moovme

Does anyone happen know why a PDF document I saved out from CAD has come into AF Publisher with all the vector lines being rasterized? I have placed it in using the PDF Passthrough: Passthrough.

My apologies, yes I am aware that this can be done currently. It’s just a bit of a mess to achieve something that can be so easily overcome with an all-in lens flare tool where all the settings/modifications etc can achieved all in one place, as opposed to running through different settings and blend modes etc. after the fact. Hope that helps to clarify.

I hear you. But that’s kind of my point, I’m looking for a much more user friendly experience to implement a lens flare. For me, brushes don’t do it. But that’s me. They aren’t able to come close to the compactness and speed that an all-in one lens flare tool can offer, along with being able to make personalized modifications and a well sought after preview. Being able to add in pngs etc from the web would be a fantastic addition to the tool as well!

That’s a good question! I think because with a dedicated lens flare tool you can create hundreds of differentiations or modifications to existing flares all in the same tool, without ever having to leave it. Personally, I find the lens brushes very cumbersome and time consuming to select and get right. Especially the fact that you have to actually apply a brush to the canvas before you can see what it is and what it’s characteristics are. Then if it’s not right, you need to back track and start all over again. Does it not make sense to have an all-inclusive tool that can contain and customize all the lens flares in one place, and with canvas preview?.. I’m guessing you’re a fan of the brushes and that’s fine. I guess I’m just wanting a much more streamlined process with more ease of use.

Great reply. I understand where you’re coming from with the Photoshop lens flare tool. I’m curious to know if you’re happy with the segregated lens flare brushes from Affinity that don’t offer any preview on the canvas and make you back track on everything whilst trying to find the most appropriate flare? Which do you prefer, a fully encompassed and unified lens flare tool (with the extremely valuable preview option), or stumbling around with lens flare brushes and their inherent usability flaws? Just looking for some honest feedback. Perhaps I’m the only one who prefers the much more fluid and user friendly experience of a dedicated lens flare tool..

You’re very clearly confusing frustration for aggression. Please don’t. How many years has it been now that Affinity has deliberately not offered/included a basic lens flare tool that other software has as a built in fundamental? Since day 1. It would be nice if you could offer help as opposed to legalistic judgement. Many thanks. Continued requests (in the nicest way possible) are the hope for this absolutely ESSENTIAL feature in their photo-editing software that may one day find its way there... When they are blatantly ignored, that simply raises levels of frustration. After all Affinity asks it’s community to make software requests to improve the usability of the software. Am I seriously the only one who thinks this should be included under basic tools like EVERY other photo editing software out there? There’s a reason they all have it - and don’t use brushes to skirt it. Pretty please Affinity, add in a Lens Flare Tool for us all to enjoy.. Please.

Where is the lens flare tool? I mean seriously? Do you expect us to screw around wasting serious amounts of time with pathetic brushes when all you have to do is include a simple all-in-one lens flare tool for photo work? Whats going on at Affinity?

Does anyone know if AFININTY can extract / create vector information from a raster image liike ADOBE Illustrator can? It's a hugely useful tool but I'm not able to find a way to achieve it in the AFFINITY suite..

Actually the image is solely made up of fills, not lines. I need to extract LINES if possible. Illustrator had a way of creating vector lines from an image so am curious if AFFININTY has figured out a way to do the same thing?..

Sadly like a lot of my requests, they fall on deaf ears and are ignored. I’m happy you have found a suitable work around for your needs I never bothered to upgrade to V2 for the simple fact that Affinity simply doesn’t add in the required features / upgrades to mitigate the user frustration, and hence I use Affinity products less and less as a result. For the money they are good products, but for features that people actually want and need, ADOBE absolutely crushes them.

You have done everything you can to dance around putting in a real lens flare tool, which is what is desperately needed. I know brushes are there, but they are a totally sad and desperately inadequate answer to not adding in a much needed customizable lens flare tool.

If you don't give your customers what they want, you're going to lose their business. Especially when you just ignore their requests without the common decency of an answer. That's called cowardice.

Yes thankyou for the links. What Affinity Photo really needs is a fully customizable lens flare tool like Photoshop has. Wonderfully powerful, and extremely easy to use and customize. Brushes are a work-around at best, as they only offer one fixed solution per brush, and customizing them is not at all a fun task to undertake. Perhaps you could tell my WHY you refuse to add in a Lens Flare tool please??..

Just curious if the endless cries for a lens flare tool have actually been heard and acted upon. I've been waiting soooooooooooooo long for this essential feature, but all we get are worthless makeshift brushes. Is this done or least in the scope, or am I going to have to go back to using ADOBE, who actually listen to their customers???.. V2 is dead to me if it doesn't.

Yes, I am aware of the base resolution issue of the layout sheet onto which the images are placed. I had hoped that 300dpi was way more than enough for a tiny little page layout like the one I am using when I first set up the document. I feel like the issue is actually a combination of overcompensation via the default vector line enhancement render settings of the PDF viewers, AND also perhaps a scaling issue occuring as I reduce the image down to fit the page layout. Either way, there are very definite things that can, and should be done about this incorrect and highly undesirable effect.