Frank M.

Ok, interesting! Alright, I understand. I think this subject has now been fully explored with the many facts covered and viewpoints expressed. Thanks, again, for your replies, which have given insights and ideas to work with. I will now go on with AF, gaining more experience. Best regards, Frank

Yes, I know. However, there is still a quite strong relationship between a canvas selection and layers in the sense that one most often would use a layer as the basis of a selection and not select blindly on a canvas with no layers. In my case, it was the paintbrush selection tool used on an image layer. This worked as expected with areas of the same colour near the paintbrush being selected. Thus, there must be some default rasterisation or conversion taking place for that to work? This is also why it seems so compelling, logical and pleasing that the "Layer" -> "Duplicate Selection" should continue to work the same way, using those same pixels that were the basis of the paintbrush selection process to be copied to a new pixel layer. Right, I see that now. I experimented with a document with many pixel layers, clicking on several of these (selectin them) while also having an active "marching ants" selection on the canvas. In this case, the "Layer" -> "Duplicate Selection" function copies the layers and does not make a new pixel layer with pixels from the canvas selection. This is also a perfectly logical way for it to work. So I see now there are two possible and logical functions for this single menu-point. Perhaps the best would be a new, separate menu-point "Layer" -> "Duplicate Canvas Selection" (inactive when there is no canvas selection). This function would copy the pixels to a new pixel layer. I know you will now say that image layers may have many different resolutions and there may be other layer types :-). However, again, there must be a basic or default pixel conversion or interpretation that combines the layers to show the combined document in AF (when all layers are set visible or the document is exported as a PNG) as well as form the basis of, e.g., the paintbrush selection process. Would it be so wrong for that pixel representation to be used as a basis together with the canvas "marching ants" selection to form a new pixel layer? In any case, each menu-point would then have a clear, separate function, which is a good thing. Unless, of course, you now tell me that there are other functions for these that I do not know about as a new user. Thanks for taking the time to go over these things in AF. It has been very informative :-). /Frank

I can't seem to get rid of this duplicate post the forum created when I was answering another post! /Frank

Certainly, it is their decision. However, I am also sure that they follow the forum and sometimes base their UI choices on the viewpoints expressed by the users. , well yes, but could the journey be easier for other new users, that would not be such a bad thing, as long as it does not spoil anything for the power users. /Frank

Hi "R C-R", My real name is Frank. What is yours? I have been enjoying this exchange of viewpoints so far. It has uncovered some new information about the workings of image layers and Affinity in general, and we have stated our views. Unfortunately, I feel that your latest reply doesn't have so nice tone to it: There is no call for talking down to me as a new user. I just have a different perspective based on my current background and experience: When I initially encountered the problem, I had been following an online course in Affinity for a few hours, including trying out some working examples, and I was now handling a photo to test the capabilities of the selection tools and adjustments. Prior to this, my experience had been Paint and Gimp in Windows now and then for just minor image touch up, i.e. no experience with any other type of layers or an application like Affinity Design. My knowledge in regards to photo handling was thus very likely similar to others that do not have deep knowledge of photo and design applications. In the first couple of hours of the course, the instructor had been covering pixel and correction layers as well as a lot about selections, but only selections in the context of areas of pixels selected in an image. This is also the meaning of the word "selection" that a user of primarily simple photo apps like Paint most likely would find relevant in relation to a photo handling application, I think. In a wider context of applications in general, a selection can, of course, refer to many other things, e.g. an item one selects in a dropdown box. With this background, I now went to Google and found an image to try out some of the techniques taught, copied it to the clipboard and opened it in AF with "New from Clipboard". This gave me the image layer. I used the paintbrush selection tool to select an area on the canvas and wanted to create a new layer with that selection and therefore used the "Duplicate Selection" function. The whole image layer was copied instead of just the pixels visible inside the selection on the canvas. This did surprise me as it was a different result to all the example in the course that I had tried out, and I thus thought I had done something wrong in using the selection tool, so I repeated the process a few times to no avail. A post in the forum of the course gave no help -- they could not reproduce the effect (probably trying it out on a pixel layer). Eventually, I discovered that the layer in the photo document was of the type "Image" as opposed to other layers that I had been working with. Thus, I right-clicked on the layer and found the "Rasterize" function, which solved the problem. But frustration and waste of time could have been avoided. Yes, it is obvious that "selection" has a specific context. What is confusing is that when one has an active selection on the canvas, the context suddenly is different depending on whether there is an image layer or a pixel layer as the active one. I do understand that the "running ants" area is on the canvas itself and not in the pixel or image layer. I think it would be more logical that the context of "Duplicate Selection" should be the same for pixel and image layers. Furthermore, I think that many other users with a background of just simple photo apps and perhaps simple pixel layer handling would feel the same. You disagree, fair enough! But do tell me: If one had an active selection on the canvas based on an image layer (e.g. some area selected with the paintbrush tool) and the "Duplicate Selection" function were to just take the pixels from the image layer (as if it was a pixel layer) and copy these to a new pixel layer, would that spoil or disrupt any specific function or work process in AF? If not, I think that implementing this change of functionality might save many users time and frustration. For me, it is no longer an issue as I now understand how AF currently work in this regard. /Frank

