Jump to content

- S -

Members
  • Content count

    643
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by - S -

  1. It looks like the masks are causing transparency to be removed—partially transparent pixels become fully opaque. You should be able to use the text as a mask for the background image, instead of clipping the background image to the text (see attached file). File: Symphony_Campaign4b - Copy.afdesign
  2. When saving an image in Affinity Photo that has an ‘sRGB v1.31 (Canon)’ colour profile, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF metadata from ‘sRGB’ to ‘Uncalibrated’. The Affinity Photo default export presets are set to use the document profile by default, this means that when saving an image that already has an ‘sRGB v1.31 (Canon)’ colour profile embedded in it, the document colour profile remains ‘sRGB v1.31 (Canon)’ when exported. However, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF metadata field from ‘sRGB’ to ‘Uncalibrated’, even though it’s still an sRGB image with an sRGB colour profile. ---------- Windows 10 – 1903 (18362.418) Affinity Photo – 1.7.3.481
  3. I don't know why Canon use their own sRGB profile; probably stems from a legal department decision 20 years ago. I've attached a zip file containing the display profiles located in the Canon ICC directory (C:\Program Files\Canon\Digital Photo Professional 4\DPP4Lib\icc). There are two Canon ‘sRGB v1.31 (Canon)’ sRGB profiles located in that directory, one is an ICC profile; the other an ICM profile: sRGB Color Space Profile.icm sRGB Profile.icc Zip File: Canon DPP 4.11.0 Display Profiles.zip
  4. This is possibly something that will be part of the rumoured Affinity 'Digital Asset Management' software, which will possibly have Adobe Bridge like features. However I don't know when they will be releasing this; I expect Affinity Publisher for iPad is next on their to-do list.
  5. Are you definitely sure the second document is sRGB? The second document looks like it's using something like a *wscRGB colour space. In the below screenshots, even though the colours won't be exact as I'm using screenshots of a video file, your first document looks like it's using an 'RGB/8 - sRGB IEC61966-2.1' document profile, but the second document looks like it's using something like a 'RGB/8 - *wscRGB' document profile. You can see the difference in the colour spectrums both in the colour picker dialogue box and also in the Colour panel in the top-right. First document: Second Document:
  6. Some Affinity Photo batch processing feedback: 1) If an item fails when running a batch process job, it creates a ‘Failed’ error message. However, as soon as the batch processing job completes, the panel returns to a blank state and all the messages disappear, including the failed error. If it’s a short job with small files, then this error message can disappear too quickly— no longer displaying which one(s) failed. When the files in the batch job are from various different folders, it can be particularly problematic, as it’s then a guessing game which one failed. If it’s a longer job and you leave the machine processing the files, when you return later—after the job has completed—you don’t have a record if any have failed, just a blank Batch panel. The Batch panel could do with a hamburger menu. And in that hamburger menu an option to keep the results displayed in the Batch panel after the batch processing job completes—until perhaps either running another batch job, or closing Affinity Photo. 2) If you set a batch processing job to run a macro on a bunch of files, and set it to save into the original location—so that it overwrites the files, it doesn’t appear to check whether it was actually able to write to the file. Therefore, if a file is read-only, the Batch panel still displays the file with a green tick and a ‘Finished’ message, even though it was not possible to write to that file. 3) It should be possible to access all the export presets (including user created ones) that are used in [File > Export], from inside the ‘New Batch Job’ settings. 4) If you set a batch processing job to run a macro on a bunch of .tif files, and set it to save into the original location—so that it overwrites the files, it doesn’t allow you to actually overwrite the .tif files, as it saves them all as .tiff files instead. 5) The batch job settings should be sticky—at least until Affinity Photo is closed. Although this has been discussed lots of times before.
  7. I just export them as 'sRGB IEC61966-2.1' instead. I did consider adding another step when processing DPP raw images and using Affinity Photo to batch process them all to 'sRGB IEC61966-2.1'—meaning everything is consistent and I can forget about Canon sRGB profiles altogether—but then Affinity changes the file extension to .tiff, which is even worse. Windows reads the metadata from the file and displays whatever the ColorSpace metadata field says it is.
  8. Affinity Photo changes the Exif colorspace metadata from 'sRGB' to 'Uncalibrated' when opening the file. Then when saving the file, the changes are saved to the file. See the below screenshots: TIF exported from Canon DPP 4: TIF opened in Affinity Photo: TIF saved in Affinity Photo:
