Tom Zimberoff

I appreciate hearing from a staff member with a request for supporting materials to follow up and try to fix this anomaly. However, since the problem happens unpredictably, even if relatively often, and because I don't do post-production work every day, it is difficult for me to find the time to do as you have asked right away. Eventually, I will — ASAP.

Yes, thank you. Now that I know what you meant, I've used that function often. Nevertheless, it doesn't add or detract from the matter that the Selection Brush Tool is gebrochen.

I doubt that you caused it, accidentally or otherwise. It just happens. And I still think it's a bug. I use the selection tool a lot. So I see the problem a lot. I don't know what you mean or in what context you meant it by citing "modifer key or mode toggle." The fact is, it happens. I trust the Affinity development team will look into this anomaly expeditiously.

When meticulously selecting sections of any given image with the Selection Brush Tool, suddenly — without rhyme or reason that I can tell — the brush starts to DE-select. I am getting impatient with the time it costs me to redo my workflow. I do not want to restart the software every time this happens or reimport an image or whatever. This problem happens so irregularly (but too often) that it is just as problematic to assign myself the task of selecting an image and then using the Selection Brish Tool to recreate it on demand. Neither a screen recording nor a screenshot, in my opinion (as someone with modest software development experience) would shed more light on this issue because it seems to be a bug, not user error. ( I reserve the right to be wrong. 🤨) Nevertheless, I will ask if others have experienced this issue, if Affinity's developers are aware of it, and if there is a fix in the works. This problem has occurred in the previous version of Affinity Photo and with previous iterations of Mac OS. ............... Affinity Photo 2 v2.4.2 Hardware Overview: Model Name: Mac Studio Model Identifier: Mac13,2 Model Number: Z14K000AULL/A Chip: Apple M1 Ultra Total Number of Cores: 20 (16 performance and 4 efficiency) Memory: 128 GB System Firmware Version: 10151.101.3 OS Loader Version: 10151.101.3 Serial Number (system): LXQNCV9G9C Hardware UUID: 600ACD63-B4EA-56F3-B5DA-93DB9979C235 Provisioning UDID: 00006002-000009443489801E Activation Lock Status: Enabled

Thanks for your reply, Walt. The problem I described happens so irregularly (but too often) that it is even just as problematic to assign myself the task of selecting an image and begin to use the Selection Brish Tool to recreate it on demand. Neither a screen recording nor a screenshot would, in my opinion (as someone with software development experience) shed any more light on an issue that seems to be a bug, not user error. ( I reserve the right to be wrong.) I will nevertheless post this to the proper section of this forum if I can find it; a bit of a labyrith. 🤨

I, too, have this problem with the latest version of Affinity and Mac OS as of April 18, 2024, but it has existing since I started to use Affinity more than a year ago with previous versions. While carefully selecting portions of an image with the Selection Brush Tool, suddenly — without rhyme or reason that I can tell — the brush starts to DE-select. I am getting impatient with the time it costs me. Does anyone have a solution? I do not want to restart the software every time this happens or reimport an image or whatever. Please help!

The thing is, my kind interlocutors, I'm not talking about resolution. And I'm not talking about lossless conversions or any such thing. I'm talking about one part of an image — NOT the whole thing, that is less sharp when converting from a 300dpi TIF to a 300dpi JPG at the same dimensions. For years, I have routinely made very high-resolution JPGs for printing. There is no difference, as expected. For years, I have never seen a difference between the TIF and the JPG on a screen, either, regardless of magnification. There should be NO difference. And it's apparent in only a part of the image. That is what has prompted my concern.

That seems ridiculous to me. It's either sharp or it's not. If you can see the difference with your naked eyes on a computer screen, what the heck do you think a five-foot-wide print will look like?

I don't usually create an afphoto file; I go straight from either 3FR or fff (Hasselblad) to TIF, then make high-res JPGs. The issue I'm referring to is subtle but noticeable. I will upload the files. If you compare the files, even without zooming in, look at the sky/clouds in the center of the images and see how it becomes "softer" when you switch back and forth from TIF to JPG. ©2024 Tom Zimberoff_#3B_0185.tif

In Affinity Photo v2.3.1, if I copy a TIF file (with multiple layers) or Export it as a JPG . . . OR flatten the multi-layered TIF, sharpness is lost in the background (i.e., the sky and clouds). As far as I can tell, I did not create a separate sharpened layer (or use Clarity) for the background. The only sharpened layer applies to the background layer as a whole and was applied before making further edits. If you A:B compare the attached screenshots, you can see what changes. Does anybody know what's going on here?

I’m pleased to report that no artifact border appeared when opening a Hasselblad “.fff” file in Affinity Photo beta v2.4.02256)

Although this was not an issue with the previous Hasselblad 50MP back, opening ".fff" files created with Hasselblad's new 100MP back in Affinity Photo, after they have been converted from Hasselblad's propritary ".3FR" format in Phocus software, an ugly artifact appears around the border of each image. I believe this to be a bug, which I trust will be quickly fixed because the alternative, storing and opening >200MB RAW 3FR files directly in Affinity, means storingtoo many >200MB RAW files, which will eat up ~150% more storage space on any hard drive array than keeping fff files.

I can't wait to look. Thank you!

Addendum #2. I think I've answered my own question, after experimenting with my printer. I've found that I can increase the default contrast. Nevertheless, if anyone wants to add their opinion about a better or alternative way to do this, please let me know. And thanks in advance.

Addendum . . . The difference that is apparent to me is better described as seeing less contrast in prints than on my display. Nonetheless, I'm hoping to find a way to accurately and consistently correlate what I see on screen to my prints. I'm pretty sure I'm using the correct ICC profile and that the display brightness is not the culprit. But then again, I'm appealing to you experts out there.