Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About NoSi

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Unlike @ajpearceUK, I used my own computers for testing. I was driven by pure curiosity, because a few weeks ago the Affinity products were unknown to me. The "Affinity Publisher" aroused special interest in me, because it promised an added value compared to a product I am using usually. That is the case - that is why I bought it. However, I have been wavering with AP and AD. With the "Designer" it was very quickly clear that it was not interesting for me. There I miss especially the title-giving tools of this thread. In the end, the "Designer" - for me - offers too little vector functionality to make itself interesting compared to the tools I am using. Therefore I refrained from buying it. Nevertheless, after I worked with the "Publisher" for a few days, I decided to buy "Photo", which is much behind the product I am using normally. However, it offers some really handy functions that can be used to quickly improve and/or enhance images. To be clear: The only thing that was decisive for the purchase was the integration into the "Publisher" - this significantly shortens the distances for the pure editing of images, thus saving time. For the direct editing of images I have tried it a few times, but honestly - for me - especially in the area of import and export "Photo" lacks functionality, which could qualify it for more than a "simple and fast accessible image editor for Publisher". In any case, it is worth mentioning that all Affinity products can be easily installed and "cleanly" uninstalled under Windows. The working speed of the "Publisher" is very impressive, even on a slightly older laptop (with Windows 10x64) smooth working is possible. Very convincing. Here, "Photo" can also score points, as long as it's about the simple "one-click functions" - which (see above) are very practical and convenient in combination with the "Publisher". I will "stay tuned" expecting the things to come. I have learned over the years that things need their time to improve. Since I have no pressure because of alternatives, the Affinity products are definitely worth watching, if only to keep a back door open...
  2. I can. But in compare to you I do not abuse this thread for advertising this product. If you tend to use multiple programs, no one will prevent you from doing so. Those who want webp as a direct output of AP aim for a different way of working.
  3. You are aware of the title of this thread "WebP in Affinity Photo" ? I'm sure by now all readers of this thread know that you are an ardent admirer of XnViewMP. Your missionary zeal in honor, but this is - according to the headline - about something else. I would really appreciate it if you would respect that.
  4. One reason we can discuss online here is that deep in the past someone came to the conclusion that there should be development in transporting information. Thus the idea was born printing information written on stones on paper instead of carrying the stones. (…) The best editor will vanish if it ignoring changes outside, which belong to it's "core" targets: sharing results.
  5. Call me "old-fashioned" but I belong to a generation of forum users who consider it a matter of respect for the lifetime of others to at least skim a thread before posting a comment. I was brought up by forums that punish repetitions by deleting them without notice. I think this is questionable, but it helps when it comes to seriously advancing a matter (or at least wanting to).
  6. To be honest I do not bother about resource budgets – because it is not my part to decide this. But I can see that the decision to implement webp was made by the development team. Which could be because "core function" is in the eye of the beholder. Or simply a question of relevance.
  7. … and if you have a hammer you can punch a screw into the wall, too. Are we talking about "workarounds" or "solutions" ?
  8. I think all of us know that. This thread is not discussing about limitations but pushing them.
  9. This is probably the best way to allow implementation of "temporary formats". It could be a general solution for import and export for all file formats in the future. This is what I called "modular concept". I agree that the current presentation of export formats requires maintenance beyond adding some code.
  10. If you read the contributions here in the thread carefully, you may notic that a. this a.) was sufficiently mentioned and b.) objectively is no useful contribution to the topic. If you don't care that you have to change the tool every time you want to create a common format - good for you! However, as the thread clearly shows - from my point of view - quite a lot of people simply see things differently – what is being talked about here.
  11. In my opinion: no. Since the formats rarely (typically never) change, it is a question of implementation. Since it is basically just import and export, these are just entries in a drop-down list, which - in a modular concept - is self-maintaining. To support the winner of a race only after the race is quite opportunistic. Innovation and progress comes from belief in something. Especially in the field of design, this is the driving force. Users of products provided for this purpose therefore expect this "belief in something" from the manufacturers of their tools. Especially because the support on the way to the goal can contribute significantly to winning. As far as I know "webp" is no youngster anymore. And unlike the (uncounted) "png/jpeg/…" killers it is supported by chrome and others since years which may be a hint what formats should be supported because of it's expectable spreading. But "Hooray" Affinity gets it. Let's see how long it takes for the announcements to produce results.
  12. YES. The only open question is: when will 1.9 be released? Estimated Date available — including year ;) ?
  13. Does this mean the main lead of Affinity product functionality are the abilities of MacOS? This would be a major point for me, not using them. This would be a questionable - because unnecessary - self-limitation to the specifications of others. It is the death of innovation to rank behind others and let them dictate what is useful, what is needed or how things should be done.
  14. I do. It is reasonable to save your own computer against being flooded with setup entries etc. If there is the option to try out something on another system using it is a good alternative. Telling a community personal impressions is the basic operation of all digital communities. I also created a forum account before the purchase. I too didn't buy Designer – because I read the entries, asked questions, … – this is a major use of communities: discussing, offering personal opinions, asking for help, … – what is your use of it? Lifting the manufacturer above any doubt and emphasize that you are satisfied? From my point of view this would be useless information because it would be only about you. I know that there are forums where member primarily post information to put themselves in a good light and to be applaused for it. But up to now I do not have the impression that this is the reason for discussing here. Therefore, I can well understand the drive why people want to share their opinions. As you did. In regard to the actual topic with a worthless contribution from my point of view. It's only message seems to be that you can not believe others that are telling their impressions. For my taste this is disrespectful and border-crossing to general forum rules to treat each other with respect.
  15. Sometimes is »saying nothing« tremendously loud… People dump people and software for something. Whether "something" is better clarifies with some delay. It's 50:50 getting it worse.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.