From a UX perspective, this is exactly why the confusion arises for many (new) users, i.e the function "Duplicate Selection" most of the time means the area with a running border on the canvas as applied to a pixel layer. Even when one has a pixel layer in the photo document, this will also be the "document selection". But no one expects Affinity Photo, in this case, to suddenly decide to use the "document selection" as the selection to be duplicated. It is obvious for everyone that it must be the area selected on the canvas as applied to the pixel layer that is the "selection". Even if an image layer is the active "document selection", the choice of meaning of "selection" should not change. That is bad UX. A menu point should ideally be referring to just the same function or type of thing. In some cases, one may justify have two separate functions activated by the same menu point if it is extremely obvious which of the two functions is now activated, but it is usually not a good design choice. So, it would be much better if "Duplicate Selection" always referred to the area of the canvas selected as applied to the active layer, if that makes sense. If not, the menu-point should just be greyed out or there could be a pop-up dialogue box saying "No selection active". If one wants to duplicate the whole image layer, there is a separate and logical function for that: "Layer" -> "Duplicate". The most logical behaviour would be the same one that would happen if the image layer was just actively rasterized and so became a pixel layer. You mention that an image layer may hold an image of larger size than the canvas. This can also be the case for a pixel layer. I did a little experiment: First I opened a new document with a small pixel layer. I then opened a larger JPG file in Windows Paint, used Ctrl-A and Ctrl-C to get that whole selection of pixels into the clipboard. I then pasted this into my AF document, and AF created a new image layer. Because the new image layer had a higher resolution than the canvas, only part of it was shown. Regardless, I could still use e.g. the Paintbrush Selection tool to select an area on the canvas. If I were to now use the "Duplicate Selection" function, I would want those pixels that I see as selected to go into a new pixel layer -- just the same way it would work if I first rasterized the image layer with the function "Layer" -> "Rasterize". This is basic rasterization that performs no other scaling or transformation. Of course, one might then realise that one would want to do some transformation first, which is perfectly fine -- the same would be the case if applied an area selection to a pixel layer of higher resolution than the canvas. /Frank

@R C-R Never mind that Your detailed analysis provided valuable insight into the actual workings of the "New from Clipboard" function and the fact that a copy Google images are not just a pixel selection, which was one of the causes of my problem and confusion when working on the initial image. I still think, though, that Serif should change the "Layer" -> "Duplicate Selection" function from copying a whole "Image" layer that apparently is "selected" in an implied sort of way as opposed to the explicit and visible selection one is making when using any of the selection tools. As Walt mentioned, many new users are certainly going to be tripped up by this. Thus, I think that the "Duplicate Selection" function should just apply the active, visible selection to the image (rasterized in the background if need be) to create a new pixel layer with that selection. This will be more intuitive and better UX, in my opinion. If one really just wants to copy the whole, "selected" layer, there is a logical and more evident "Layer" -> "Duplicate" function. This is also why I find that for the "Duplicate Selection" function to prefer to go by another, lesser (semantically) meaning of the word "selection" is confusing. I am certain that many users when seeing an active border around an area selected will instinctively see that as the selection to be worked with or upon. While I may not be that experienced with Affinity Photo yet, I do have many years of working experience in software and user interface design. I may, of course, change opinion later on and if so, I will come back here to readily admit it All of this is a bit nitpicking, which I also like. All in all, though, I must say that Affinity Photo is a great tool that just grows on you as you discover and learn all of its efficient features. A nice weekend to all of you! /Frank

