Jump to content

JPWatkins

Members
  • Content count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Oh, that must be why Google says there are 146,000 pages in the Affinity support forum—Everybody must be like me and has never even thought of even trying to read the Affinity help files. The help files are great and comprehensive it's the users who are F'ed up. That resolves that issue. Thanks, MEB ;-)
  2. Affinity Photo and Designer are no longer Beta software, and I love em a lot. But I have to say a manual like thing is needed. Maybe just a statement of the model of interaction would be a good first step. Tutorials are good, but I've been using Designer and Photo for about a year now, as needed, and I cannot say I have internalized a "model of interaction" for them. In order for this software to have been developed, the writers, by necessity, must have a shared idea of an exact model of interaction for the software. Every time I need to use a mask, I have to try 10 or more things before I find the right way to do what I want. Every time I want to adjust type I struggle a to find the control I want, or I find it and it has no effect (until I find another one that overrides it.) WTF is a pixel layer and when and why might I need it. Placed items do not seem to have a linking function. Is there a linking function and if not why place an item rather than just cut and paste? etc. In short, it seems like the model of interaction is inconsistent or obscure. I'd love to be wrong on this. I'm sure part of my difficulty has to do with the complexity and flexibility of the software. Obviously Designer isn't just a vector program and Photo isn't just bitmap one. But I have experience with software like the the Adobe suite, Painter, various CAD and solid modeling packages etc. But many of these are easy to pick up because the model of interaction is either well explained, or very apparent (the others are hard to use.) The Affinity SW seems to largely follow the Illustrator / Photoshop model, but seems to regularly stray from it in unexpected ways. I'm sure there's a reason. Please share. :-) *** Is there a resource somewhere that lays out a model of interaction that the creators of the software try to adhere to? That indicates major and/or philosophical differences between Photo and Designer and Affinity and Adobe's approaches? Something that would generally serve as a guide to approaching what should be done in what way and how? *** Thanks.
  3. I knew there was some way to do this but have never seen how (short of using the terminal—but I'm no Unix champ either.) I should probably buy a copy of the latest "Mac Bible" or whatever the current equivalent reference book is.
  4. Clearly you are offended. No offense was intended. Like most people you have made an accommodation and now assert there is no problem. That's why below optimum software persists—people get used to it and live with it. Most companies making products of all kinds depend on this. It saves them time effort and money. Apple used to be a leader in UI design, sadly now they are dilettantes and are captured primarily by "coolness" and esthetics rather than a practical concern for the needs of the users. I lament that Jony Ives eyes have remained so amazingly youthful and sharp! ;-) In any case your experience with cataracts, before surgical correction, is your experience. Other people have a different experience. Your prior difficulties and accommodations in no way makes bad UI design acceptable. It seems you are literally saying, "It aint all that bad. I used to be blind!" Let's just say that this is an "inexact" argument to make for other use cases. It's fortunate you have had a complete resolution to your visual limitations through surgery, but that's not the case for everyone and it's not a solution for sub par UI design choices. I say this as a product design researcher and consultant.
  5. Yeah, . . . I poked around earlier and found them. It appears with the exception of the Applications folder, searches on the Mac go no higher in the file structure than certain folders (documents, Downloads etc.) inside the user folder. That seems weird, no? No wonder I can't ever find stuff.
  6. I have the same machine (and presbyopia!) and it's a problem for me too. I'll have to check out those UI display options you mention. It might also be good for my Mac user Mom (83!) who has great problems seeing the UI. @mac_heibu I'm glad you have no problem with reading the UI, but why ignore the fact that other folks have difficulties you don't? That's classic "blame the user" mindset. :-)
  7. OK I see the slash now. I didn't get it before. I thought I needed to specify a path to the plugins. (I won't ask why I have to specify a path when the specified path leads to the whole fricking computer!) Yes, now all three plugins work, and work properly. Interesting to me, if I remove the global support, the silver FX Plug in (and only the Silver FX plugin) gets the trial countdown splash page on it. (Being able to share a screen shot is very handy!) Thanks so much for all the help. I'll be very happy when the 1.5 release comes out and I can use the rest of the plugins.
  8. When I search my computer, for "Silver Efex Pro 2" these (the ones in "NIK Collection" and "Photoshop Plugins>Google") are the only two instances that come back. I have no idea where the Aperture versions are (unless Aperture uses these?)
  9. Did as you advised. The preferences still indicate Analog and Color FX "requires global support" Silver FX still works, but the funky splash screen still comes up and I still have to click the button to complete the action (and the countdown has gone down another day.)
  10. @ R C-R >"Just curious, but did you have Adobe Photoshop or Bridge installed on your system, and/or did you add the supplemental install location like the video shows at about the 2:45 point in the video? Some users who do not have any Adobe products installed seem to overlook the need to use the plus button in the installer to add a pre-created folder for the plugins, like the video shows near the beginning. >This has been mentioned several times in the Affinity forums but it is easy to overlook that critical step." You didn't actually ask this of me, but it applies. I have an old version of Photoshop and Bridge on this disk (I forgot I had it on here.) But I did follow the instructions and create a supplemental install etc. as you can see from the screenshots I posted.
