iconoclast
-
Posts
1,670 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by iconoclast
-
-
8 minutes ago, loukash said:
I agree with all you wrote (especially the DPI vs PPI part which is something that Serif got totally wrong from the start, duh)...
It's not only Affinity/Serif. Also f.e. my Epson Scanner denotes it as "DPI", as many other hard- and softwares like Inkscape and, as far as I remember, IrfanView do. It is a verry wide spread misunderstanding. Of course a pixel is somehow some kind of dot, but I think it is a little too ambiguous and confusing to name it so.
-
Hi Jeremy!
You mean in Publisher? Don't really know if this is meant to be this way, but it only works with afphoto- and afdesign-files for me too, as far as I can see. I think it should also be possible with other files.
-
It is not clear to me what you exactly want to do. You have to know, that the size of bitmaps (pixel-based images) is always defined by the quantity of pixels horizontal x vertical. That is the real size of the digital image. The third value in Dots per Inch (dpi) or better pixels per Inch (ppi) - dots are actually the dots of a halftone-raster in print - is only important for the analog output - for example printing or plotting - because pixels don't have fixed sizes. So you have to tell how big the pixels shall be for the output. The standard-value for printing is 300 ppi/dpi. This value is just a rule or convention in form of an added information. It will not really change anything in your image. It only tells how many pixels shall be assigned to an Inch. But on screen, only the quantity in pixels horizontal x pixels vertical counts.
To judge the look of your image, especially the sharpness and how pixelated it is, you should always watch it in the zoom-factor 100%, because this is the only zoom-factor the pixels of your image fit to the pixels of your display. The ppi/dpi-value is not important for images that only shall appear on displays.
If you scale an image, the quantity of the pixels of the image will change. So, in case of upscaling, there must be added new pixels to the image. And because every pixel only contains one colour, the colours of all pixels must be computed new. For this process the Resampling-modes are. Depending on which one you choose, the new pixels will be computed with different sensitivities to the surrounding pixels, which results in differnet qualities. It's verry important to know, that scaling images always leads to less sharpness.
In opposite to that, you can assign another ppi/dpi-value to your image - without changing the quantity of pixels of the image. You can do that by using the "Resize Document"-dialogue by unchecking he checkbox "Resample". In that case, you can define another ppi/dpi-value, and the quantity of pixels will not change. So normally, if you are planing to print an image, you should create it with a sufficient quantity of pixels right from the start to get an image with the best possible quality.
By the way: Sorry for my bad english. It's not my mothers tungue, and I'm a little bit outoff practice.
- loukash and cosmospacemonkey
-
1
-
1
-
Thanks for the hint, Walt!
-
Hi Johannes!
I'm also new to Affinity, and so I'm not absolutely sure if I'm right, but I think you can prevent this problem by creating a snapshot before you go back in time.
-
Well, I can see the difference. Especially the text elements and the sharp edges are pixelated. Have you tried "Resample": "Bicubic" or the "Lanczos 3" modes? "Bilinear" is only for graphical images like drawings or diagrams. Bicubic is better. The Lanczos-Resampling-modes are often even a little bit better. This could be the reason for this results.
As an explanation: The Resampling-modes are made for different qualities of the so called "Interpolation". That means the way how the pixels will be computed if you resize an image (or transform it in any way). Bicubic and Lanczos are more complex algorithms than Bilinear. They work with a wider range of neighbour-pixels. The result will be less sharp, but not pixelated. To scale images always causes a loss of quality. But you can compensate a slight loss of sharpness by resharpening the image afterwards (for example with Unsharp masking).
-
9 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:
I know this solution is off from the main topic but I have to say that if the end result is to have the 'ink' from the letter blend in with the 'paper' then I would just do a quick round trip to Photo and use the live Displace filter.
That is an interesting idea. I don't really know what result angier wants to see, but I want to let it lokk like the letter would react to the surface of the canvas, like it was a calligraphic letter, handwritten on a rough ground. So I tried to give it a frayed edge and a fluidly blend on the inside. It's easy to do such things for example in painting programs like ArtRage, because there the brushstroke interacts with the canvas while you paint it. But in Designer and Photo, it needs some more steps, I think. The "Displace" filter could possibly be one of those steps. Have to test it out a little more. Thanks for the hint!
