arnofly

Plus one for this feature.
In order to simulate web's look and feel "Browser's antialiasing" would be a good option. 
Is quite far from reality now :(

I'm glad we agree, and thank you for the screenshot. There's much power in using OS X's Terminal too to accomplish various tasks in OS X, but arguably, it is a less intuitive and sometimes a slower approach that using the GUI. In like manner, fiddling with curves in AP only to eliminate text anti-aliasing is ridiculous.
 
Serif, please add a text anti-aliasing pop up to AP at the earliest possible time. Thanks.

+1 (four years after I last added a +1)

+5
I create ICO files all the time, specifically for projects within the Windows environment, where ICO files are still de facto for icons.

Yeah shame I thought this might be the case, I'd love to have something similar to Photoshops content aware.
I work with mockups a lot and like to have things just the way I want so love a similar content aware fill and better results than inpainting tool gives me in v1. 

Not got version 2 Affinity myself and was just curious if the inpainting tool had been updated in version 2, this tool in version 1 seems a long way behind what photoshop can do with Content-Aware, Can anyone who has version 2 let me know if they see any difference with this tool.
 
For me I'm still on the fence with getting version 2 as only got version 1 at the beginning of this year.

Because de staff of Serif don't have a clue what is going on in modern web development! Or maybe they don't want to support Google I don't know?
For the time being  I convert with https://www.xnview.com/en/xnconvert/ they have an excellent converter with webp for free or donation.

Hello Serif Team,
Next Gen image formats are necessary for us to a) keep up with best practise and b) ensure we do everything we can to rank well with Search Engines (SEO).
Formats like webP, JPEG 2000 and JPEG XR should be considered for future releases of Affinity Photo.
https://developers.google.com/web/tools/lighthouse/audits/webp
Regards,
John.

It's a bit strange that Affinity that tries to hit the "pro market" is not implementing webp in their application and forces me to go back to Photoshop and Avocode. Despite the fact that Google provides the codec for developers to use in their applications.
Regards,
David
API for the WebP Codec
The WebP team has provided an extensive API to allow developers to add support to their applications, including browsers, image editing tools as well as native applications.
Consult the API documentation for a description of libwebp application programming interface.

May I ask why not? Will it be implemented in v1.7? Since you support webp import, adding export ought to be rather trivial. I use it all the time for preparing game assets in Godot Engine.

Export to WebP is already required, so sometimes :-)
 

Hi,
We use webp in combination with jpeg in every website we make. Afinity opens a webp without a problem, but unfortunately when I go to the exportpanel there is still no webp extension to find.
Regards,
David

I’m sure there are many users who would like to see WebP support, but I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that they’re outnumbered by those who want support for 1-bit BMP or transparent TGA export.

The joke! Affinity Photo is sometime better than Photoshop, sometime as good as Photoshop and sometime less good than Photoshop, but it's look a real competitor.

It would be very nice if you could collapse all layers at once in the layers panel. Layers become very difficult to work with when you have many of them since selecting objects expands the parent layer, so you have to scroll back up and manually collapse them yourself.
Perhaps you could have it so that layers are only expanded for as long as the item within it is selected? That way, after deselecting an object, the layer expansion goes back to its previous state, which is ether expanded or collapsed. Am I making any sense?

Is there a possibility of allowing masking (Mask to below)  to have a shortcut on pixel via vector. That is Masking an image using a vector object?

Hi, 
 
Wondering if I can assign a keyboard shortcut on "Mask to Below" in the layer menu. Or can I assign shortcuts for the items in the layer menu? Thanks!
 