  11. >To add it to a post, click the More Reply Options button at the bottom of the reply window, click the Choose File button, & choose the screen shot you just made. Then click the Attach This File button. So *thats* where it is! Yes, the standalone plugins work fine and I think all the apps and plugins are in their proper folders.
  12. Not sure why mac_heibu questions you on this, it's a real problem. Apple's has been distracted for several years from their efforts toward a resolution independent OS (but I don't think anyone else is there yet either.) All you can do in the OS, once you have settled on a screen resolution, is make adjustments in System Preferences> General, and Finder> View> Show view options (I may have forgotten somewhere else, but these are the biggies. This is sufficient for smaller displays and up close work, but if you have a big display and sit further away from it you do a lot of squinting. You will also want to learn to zoom in and out quickly using keyboard and mouse shortcuts. This is enabled in System Preferences> Accessability> Zoom. I have no idea what the default settings are, but I check "use keyboard shortcuts to zoom" and "use scroll gesture with keyboard modifiers to zoom" using "command" as the modifier. This is just what I'm used to. It really all depends on taste and the type of pointing device (trackpad, mouse, Waccom, etc that you use. (BTW, I have to have the mouse setting "scroll direction natural" checked, which strangely is not apple's default, or I go completely insane!) Most software (Affinity included) also has some options that are helpful. In Affinity Photo go to Affinity Photo> Preferences> Interface where you can make some interface size adjustments if you want.
  13. Thanks for taking the time, BTW. I appreciate it from you, MEB, and everyone else. [Lucky you, you may be the only one near my time zone!] "What is the creation date of your file named Silver Efex Pro 2.plugin, & of the one named Silver Efex Pro 2.app if you have that as well? It should be March 25, 2016 for these & all the other NIK files." > No. All my creation dates for all plugins and apps are yesterday (since the files were created yesterday when I installed them.) "Also, on my system both of these items have a version number of "2.2.24" without the ".10 x64" suffix." >When I go to get the NIK Collection at Google obtained via Google search or via the link that MEB supplied (at "https://www.google.com/nikcollection/) and click on the download link it downloads a file called "nikcollection-full-1.2.11.dmg" which installs Silver Efex Pro 2 (v2.2.24) The ".10 x64" only appears in the splash screen when the plugin is called from the filter menu in AP It has has a down counting trial time period, but who knows if it actually is in effect? In any case I have to press a button labeled "demo" or "trial" or something like that in order to fully launch the plugin. OK, I found an info Plist in the contents of the plugin that identifies 2.2.24 as the "bundle version short" and 2.2.24.10 as the "bundle version" so I don't think this is a problem. They would appear to be the same version. Also in the resources files are the splashscreen graphics I mentioned and they look exactly the same as the ones that come up when AP calls the plugin. I assume the extension merely indicates a Mac optimized 64 bit plugin. "As mentioned in the bottom section of the NIK Collection Uninstalling Help page (same link that MEB mentioned above), to uninstall any of these earlier "uncollected" plugins, you must download from that page the individual installers for each of them & run them prior to running the NIK Collection installer. The current free NIK Collection installer will not remove any of these old versions." >Yes, as I said, I did all of that (I did it when I first installed and then again on reinstall when MEB asked me to.) "Also, earlier you asked which plugins I had working on my Mac. What works for me with AP version 1.4.2 is exactly the same as MEB described on his Affinity Photo: Plug-Ins Support page. (Be sure to click on each plugin listed on that page to see the details.)" >Good to know. Confirms things. Yes, I have looked at the details for them for both 1.4.2 and for 1.5) "All of the stand alone application versions also work." >Yeah . . . How do you use those? They launch OK and Silver Efex has a File menu column (which is an annoying way to open a file,) but Viveza does not! Dragging an image into the window doesn't work. What do you do to get an image open? As you may have noticed, I actually don't really care about Analog or Color Efex, just sharpening, de-noise, b&w conversion (HDR also looks good, but I have yet to use it,) and most important of all—Viveza. So it's pretty frustrating for me that it doesn't work for me! [i have since found I can drag a file onto the application icon, still not ideal, but what should I expect for a free, orphaned piece of software?]
  14. OK I've done everything all over (again.) Uninstalled with every conceivable uninstaller. Emptied the trash. Reinstalled, again (This is at least the third time I've done this.) And guess what. After I uninstalled, nothing worked (in both Aperture and AP)—the plugins were gone. After I reinstalled (yes, from the newest free installer from Google) everything was in the same state as before uninstalling (for both Aperture [working] and AP [only Silver Efex sort of working,]) and including the 7 days left in the "free trial" and the "requires global support" status warning. Only Silver Efex Pro 2 v 2.2.24.10 x64 works, and only for 7 more days. I don't know what else to do.
  15. Yes I installed the newest. and I ran an uninstaller beforehand just in case. I may have installed an early version years ago, but I would have uninstalled it. I figure there must be something old hanging around somewhere, but it's pretty hard to find stuff of that sort on the Mac these last few years.
×