-
Hi angier and others!
I explored this topic a little more, because I wasn't verry satisfied by my first brush, that doesn't really work with letters. So, after lots of experiments, in which I learned some important things about brushes, I created two new brushes. The first one (AquaBlend_outlineCentered) is more important, because it will give the outline a more frayed look. The second one (AquaBlend_outlineInside) will let it blend a little into the letter. So you will need a duplicate of the letter for the first one, that has to be on top, without filling. And the alignment of the stroke has to be "Centered". The second brush should be applied to the filled letter below, and it has to be aligned "Inside". I grouped those two layers and applied the "Linear Blend" mode to the group. And I used a selfmade texture as background. It is all still not perfect, but I hope someone may like it.
-
-
-
Here it is. It is a brush I created myself. The first one in the category "Spray". But it's the same with the other ones (and, by the way, also with the dotted brushes of the "Fineliner"-Set that could be downloaded with one of the latest updates). I saved the file with the protocol.
-
Hi!
I possibly found a bug. I tried to give a letter an outline with a selfdesigned brush to make its contour a little rough. So I created a new image, placed a letter with the Artistic Text Tool, scaled it by dragging its edge and then clicked on the brush in the Brushes panel. The brush was set to repeat, but the outline that appeared was stretched. So I controlled if this also happens to ellipses and rectangles. In that cases, it worked as it should.
It has no effect to convert the letter into curves before. But sometimes, after having added some objects like ellipses, rectangles, curves..., suddenly it even works with letters as it should. But sometimes even that doesn't help.
I attached a screenshot to show what I mean. All outlines of shown objects are made with the same brush and the same parameters.
My OS is Windows 10, Version 20H2; Designer 1.9.1.979.
-
OK, I will write the bug report. If it isn't a bug, the developers will tell.
I attached the brush. Made it with ArtRage. Test it out. Hope it works.
-
23 minutes ago, Pšenda said:
"Reverse curve" in Context toolbar?
Thanks for the hint! Haven't seen it yet.
-
1 minute ago, angier said:
ionoclast, the same thing happened to me. The repeat stroke in AD miraculously worked once and then never again. I think it's a bug as well.
Yes, i agree. I explored it this morning, and it worked exactly one time, after I created a curve before I wrote the letter and attached my special brush to it. After that it even didn't work this way again. Verry mysterious. Later this day I noticed another thing, which I don't know if it is somehow associated with this problem. Inspired by your calligraphy project, I created a brush, especially for edges. Then I used it for a letter, which resulted in our well known problem, then for a circle and a rectangle. I dragged both, the circle and the rectangle, from the upper left to the lower right, and attached the same brush with the same parameters to it. You can see the result on the attached screenshot. Seems that the curves of this two forms have the opposite direction.
By the way, is there any opportunity to change the direction of the curves?
Have you already wrote a bug-report?
-
13 minutes ago, Pšenda said:
It depends on the type of brush and its parameters, such as Head/Tail offset. Sometimes it helps if the closed curve breaks.
But I used the same brush for all my samples above. With the same parameters. I only adjusted the thickness of the strokes after I applied them to the letters and forms. But that had no effect on the repeat- or stretch-effect.
As I made a new test some minutes ago, the problem appeared again. Even to break the curve didn't solve the problem. But it seems that, if I draw a curve-object before I write a letter and apply a brushstroke to it, it suddenly works pretty fine to even apply the brushstroke to letters. Doesn't make sense, but that's how it is. Think it's a bug. Will explore it tomorrow.
-
Oddly, as I tried it again some minutes ago, with an unconverted letter, it worked. Verry strange! Will try it again tomorrow.
-
This is in fact strange behaviour. I suppose it's a bug. As you can see on my screenshot, the outline of letters always get stretched brushstrokes, whereas other forms get brushstrokes as adjusted in the brushes-adjustment-panel. No matter if the letters and forms are converted to curves before. Can't see any logical reason for it.