CY

Exactly! I often find myself quite impressed with what you can do in Affinity Photo (same in Designer and Publisher BTW) but at the same time I'm often sort of turned off midway in a job by  the clumsy and uncomfortable way to get these things actually done within the apps. The Affinity apps regrettably – in several aspects – still lack an "elegant" and intuitive ergonomic concept. Especially Photoshop, however, has developed and refined this approach quite convincingly over the (long) years it has been on the scene.
To really compete with the Adobe apps it's not sufficient for the Affinity apps to just let the user come up finally with (about) the same results he'd get using Photoshop & Co. but he must be able to get there by a workflow that's at least as easy and convincingly ergonomic as it is with the (still) market leader. Having to go to two places in the menus and one place in the control bar and/or context menu to get something done, what the rival makes possible with just a click (OK: maybe with some additional modifier key...) won't do the trick eventually.
I REALLY do want to make the transition and I'm absolutely thankful to Affinity/Serif for having taken up the challenge. I actually admire what they've achieved so far, but PLEASE keep on working on the ergonomics of the apps to make the users enjoy what they're doing in the most satisfying way!

I totally agree! I've been dabbling around with AP for months now and I really and honestly want to use it instead of Photoshop, but it's just driving me nuts every time when it comes to masking and editing masks (especially when you want to paste something into a mask). The process in AP to me is absolutely counter-intuitive and unnecessarily complicated. The whole clipping and masking business is disturbingly confusing in all the Affinity apps once you want to do something that's a bit more advanced than the simple basic stuff.
I don't think that making things different from the almighty competitor just for difference's sake is beneficial to the struggling users (and of all: switchers). You have to admit – however grudgingly – that the guys at Adobe did some things right in Photoshop (and in Illustrator and InDesign as well).

I think if you read the rest of the forum you'll see why it's essential to many people. You don't need to understand it or need it yourself, just accept that a lot of people require it.
I work at a printing company and often need to be a lot more precise in measuring things. Percentage comes into play there. If I place one image and then manually have to make it smaller, then place a second image that needs to be scaled down the same amount, how can I tell by how much the first image was scaled down? With InDesign, I would select both placed images and then change the percentage to 25% (for example).
Percentage also comes into play when I am creating different sized versions of the same file (say, different sized posters), so I can make sure in the new size that all elements are scaled properly. There are of course work arounds in Publisher but it takes more time and as posted above, sometimes requires doing the math manually.
fde101 above says "percentage of what?" - this would be a percentage of the current size. So if a box is 2x2 and you choose to scale by 200%, then the box increases to 4x4. Now the 4x4 size is considered 100% for that object. Photos are the same except dpi is involved.

Abslutelly agree!
Serif, please implement this.

I don't know but this is pretty much the reason I would no longer recommend any affinity software to anyone. 
Yeah Photoshop sucks for having become a service as a product thing but at least they still develop and evolve. 
This thread has been open for 6 years, constantly active and totally reasonable as a feature request 
and its the second feature that I've basically been waiting on for years to at some point be integrated. 

It feels like they made Photo and Designer six years ago and ever since just fixed a few bugs 
while competitors kept improving their products 

These days there is a lot of free or cheap one time payment editing software and I feel like 
Affinity has had its peak days long ago

I thought about this from a more photographic background.  Two possibilities would be to add 
Layer > New Adjustment Layer > White Balance…   OR Layer > New Adjustment Layer > Lens Filter… In the first example, try starting out with White Balance set to around 10% – but leave the Tint set at 0%.  You could slowly boost the WB value, but I think you'd probably want to keep the Tint at 0%.
For the second example, the default Filter Colour is okay to start with, as is the Optical Density of 50%.  You could select a slightly warmer Filter Colour or tweak the density up or down (depending on the colour you've selected).
Cranking up the settings in either approach might require masking the cables to avoid introducing an unsuitable colour cast in an otherwise fairly neutral area.

It would be good if you would try to read my post related to the "Feature Requests & Suggestions" forum. Serif obviously responds to questions and comments from users, not only those who pay, but also those who try the product or are just considering its use. Just look in the "Affinity Support & Questions" forum.

In my opinion, "just think about the pixels" is good advice for anybody concerned with preserving image quality. Even if you are printing, you still have to include enough pixels in the image to preserve every detail you want the print to include. If you are not printing, DPI is irrelevant; if you are it sets the print's dimensions but not the amount of detail it contains.