no say so over the recipe. Only the amount of heat. And "every oven" ... irrespective of the manufacturer can produce the necessary heat to get the job done.
The software is merely producing the heat ... not the content. The baker can, at his whim, take that recipe and produce the result in any properly functioning oven.
Perhaps, however, I am in possession of a ruggedly stubborn mindset.
MGBJAY
-
Good Morning ...
... while this is not exactly "the" issue being discussed in this thread, it is something that I have been considering as a new AFFINITY user.
Considering the speed with which technology gives rise to change in our time, something that I have begun to wonder about is the "long-term" stability of the SERIF platform with regard to future access to our images that have been saved in the "*.afphoto" proprietary format. This file format cannot be read by any other reader other than itself, and to the degree that I have been able to validate what I am about to say, SERIF is not making their information available to any developers so that they can incorporate the ability to open images in "*.afphoto" format by any other software than that which SERIF creates. This is the reason that the "*.dng" file format was designed, and which may or not be one solution to address this concern.
I find it somewhat unsettling that SERIF chooses to keep this information to themselves, thereby disallowing users any options to access their files by other image editing software.
I just ran into this issue AFTER choosing to use AF when I imported a number of images into both ADOBE BRIDGE and photools.com DAM software IMATCH. Neither of these programs can open the afphoto formatted images. In that situation all that is available is the APHOTO LOGO image. It has the undesirable side effect of making one feel as though having chosen to use AF PHOTO, corrals one into the SERIF sphere, and from that point forward one must either use them or lose the ability to access to those images and the information contained therein.
I cannot imagine that I am the only one that has thought about this issue.
While "operating systems" may understandably have specific reasons for proprietary code formats, extending that to include image editors is, in my opinion not a great incentive.
Just a thought from a new user. Any response is welcome. Especially if I am dead-wrong in my thinking on this issue.
MGBJAY
-
-
Is there any follow-up on this question?
-
Firstly, Thanks for the answer, and my apologies for sounding a bit thick here, but ...
... I am still not understanding the results of either choice here. As far as I am concerned, I've already made the changes to the image that I wanted to. I then saved that image as BOTH an *.afphoto image AND a HQ *.jpeg image ... with my understanding that the ORIGINAL image remains as it was before ANY editing applied to it, and remains unchanged as the RAW image it began as ... and that is what I thought was the way this worked.
Why am I yet again asked whether or not I want to save it yet again, and if I choose to save it again ... which image is then changed?
-
... "the document is about to change, do you want to save your changes?"
What I am not understanding is this - Once that I have completed editing an image and have saved it as an *.afphoto image after leaving the DEVELOP persona ... and then EXPORT the aforementioned edited image, and saved that as a HQ ".jpeg" image ... when I then try to "CLOSE" or "X" out of the image, I get the dialogue box asking me whether I want to save the image or not (see attached clip) - I find this very confusing as I thought that I have already saved it twice, as stated.
If I choose either YES or NO ... what are the results of those BOTH of those choices upon closing that image?
-
When using the OVERLAY PAINT TOOL ... or any tool which would allow the creation of any mask in an image - either in DEVELOP or PHOTO persona ... I have noticed that while creating the mask that the density is not entirely always "even" in its coverage without going over it repeatedly.
The question I have is this: Does the density of the mask - in other words ... the solid-ness of the color red ... have any actual effect on the process on the underlying image when it is processed? My habit up to now is to paint and repaint until the mask has a solid and even ruby color in the area to which I am applying the mask. This takes considerable time, and it would be nice to discover that this may not be necessary ... IF the density of the mask is irrelevant ... and instead its mere presence is sufficient for the effect.
Thanks to anyone that may have an answer.
MGBJAY
[Poll] Do you need a DAM? And what should it be like?
in Feedback for Affinity Photo V1 on Desktop
Posted
"It is not entirely fair from [sic] your company to not give your customers information on whether you are preparing a program that will replace the Adobe Lightroom."
"tomkuklik" makes the single most relevant point around which this multiple year(s) long thread should revolve.
As the "consumers" that provide this company [AF] with its income stream ... and without which they would be unable to remain viable ... we deserve nothing less.
Speaking as one of the myriad "consumers", and as outstanding as AF Photo truly is ... I'll not return until this issue is completely addressed. and/or the solution is released.