Herbert123

I would say pretty much for ~75%. It is when 32bpc support is required that Affinity Photo becomes too limited, since it does not support a bit depth beyond 16 bit per channel. And there are issues with certain plugins which are Photoshop-only, or will not run as a plugin in Photo.

Such as the new stackable layer effects...

Due to Adobe's rather lacking documentation, it is very difficult for third-party developers to support all of Photoshop's features. I also work in Photoline, and the newest betas do import smart objects and art boards. If the smart object is a bitmap layered one generated within Photoshop, it is imported as an embedded placeholder, which can be opened and edited just as in Photoshop - even the layers are retained. It literally opens the psb file. But embedded text layers are converted to bitmap layers, and shape layers may disappear. When I tested a CC2015 PSD file with a smart object which contains a placed Illustrator object, Photoline would even open that file more or less correct: the vectors remain intact, but the scaling is off compared to the original. Currently Photoline's workaround is to also include a rasterized version which does look correct. In short, developers are pretty much left to their own device in regards to figuring out the intricacies of the PSD format.

Must have been a crushing experience all that crashing! :D Sorry, could not resist!

A free alternative would also be http://www.xnview.com/en/xnviewmp/ A dark theme can be downloaded here: http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=25934&start=15#p109533

I use Photoline's Browse function as an alternative to Bridge. It's a bit clunky in places, but has all the power of Photoline behind it, including actions. And the browse function can send image files to external apps, so it works well together with Affinity. Batch processing is also supported. Once the images are indexed, thumbnail preview is lightning fast. www.pl32.com It might be a bit overkill, though, to install an alternative image editor just for its browse functionality. What about Picasa?

Both platforms have great alternatives for Adobe software. Xara Designer and CorelDraw are brilliant Illustrator replacements on the Windows side, while Mac users now have Affinity Designer. For Premiere one only has to download the free version of Davinci Resolve, and BlackMagic released the first Mac version of Fusion (which is a free download as well for any output up to 4K). For a Photoshop alternative which offers in-depth image editing features which surpasses even Photoshop in cases, Photoline is available for both Windows and Mac: full 32 bit per channel, a layer system that beats the pants out of Photoshop, and a full inexpensive license, just like Affinity Photo. If you need a cross-platform solution (which can be installed on a USB key as well) that's your answer. If digital painting is part of your work, Krita is hard to beat, and leaves Photoshop behind in its dust. In short, many options out there for both Windows and Mac users who dislike Adobe's Digital Serfdom. Although I admit that it would be nice if Affinity would be made available for Windows as well - the more choice we have, the better.

A work-around solution is to download ImageAlpha http://pngmini.com/ Export as full 24bit transparent PNG files in Affinity, and optimize in ImageAlpha. For images which require more than 256 colours, ImageOptim is a good choice on Mac. https://imageoptim.com/ If you have access to Windows, the best overall solution is ColorQuantizer. http://x128.ho.ua/color-quantizer.html Any number of colours, with numerous down-sampling algorithms, many quality options, and a custom quality mask brush for precise control.

OpenEXR would only make sense if 32 bit per channel support is added.

In Photoline this is/can be solved by switching to document mode (rather than image mode). In document mode any background colour can be selected in the document properties, including transparency. A custom document background colour setting would be very helpful in this regard.

In Photoline any layer (bitmap or vector or combinations of both), layer group, adjustment layer, layer mask and layer mask group can be virtually instantiated (cloned). These virtual layers update in real-time when the source layers are painted in or edited. By transforming the virtual copies, any type of symmetry and as many symmetry axes as the user wishes can be setup relatively quickly (especially with a recorded action). Krita also supports virtual instantiated layers. It would be a good solution in Affinity Photo as well.

The beautiful thing in FilterForge is that anyone can create new filters either from scratch, or based on one of the existing ones. FF is a filter creator that works with a nodal approach. FF with its filter library replaces 95% of filters out there all by itself. And yes, I agree: a combo with FilterForge (even the basic version) would be lucrative to both companies, I think. Why invent the wheel all over again?

I agree - in this regard it is interesting to note that there is software which tries to ease the workflow. For example, Photoline enables a workflow in which a layer can be sent to any other application through the use of SVG, TIFF, PNG, or PDF for editing, and when the external application saves the (temporary) file, the source layer in Photoline is automatically updated. Or send the entire file to the external app, or a flattened file. This is an original solution to mitigate the difficulties surrounding round-tripping. It works really well, and is quite a novel approach, and It also means almost any application which can handle graphic files may be integrated in Photoline as a kind of 'plugin'. It saves a lot of time: with a flick of a key I send a layer to Krita for painting. Or another shortcut sends a group of layers as a flattened version to a web image optimization app for final output. When I require a special filter only available in Gimp: send the layer to Gimp, apply the effect, and send it back to Photoline. Super handy and efficient. Although it is not a perfect solution, it beats having to limit oneself to only a group of applications from one vendor which only 'talk' well to each-other, and no other applications can be easily integrated.

