Brian_J

Oops, I forgot to search the issue before posting. Thanks for the observation @carl123

When a layer is selected and visible in the Layers panel, if I switch to a different open file in the same Affinity Windows app, then back to the original file, the view in the Layers panel has reset to the top. I have to scroll down through the Layers panel to find the layer that is selected. It would be nice if the Layers panel state was remembered when switching between opened files. Windows 10 22H2 Affinity apps 2.1

Have you double checked the brush Opacity to make sure it’s 100%?

I have the same question. I don’t know why it would be intentionally designed that way. I wonder if its a side effect of the underlying code, but not intentional behavior, or if Serif intentionally made it work like it does for some reason. I suppose it could be a bug. I never posted a bug report about the issue because I figured someone else surely would have already if it wasn’t “by design.” In retrospect, I should have asked about it in the forum long ago. I’d love it if I could easily resize a Marquee selection to my hearts content, and then copy/paste exactly what’s in the “marching ants,” pixel-perfect without feathered edges.

The more the size of the initial selection (made with the Marquee Tool) is changed (in the Transform panel) the more “feathering” occurs. This is an easy one to confirm yourself by running through the process a few times making different selections sizes with the Marquee Tool.

At the risk of misrepresenting something, this is my understanding... Think of a selection like a mask — it has transparency data in it, but it's invisible until it's applied to an object. The pixel data in a selection is in the selection itself; unrelated to layers — for example, feathering a Marquee selection has no effect on layers. Transforming a Marquee selection (a raster element) changes the pixel data, which has the effect of "feathering" the edges. When the selection is used to copy something, the data for each pixel in the selection is applied to the corresponding pixel in the object being copied. As far as why only edge pixels are effected, I don't know. Selections seem to be a lot like masks... when a mask is blurred, only the edges are effected. But I'm stepping a bit too far out on the ledge... this is all conjecture. 🙂

I don't think I can add any insight beyond what's already been provided. @lepr has provided a number of explanations that seem reasonable to me and appear to explain what I'm experiencing. But ultimately, I only know what happens, predictably for me; not sure of the "why." From my nontechnical, layperson perspective: a marquee selection is raster; when a raster object (a selection, in this case) is transformed, it gets distorted; the distortion only applies to the edges of the selection for whatever reason... like feathering; when a "distorted" (i.e., transformed) selection is used to copy an object, the attributes of all the pixels in the selection are applied to what's being copied, which results in the pasted object being feathered. The pixel attributes in the selection that are applied to the 'copy' command are only transparency, because that's all the information that's in the selection... there is no color. The corners look like what I'd expect when blurring or feathering a rectangle.

The answer to your question was "Yes."

The results you get in the test 4 file is exactly what I would expect. That's the issue with copying using a selection that has been transformed. I'd be interested to see a file that includes history where the outcome is different... i.e., there's no feathering; because I've never experienced that.

Yes. For all the tests I've performed over the past few days, everything is pixel aligned according to the Transform panel and I get predictable results.

Interesting. I get very predictable results. We must be doing something differently.

It wasn't clear to me from Sean's response that the feathering issue was clear. I may have misunderstood Sean's response, but I got the impression he was only referring to making it easier to edit selections by doing something like adding handles, which the OP suggested.

The larger the variance between the initial Marquee selection and the final selection that has been edited in the Transform panel or using Quick Mask mode, the larger the feathering. Could it be that in situations where you don't see feathering (transparent edges) the amount you transformed the selection was fairly small? We may be talking about different issues — whether a layer is selected while making the selection has no affect on the issue I'm referring to.

I just want to make sure the full scope of the issue is clear. There are two issues being raised: Ability to easily change the dimensions of a pixel selection, e.g., add edge handles to the selection marquee. Ability to edit the dimensions of a pixel selection and use the selection to create a pixel-perfect copy of an object/layer. Currently, if a selection is made with a Marquee Tool and the selection size is edited in the Transform panel or using Quick Mask mode, when the selection is used to copy an object, the resulting pasted object is feathered. From what I can tell, the variance between the initial selection and the final, edited size of the selection affects the amount of feathering. Attached is a file showing the issue. 2023-05-23 Pixel Selection Transform Issue.afphoto

If you run through your test again, but this time make sure the layer is selected before copying, you will get consistent results and I think it will clear up some confusion. If no layer is selected when you copy, you’re not copying anything — it’s like opening a Word document and copying without selecting any text — so when you paste you’re pasting whatever is in your clipboard… which, in the case of your video, is the last thing you copied when a layer was selected. To reiterate: It doesn’t matter if a layer is selected when you make the selection. A layer must be selected in order to use a selection to copy from the layer. (Side note: you don’t have to deselect before pasting.) Believe me, I understand your issue. I ran into this when I started using Affinity V1 apps. What it comes down to is, if you want to make a selection to copy/paste unadulterated pixels, you can’t edit the selection size in the Transform panel or Quick Mask mode. Hopefully Serif will respond to the bug report you posted and shed some light on the subject.

It doesn’t matter if a layer is selected when you make the selection. It does matter if there’s no layer selected when you copy — if no layer is selected when you copy, there is no change to you’re clipboard, so you’re pasting the last thing you copied correctly.

It doesn't matter if a layer is selected or not. Changing the dimensions of a pixel selection in the Transform panel or Quick Mask has the same result whether a layer is selected or not.

lepr understands what you are trying to accomplish.

Because it appears that's the intended behavior of the software. You can report it as a bug and see what Serif has to say.

I see why you're confused — I provided a link to the Symbols help article in my previous comment... I meant to provide the link to the Embed vs Link help article. Sorry about that. Here's the Affinity Embed vs Link help article: https://affinity.help/photo2/en-US.lproj/pages/Media/embeddingVsLinking.html To work with linked files, you first need to place an .afphoto or .afdesign file into an Affinity Photo file. There are several ways to place content... one way is to drag the file from your operating system's Explorer window onto the canvas of an open file in Affinity Photo. After placing the file, you can make the placed file linked by doing the following: From the Window menu, select Resource Manager. From the manager, select the file to be linked and click Make Linked. The Embed vs Link help article provides additional information, including how to set the default placement policy when creating a new file, and how to change the default placement policy in an existing file. Let us know if you have any questions.

@KCP Placing linked file — a feature available in all Affinity apps — is what is equivalent to Smart Objects.

Like Walt mentioned, placing an .afphoto or .afdesign file is equivalent to Smart Objects in Photoshop. If the placed file is linked, when the file is edited, all instances in the parent document are updated. I use linked files more often than Symbols (in files that I’m not sharing with others and collaborating on) — I find linked files a bit easier to work with… just a personal preference, depending on the situation. Here’s the Affinity help page for Embedding vs linking if you’re not familiar: https://affinity.help/designer2/en-US.lproj/pages/SymbolsAssets/symbols.html.

@KCP It’s been a while since I’ve worked in Photoshop… I can’t remember how Solid Color layers work. Fill Layers in Affinity Photo are pretty versatile — the color can be changed at any time and opacity, blend mode, gradient, and masks can be applied to them. But if Fill Layers don’t do what you need, their capabilities may be moot.

@Markus Allen I don’t know much about the iPad app, sorry man. If you post in the iPad Questions forum that v_kyr provided above, I’m sure someone will be able to help.

@Markus Allen Can you post a screenshot showing the Node Tool hovering over a path, like you’re trying to add a node? Make sure the screenshot shows the entire Affinity app window and that the Layers panel is visible.