Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

ATP

Members
  • Posts

    138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ATP

  1. It would be great if Serif could add some transparency of the encoders used, versions and the equivalent parameters for the encoder libraries. Give us a scale in the documentation or similar, so we could check with the encoder library to more precisely tune our final output quality. Currently the quality slider exposed in the export interface isn't directly comparable to anything from the encoders used, this makes it difficult to ensure similar quality when exporting across multiple applications. Some background for the request. JPEG XL is supported in Affinity 2, but nowhere is it documented what library, which version, what effort settings or what quality/distance equivalent the quality slider in AFP corresponds to. This information could be hugely useful when more precise control of final output quality is desired, and not only for JPEG XL but all export formats supported. *There's no third-party notice for anything to do with JPEG XL.
  2. +1 Complete support from me too. There's a lossless option with WebP, so we should definitely get the option with JPEG XL too. The latest libjxl version has a 10x improvement in memory usage and greatly increased speed. I could suspect the high memory usage was a reason to not support the lossless option, but that worry is now in the past. The same is true for the lossy mode, though not important for this topic. This newly released article has an overview of the improvements and some comparisons to other formats. I highly recommend checking it out.
  3. Is there really no UI option to open this dialog, only a keyboard shortcut?
  4. I want to pop in here and ask, are people happy with how Affinity Photo handles RAW photos? My old copy of Lightroom handles RAW pictures a lot better, so much so that I never use Affinity Photo for anything RAW. Their RAW processing needs to become a lot better if they create a Lightroom competitor.
  5. Could it also be possible to get a dynamic area tool? Where we can drag a shape directly with the tool, to get quick measurements? This is possible! Simply drag a shape with the shape tool, it will show you the height and width in your set scale. Of course in addition to the main feature request which is permanent measure/area layers/objects.
  6. Can you make the same behavior happen with any other file?
  7. Did you export as JPEG XL in Affinity Photo 2? JPEG and JPEG XL are not the same format. JPEG XL is a new format which currently isn't widely supported.
  8. Has there been any further discussion on this topic within Serif? I'm planning to gift two universal licenses to my parents for Christmas, but if offline activation stays as a business exclusive feature, I might just buy them the licenses as a business user instead. It'd be most optimal with offline licensing for personal individuals though... then they could manage their account themselves, and we'd all be sure of never losing access to V2. Would some compromise work? Like having to email the sales team as an extra step for the offline license? I understand from earlier comments that the activation isn't meant to be intrusive or act as DRM, but at some point in the future it will become that, an obstacle for honest customers.
  9. It will be excellent for single-frame pixel art, nice addition.
  10. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-5129 Google has given this vulnerability a 10.0 base score, something basically never seen.
  11. You're either doing something wrong or choosing a very low quality target. Trust me, I know what I'm doing Affinity doesn't help by having a bad implementation though, file sizes always seem high for some reason.
  12. Please check real tests and comparisons before posting misinformation.
  13. Makes sense when it's 14 years old, doesn't make it widely used though. There's a ton of JPEG 2000 pictures too, but mostly used in very specific circumstances.
  14. JXR is developed by Microsoft, it will never become widely used. JXR support for the wallpaper probably comes from internal changes to allow more formats in the future.
  15. This problem seems to be far from exclusive to the Affinity suite of software. Some checksums and hardening of the files would be great to see in the future. Build in error-correction would be fantastic.
  16. Might be worth a try, download the Affinity Publisher 2 trial and open a copy of the file in that. Be very sure to always operate with a second file as saving will make it impossible to open the file in version 1.
  17. There's a ton of reasons, the most important change with AVIF and JPEG XL being Wide Gaumut/HDR. Normal JPEG we all currently know and use can't do that.
  18. 1. Web distribution isn't everything. 2. With MacOS/iOS/iPadOS (Safari), and in the future, Edge, adding JPEG XL, we'll see if the Chromium team won't get their head out of their behind. 3. Edge actively removes AVIF support. Microsoft implements a lot of stuff outside of Chromium, and there's whispers about Microsoft adding JPEG XL support in the future.
  19. Everything can be re-evaluated. Microsoft and Apple will back JPEG XL.
  20. It's slower, and there's other reasons for making a checkbox to enable the old behavior. Having to hit Ctrl-0 all the time becomes a chore.
  21. I think this is another great example of different workflows benefiting from an option to enable/disable the old behavior. I myself think the old behavior is better, but a checkbox would make everyone happy.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.