Alternatively you could invest in FilterForge, which offers more than 11.000 filter and texture effects. It will run as either a Photoshop plugin or stand-alone. The creative filter section by itself consists of almost 1000 effects. And each filter often offers ten times or more control compared to Photoshop's creative filters. https://www.filterforge.com/ Three filters and three minutes later (okay, I did add a cloud texture in overlay mode) to darken things a bit):

I am surprised (no, amazed!) this is not already part of PNG export: it is an absolutely essential option for web, mobile and game design.

Photoshop's "Save for Web" feature is being phased out in the latest version: it is considered a 'legacy' feature, and will disappear in the next version. As for the PNG optimization in "Save for Web": it is terrible: - no support for alpha transparency and indexed-based coloured PNG - no support to reduce the number of colours to 512, or 1024, or an arbitrary number of colours - a lack of dithering controls, and misc other PNG options. - resultant file PNG file size for assets with alpha transparency is dreadful compared to other (free) tools. - in Illustrator the anti-aliasing and downsampling quality is downright useless. Avoid. In short: photoshop's Save for Web function is the worst option out there for PNG optimization and quality control. The best alternative for PNG optimization is currently ColorQuantizer (http://x128.ho.ua/color-quantizer.html). Unfortunately, this is unavailable for Macs. An alternative (with almost no control over conversion settings) would be ImagOptim, but it only supports lossless PNG optimization https://imageoptim.com/ Color Quantizer is so good, it is worth running it in a virtual box or Wine environment on your Mac.

I agree. For comparison, here are Photoline's layer effects, which offer full advanced curve control. It would be nice if Affinity would afford the same level of control.

Workflows in compositing and matte painting have advanced, and HDR painting is is one of the features becoming more prevalent in those areas. EXR and 32bit per channel support are missing in Affinity, and are important in 3d work as well. In Krita and Photoline I can work seamlessly with 32bpc, multi-layered EXR files and HDR files. I can combine 32bpc renders with HDR imagery, and paint details in highlights and shadows. Even Photoshop's EXR support is very limited to a single layer workflow, and users will have to invest in a commercial plugin which costs more than Affinity Photo! Until Affinity receives an update in these areas, it will be considered immature and unsuitable for these areas of work, no matter how good or bad the painting tools will be(come). But I have a feeling the developers are mainly focusing on designers and photographers as customers, and are less concerned with including features which are aimed at higher level compositing.

Truth be told, Adobe HAS removed many features from their software, and those either were not replaced, or only after a very long time. For example, the oil painting filter was removed from Photoshop, as was Kuler and Mini Bridge. With the CS5 release an assortment of tools were missing, such as the Pattern Maker. Two years ago Flash lost essential tools: the bone tools and curves: these were only reintroduced a couple of months ago. Dreamweaver lost many features which were never redeveloped by Adobe. And many apps were completely abandoned without warning by Adobe (Fireworks, GoLive, Freehand, LiveMotion, and so on, and so forth). Adobe did far worse than removing a beta feature in a beta version, and a feature at that which will return in the full release.

I used to do my green screen keying in After Effects - much more control with the built-in keyer and tools. Getting rid of green spill is a doddle in dedicated keying tools. Nowadays I use either Blender or Fusion. Both applications's keying tools are great (with Fusion's tools outperforming Blender's). It may sound like overkill, but when I need a quality green screen key, even for still frames, I choose either application depending on the resolution of the source file(s). And both are free (Fusion will work with up to UHD). Fusion beta is out for Mac now. The workflow, once you get used to a nodal workflow, is easy and quick. I am quite pragmatic: the right tool for the right job.

Jack of all trades, master of none. 'nuff said.

I am unsure about focusing too much on painting tools: the danger lies in fragmenting the focus of the application, in my opinion. And the market is already saturated with a number of extremely powerful digital painting and drawing tools, and trying to compete with those would probably take up all of the Affinity developers' time. For example, I do not see them competing with Krita, which is open source, and arguably superior for digital painting even when compared to the likes of Photoshop. So is ClipStudio, Corel Painter, Art Rage, and newer applications such as Mischief and PaintStorm Studio. How can the Affinity team hope to compete with dedicated apps? I think it should not. The developers behind Krita, for example, decided to shift their focus on digital painting a couple of years ago, rather than developing an all-purpose app, which worked out well for them. Affinity Photo is better off primarily focusing on becoming a great photo and image editing app, if you ask me.

What are you talking about? InDesign can easily deal with multiple page formats in the same document - just use the page tool, and the master pages. With spreads, without spreads, and even alternate layouts are supported of which the objects automatically update their contents based on changes - perfect for mobile wireframes and mockups. Fluid pages are supported as well, with objects automatically adjusting (up to a point, of course). I am no fan of Adobe's current direction, but InDesign is a tough act to follow in regards to page and template management. Freehand looks positively stone-age compared to InDesign. There is just no comparison.

Yes, that would be handy: the dehaze in Photoline is non-destructive, and it makes it easy to adjust it later after applying other adjustments.