@R C-R I copied the image from a Google Image search, right-clicking on the selected image, selecting the menu-point "Copy Image", and then used the "New from Clipboard" function in Affinity Photo, which gave an "Image" layer. So, it is apparently not only image layers from other Affinity Photo documents that can have this "Image" format. I thought the Google "Copy Image" function would just put the pixels of the image in the clipboard but apparently not. If instead of creating a new document from the clipboard in Affinity Photo, one pastes the clipboard into a Windows Paint document, then in Paint press Ctrl-A and Ctrl-C to select and copy the whole image, and finally open a new document from the clipboard, A group layer is created with a sub-layer of the type "Pixel". Thanks for the detailed overview of how the clipboard works! /Frank

@walt.farrell Sure, and I look forward to trying everything out! So far, I only have praise for Affinity Photo. It has been a real pleasure to work with it. Agreed! Thanks, for welcoming me to the forum, Walt /Frank

@walt.farrell I admit that I am not so far with Affinity Photo yet that I understand the workings of vector layers. Even so, the concept that the image layer is a "kind" of vector layer and on top of that by default this whole layer is selected, although I have done nothing actively to select it, seems a bit convoluted and counterintuitive. I can't see why anyone would benefit from such default functionality. It would make more sense to me if there was a pop-up message "No selection available" when I tried to use the "Duplicate Selection" function or even better, that the application just got the pixels of the selection behind the scenes (i.e. by rasterizing the image layer in the background) and created the new pixel layer with those. Also, if the selection to be duplicated is the whole "vector" layer, should there not first be an active act of selecting it? I am also trying to understand the benefit of getting an image layer when opening an image from the clipboard. Why is that different and better as compared to when I open a PNG file, which is then created as a pixel layer? Thanks for taking the time to explain the functionality to me. Perhaps it is just parts of the workings of Affinity I do not fully understand yet, but do leave the door open for the possibility that I might actually be correct: That although the behaviour can be explained in some way by some kind of logic, that it may in fact not be very useful, sensible or intuitive as compared to just have the selection work the way one might expect. /Frank

@carl123 Yes, I have now tried that out. One can go directly to adjustments and any adjustments are implemented in a new adjustment layer affecting just the selection. One can even just create a new empty pixel layer on top (having the selection active) and then do e.g. a flood fill on the new pixel layer and only the selected area will be filled. However, I feel the above behaviour for a selection done based on an image layer actually gives even more weight to my argument. If I can do adjustments or changes on the selection which goes to the new layer (either automatically or by creating a new, empty pixel layer first to work on that), it would seem logically consistent that "Layer" -> "Duplicate Selection" (Ctrl-J), should also duplicate exactly my "selection" from the image layer and put that very selection onto a new pixel layer, rather than create a new, additional image layer with the whole image and thus ignore my selection. The function is called "Duplicate Selection", and I have a "selection", so please duplicate my "selection", not the whole image. I am sure after one gets used to it, the behaviour will be internalized and justified -- In a few months time, I will most likely have lost the fresh perspective of a new user and find myself berating and educating the new, inexperienced users on why selection works just the way it should on image layers :-). For now, however, my viewpoint is that this behaviour/wording is inconsistent and simply confusing and therefore should be corrected, even if not a bug that crashes the application or spoils the data in an image. /Frank

Hi Walt, Thanks for the clarification! You are right in regards to what confused me. In particular, the fact that one can use the image layer as a basis for the paintbrush tool, i.e. the areas get selected based on the colours present in the image layer, although the selection cannot work on that very same layer. Even if selected areas exist separate from layers, it does seem very counterintuitive that one may select an area based on an image layer, but then one cannot apply move the selection to a new layer for manipulating it. I will never make that mistake again, but for other, new users it would be much better if the "New from Clipboard" function just created a pixel layer right away, possibly with a setting to create an image layer, if one really wants that. /Frank

Problem found in Windows 10 Home 64 Bit, Affinity Photo 1.3.3 (481). When starting a new photo using the menu point "File" -> "New from Clipboard" (or "File" -> "Place"). The layer with the image is of the type "Image" rather than "Pixel". Apparently, one can select using any of the selection tools, but when one tries to copy the selection to a new layer (ctrl-j) or the clipboard (ctrl-j), the whole layer gets copied rather than just the selected areas. If the select tools are not to work on "Image" layers, they should not appear to be working, i.e. one should not be able to mark areas with running borders around them with the marquee tools, flood select or paintbrush select. Otherwise, one may get very confused as to what is wrong. It had me baffled for some time until I noticed the layer type "Image", which I could then right-click and "Rasterize". The best UX would actually be dialogue box warning that selections cannot be done on image layers, or perhaps the new layer could just be rasterized to type "Pixel" right away. Best regards, Frank