nickbatz

Am I right that the only way to paste picture onto a pixel layer in another picture is copy/paste? You can't open a second picture in a tab and drag it over, right? This is one variation of something I do all the time - never mind that I'm a walking edge case. TIA

This is three years later, and of course it's a matter of personal preference... but is this really the kind of operation you perform often enough to warrant assigning a keystroke to it? I'm not trolling, I'm just surprised that this would be so important to anyone.

Because my goal in life is to be annoying. Is it a newly added feature? I thought it was just that I was clicking in the wrong place all along.

THANK YOU! I had a whole thread on this and no one pointed that out. See? This is why no one should pay attention to anything I say.

You still have to create a useless pixel layer to merge visible if the top layer is an adjustment. This is worse than the Devil! Okay, not quite, but still, I vote for it to be fixed next update.

For what it's worth, Edit With [Affinity Photo 1 or 2] works perfectly on macOS Monterey and Ventura on a Mac Studio. More than that, it opens in a couple of seconds. It didn't work consistently on my previous machine, a 5,1 Mac Pro running Mojave. Also, it took about 25 seconds for Affinity Photo itself to open off a standard SSD on that machine - vs. literally two on the Mac Studio.

Techbro incels trying to replace the soul of humanity with algorithmic garbage. Other than that I'm all for it.

My answer is that no machine could possibly do what I do.

The copyright issues will need sorting out, but to me the issue is using machines to create "art." Why do people have a need for artistic expression in the first place? But as to copyright... well, I have to give you credit for using coffee as an analogy rather than cars. Really, how are you going to calculate royalty payments when these services have every image on the Internet in their databases? With prescription drugs you can criticize the whole concept of copyrights in general, i.e. it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for sick people to finance drug development. But IP is quite different from prescription drugs (and coffee).

(I'm not up on Clip Studio, just snorting at AI "art.")

So there is hope for humanity after all?

Utter revulsion aside, I just don't understand the point. We already have humans. Minor flaws aside, I think we're pretty remarkable.

I'm sorry, the Monty Python Argument Clinic is down the hall.

Well, in the example I started this post with there's no nesting - it's just a brightness/contrast adjustment applying to everything beneath it. I usually use nested adjustments as well, but this particular one was global. At least I'm pretty sure it was.

Merge Selected is cool. Merge Visible should merge what's visible, no? I don't think it's a bug, but this behavior does create an extra step - a very small one, but nonetheless an extra step. If there's a reason for it (which is how I framed my post) then I'm fine with being wrong, but I don't see one. And if there isn't one, frankly I find the justification that there's some kind of "context to respond to" rather contorted. I mean, I too am a huge fan of Affinity Photo and don't want to nitpick over minor details, but in this example I added an adjustment and was ready to merge what I saw and liked. End of story; I usually do that to consolidate my work so I can turn off unnecessary layers below it, or sometimes to create a compound raster image that I can cut/paste from. Exactly what trouble is avoided by either selecting a pixel layer or adding a blank one? That's a rhetorical question.

This is v.1. Adjustment layer selected on the left, pixel layer selected on the right.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, but this is 100% repeatable. Either you're charmed, I suppose it's possible that my software is corrupted, or you're doing something else. And yes, I only use the Mac version. iPads have a small fraction of the memory what I do requires.

Okay, so I can confirm that this behavior has changed in v.2.0.0 Mac. In v.1.x it doesn't matter what kind of layer is selected, you get the menu with all the options. Not so in v.2.

This is the Mac desktop version. I’m out and can’t check the version, but it’s probably 2.0. Thanks for the replies. It’s not a major hassle to add a temporary pixel layer before merging visible, but I’m pretty sure this wasn’t how v.1 worked.

I think you're right. Thanks, will check.

But if I create a blank pixel layer on top (as shown below) it comes back again. Can someone explain why this behavior has changed? My guess is that it's intentional, and I'm confused. TIA

Okay, I posted about this the other day but I caught it in the act. Ladies and Gentlemen, observe that I have a pixel layer selected and there's no Merge Visible command in the right mouse menu. ...continued next post.

The other glitch - needing a pixel layer or the right-click menu containing commands like Merge Visible didn’t even appear - was definitely a weird glitch.

I take it back. Now that I restarted, it's working normally. There was definitely a glitch, though - I've done both these things literally hundreds of times (and I've posted before that I use the clone brush more than a toothbrush, and I have good dental hygiene). Well, these are computers. As we were...