Asha

Don't know what control-D is, but command-D will deselect the selection. This is not useful if you want to keep the selection and modify it with other tools.

I'm on board with improvements to the crop settings. I've mentioned it in other threads--the ability to resample and crop at the same time is extremely helpful to workflow. singlesparq--you can save settings in AP 1.4.1. First select the type of crop (eg ratio, absolute), then type in your numbers (with units if it is absolute). Then, select Add Preset from the drop down. The distinction between ratio and absolute is a little tricky in 1.4.1--ratio will constrain proportions, but absolute will not. I agree that this is not adequate--a constrained pixel dimension should stay constrained.

See responses here: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/17816-using-cmd-key-to-bring-up-move-tool/

This appears to be a duplicate post, and was also answered elsewhere: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/17816-using-cmd-key-to-bring-up-move-tool/

See responses in your other thread: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/17816-using-cmd-key-to-bring-up-move-tool/

Madame, the OP is referring to an Illustrator keyboard toggle that will change the cursor to the move tool while that key is depressed, and return directly to the text tool when released (this is done instead of switching between tools). The need for a keyboard toggle is irrelevant, as explained by crabtrem, because the cursor only needs to be moved to the bounding box in order to change to the move tool, and after repositioning, the cursor will go back to text when moved inside the text box.

Pick a different tool, such as the brush.

Haha Quarian, and I see pigs in the sky! I've sent requests to all of the filter makers I use (Nik, On1, DxO), asking for Affinity Photo support. I think the more requests are made, the more likely we will get cooperation and attention :)

5mm might not be enough for some processes. Some things like die cut, for example, have a lot of leeway and need big bleeds.

Makkah, just tried it, and it does show up when I open other files. The new preset ended up on the bottom of the list, if that is any help.

This tutorial is a good resource for creating a custom vector brush with arrowheads: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/3998-how-to-create-your-own-custom-arrow-stroke-brush-video/

I was exploring the channels a bit today. One thing I would have liked is the ability to directly copy the contents of a channel and paste them into a layer or a new blank channel. In other words, it would be more intuitive if the channels had behavior a bit more like layers. I was able to work around, but it was a bit tedious.

I have been trying to use the channel separation method for selecting the tree, and in AP it is a bit convoluted, but it will allow you to get decent separation of the tree from the background. Here is what I did: --convert the file to CMYK (for this photo, RGB and LAB did not have sufficient contrast in any of the channels) --check for highest contrast channel--in this case it was the black channel --duplicate the background layer and change the name to something more unique --right click the black channel of the duplicated layer and select "Invert" --right click the black channel of the duplicated layer again, and select "Create Grayscale Layer" --add layer adjustment "Threshold" above the new grayscale layer, adjust so that tree is distinct from the sky, then "Merge Down" so the threshold is applied to the grayscale layer. Since your file has a difference of exposure due to the backlighting, you may need to do 2 grayscale layers with different threshold settings. You can use editing tools to remove most of the the background way more easily once the threshold is applied, and you can use the finalized black and white to create a mask for masking or selection of the tree. Creating a mask has the added benefit of allowing you to refine it with powerful tools within the layers panel ("Refine Mask") to get even better edges around the tree. barninga already answered the issue of the inpainting needed for your 2nd photo--that should be corrected before you merge with the first photo.

This sounds like a feature request--my suggestion would be to have a user defined offset for the crop marks in the page setup. That way, people can get the exact position they need, especially if using a variety of bleed widths.

Welcome steve-halloween--there are both vector and raster tools available in Affinity Designer, so AD may be all you need. There is a free 10-day trial, so it is worth a try. If you need more options for pixel painting, Affinity Photo is great for raster editing, and it also has a 10-day trial.

AP 1.4.x is leaps and bounds above where Photoshop was at v1.5...

I have had some similar frustrations with crop. AP is a little different than PS in this regard. If you have "Absolute Dimensions" selected in the top settings, it will create something with units such as pixels or inches. The aspect ratio of the Absolute Dimensions doesn't stay fixed if the box is resized. However, if you select "Custom Ratio", you can resize the box and the ratio will stay fixed. If you want to save your settings, enter them first, then select "Add Preset" from the drop down.

billbr, I was suggesting the Exposure Merging video because it would help you with exposure bracketed photos, if you chose to do that. If you scroll down, there are many helpful videos, including one called Quick Masks that would probably help you with your single photo.

HDR in camera is a bit tricky for handheld photos of people--any little movement of the camera or the subject will result in differences in the bracketed photos. This could make it difficult to process the photo as an HDR in image editing software. Having said that, you can use exposure bracketed photos as layers in AP and create masks so that you get the best parts of each exposure. It would essentially be photo-compositing, but with the same source material in all the photos. For the photo you showed in your post, you can also use adjustment layers with masks to correct the different areas of the photo. Since the exposure of the background looks about right, but the people are dark, I would make a mask that allows the foreground to be adjusted with levels or curves. Or, you can duplicate the layer, mask out the background, and use the Dodge tool on the darker areas. Those are just 2 examples... ETA: Here is the link to the AP tutorials--the one titled Stacking: Exposure Merging might be of interest https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/tutorials/photo/

For most general uses, the high-level JPG out of the camera is good enough. However, if you want more control, shooting RAW is a good move. If I'm working for myself, I only shoot RAW. To be honest, even for my own general use stuff--since I've been using RAW, I don't even bother with JPGs anymore since I like the results of processing my own RAW images better than JPGs. I shoot JPG+RAW if I'm in a situation where a "client" wants to see something right away (having JPG on hand is better since most people have a way to view them). Plus, my Canon produces horrible JPGs, so if the "client" wants something a bit more refined, I develop and export all the RAW photos to JPG for them. AP can develop one photo at a time currently, so to do batch processing (which is most of the time, for me) I use DxO OpticsPro. Adobe Camera Raw, Lightroom and CaptureOne will also do batch processing. The advantage of DxO and CaptureOne is that you can control whether lens profile correction is applied, whereas (at the last I checked), ACR and LR will not give you the option to switch it off. AP also lets you turn off the lens profile, but again, for only one photo. It seems like such a niggling detail, but sometimes I find the lens correction muddies the photo, so I want to be able to turn it off if needed. ETA, I'm not sure I know the answer to whether there is a difference in JPG editing tools in the develop persona. I would think that lens correction would not be available, but exposure, color temperature, etc., should be.

Yay! Glad it finally worked for you!

PhotoNewbie--yes, if you have the full frame of your camera and the camera itself did not down-size your file, then your resolution is more than adequate for 6"x4" inkjet printing. It is strange, though, how the file you were working with had only 432x288 pixels, which is on the low side. Perhaps in future, this is something to keep an eye on :)

If the pasted picture is just so enormous that the bounding box is out of view, it really helps to zoom way down...

Actually, I was thinking about it--if there is a desire to have gradations in the mask based on the varying tone of the image, then selecting fully transparent won't work. I drew an airbrushed shape onto a transparent pixel layer, then chose Select>Select from Layer, which selected my shape with the feathered edges. Once the selection was made, I just clicked on the layer mask button to get a mask. It also works with the Quick Mask button at the top toolbar. Obviously, if the inverse is desired, then Select>Invert Pixel Selection should be done before the mask is made.

PhotoNewbie--I think I must have misread your post. Can you go to your original file, select Document>Resize Document and see what the dimensions are?