-
Hi Nashorn!
Go to the Stroke panel and click on the left Style and/or drag the slider to zero. The circle must be selected for it.
(im Panel "Kontur" auf den linken Stil - durchgestrichener Kreis - klicken und/oder den Regler auf Null ziehen. Der Kreis muss dafür ausgewählt sein)
-
5 minutes ago, v_kyr said:
Nun da gibt es verschiedene Möglichkeiten und Viewer (je nach benutztem OS) welche das Eine oder Andere hier flexibler ermöglichen, IrfanView ist für die Windows-Welt eines davon (zudem ein recht gutes und vielseitiges Programm). Auf Macs würde man dann wahrscheinlich GraphicsConverter (GC) oder XNView MX etc. benutzen. - Wie dem auch sei, jeder sollte es so machen wie es ihm am Besten beliebt, sprich "Jedem das Seine und mir das Meine!".
Genau darum ging es mir. Ob nun jemand IrfanView dafür nimmt, XNView (das es ja auch für Windows gibt), Fast Stone Image Viewer oder was auch immer ist mir wumpe. Da habe ich keine Aktien drin. Ich wollte nur darauf hinweisen, dass es auch Lösungen außerhalb von Affinity geben könnte. Wichtig ist allerdings, dass man das Programm so einstellen können sollte, das es im Vordergrund bleibt. Sonst könnte das nervig werden. Bei IrfanView geht das.
-
1 minute ago, v_kyr said:
Erzähl mir jetzt nicht Du könntest jetzt nicht von einem Hintergrundbild abmalen. Insbesondere wenn es exakt und nicht Pi mal Auge sein muß.
Ist das an mich gerichtet? Doch, das kann ich wohl. Aber das wäre dann halt Abpausen. Das mache ich machmal, wenn es eher um technische Abbildungen gehen soll. Für künstlerische Arbeiten macht das aber eher weniger Sinn. Dann könnte man ja unter Umständen auch einfach Strg+C und Strg+V drücken. Das Schöne an der Lösung mit IrfanView ist zudem, dass man die Größe der Vorlage recht flexibel platzieren, vergrößern und verkleinern und jederzeit auf dem Bildschirm verchieben kann. Noch besser finde ich das nur in ArtRage gelöst, wo man sich ein Referenzbild in einem Extra-Fensterchen im Programm laden, dieses ebenfalls frei skalieren und verschieben und auch drehen kann. Ist aber natürlich eine Frage individueller Vorlieben.
-
4 minutes ago, v_kyr said:
Naja für das direkte Abmalen bietet es sich eher an, das Ausgangsbild dann als quasi untere Hintergrundebene zu platzieren, fest gegen Verschieben etc. zu veranckern (Locken) und dessen Ebene dann etwas transparent zu setzen. - Quasi wie Abpausen.
Naja, aber zwischen Abmalen und Abpausen gibt es dann ja doch noch ein paar bedeutende Unterschiede.
-
In Programmen in denen es keine Funktion für Referenzbilder, also Bildvorlagen zum Abmalen, gibt, nutze ich IrfanView (Bildbetrachter-Freeware) als zusätzliches Programm. Das kann man so einstellen, dass es immer im Vordergrund auf dem Bildschirm bleibt, während man es in einem anderen Programm abmalt.
-
Just now, Old Bruce said:
Reminds me of the time I had a Serial number needing to be entered and the font chosen by the software company for the serial number had the One, the Lowercase Ell and the Uppercase Eye all look the same, and of course the Zero and the Uppercase Oh looked similar too.
It is sometimes somehow similar to me with 0 and O. Sometimes awkward in case of financial transactions.
Generating image assets from layers
in Pre-V2 Archive of Affinity on Desktop Questions (macOS and Windows)
Posted
Hi Wyrmling!
Have you tried the Assets panel (Menu "View" > "Studio")? Just click on the burger menu of an assets category and then click on "Add from selection".