  9. That's what I would expect to see. The below is from the ExifTool documentation: Tag Name: ColorSpace Notes: (The value of 0x2 is not standard EXIF. Instead, an Adobe RGB image is indicated by "Uncalibrated" with an InteropIndex of "R03". The values 0xfffd and 0xfffe are also non-standard, and are used by some Sony cameras) 0x1 = sRGB 0x2 = Adobe RGB 0xfffd = Wide Gamut RGB 0xfffe = ICC Profile 0xffff = Uncalibrated In my original post however, the image doesn't have a wide-gamut colour space. The image is an sRGB image, with an sRGB colour space (it has an ‘sRGB v1.31 (Canon)’ embedded profile); therefore the exif metadata should remain as sRGB, and not changed to 'Uncalibrated'. Yes, it's 65535 (0xffff), which is Uncalibrated.
  10. Affinity Photo writes to the below locations when selecting 'Show Grid' from the View menu. Publisher does something similar with 'Show Special Characters'. C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Roaming\Affinity\Photo\1.0\user\visibility_options.dat~temp C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Roaming\Affinity\Photo\1.0\user\visibility_options.dat It also writes to the same place when selecting 'Show Margins' and 'Show Guides'. Does Affinity Photo crash when selecting these from the View menu as well? Do you have 'Google Drive' installed on both the desktop and the laptop, or just on the laptop? Same goes for any other cloud sync applications where they are on the laptop, but not the desktop (some desktop printers like HP for example sometimes install stuff like this when installing their software).
  11. Although you mentioned it happening with menu items, is it possible it's actually triggering when trying to autosave in the background, which it does every 300 seconds? Can you think of any differences between your desktop and laptop? For example, does the laptop have different OneDrive settings to the desktop—such as OneDrive Files On-Demand set on the laptop to save space, but not on the desktop? Or if OneDrive Files On-Demand is set on both, are there any applications installed on the laptop—which are not installed on the desktop—that may be interacting with the file system in the background, such as third-party antivirus?
  12. That makes more sense. When I posted the reply, the original post only mentioned ddflt.sys—which I haven't come across before. Problems with cldflt.sys however have previously been reported in the bugs section: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/99381-saving-files-causes-computer-restart/&do=findComment&comment=533028
  13. I am also on 18362.418, however I don't have that driver (I can't find any reference to it in %SystemRoot%\inf\setupapi.dev.log either). Are you able to find the location of the driver using Windows File Explorer search? I.E. Searching for the following from 'This PC' in Windows File Explorer. ext:(=.sys) name:(~="ddflt") If so, does right-clicking the file and going to [Properties > Details] shed any light on what this driver is or what it does?
  14. As others have mentioned, this is a bug—and a pretty nasty one as it can ruin images if you don't realise or use it with a batch job. I do the same as you when scanning: I.E. Scan at a high scanner DPI, then afterwards straighten, crop to the correct aspect ratio, resize to the final pixel dimensions, set to 300 DPI. Therefore below is a 300 DPI macro I recorded in an earlier version of Affinity Photo, which still works OK in the current version of Affinity Photo. You can use this if you want until it's fixed: Affinity macro file: DPI.afmacros
  15. There are a couple of ways: 1a) Select the two curve layers in the layers panel 1b) Press and hold the 'ALT' (or Option) key 1c) With the 'ALT' (or Option) key still pressed, click the 'Subtract' button in the tool bar (which will create a Compound object). You may first need to add the 'Operations' group of icons to the tool bar by going to [View > Customise Toolbar] and then dragging it to the tool bar. 1d) Drag the 'Compound' group over the Background image thumbnail (small vertical blue bar) so it acts as a mask for the image. Alternatively: 2a) Select the two curve layers in the layers panel 2b) Right-click on the image with the Pen tool or Move tool selected 2c) Go to [Geometry > Subtract] to subtract the top curve from the bottom one 2d) Drag the combined curve over the Background image thumbnail (small vertical blue bar) so it acts as a mask for the image. 2e) Switch to the Pen tool to see the nodes
  16. As Walt mentioned, some people have reported problems with MSI Afterburner or Rivatuner Statistics Server (RTSS) causing this issue. Do you have any of these installed?
  17. I’m not a designer so I don’t normally reply to Affinity Designer questions, however looking at the file from the perspective of Affinity Photo, rather than Affinity Designer, some of the objects in the file don’t align to the pixel grid. In the below example (which is the white/blue edge as shown in your above screenshot), the vertical edges of the white curve aren’t straight, which will cause anti-aliasing. The same thing with the grey curves also in this group. In the below example, the blue rectangle (and it’s 8px white stroke) are aligned at the top-left corner to 740.3px—rather than 740px—meaning it straddles the pixel grid. This results in softer edges and the green layer below showing through the anti-aliasing. However, not being a designer I don’t know how other software handles partial pixels like this, especially when the final image may be exported at various different sizes; meaning even if it’s pixel perfect at the original size, it may not be at the exported dimensions. I don’t know whether it’s just accepted that there will be some anti-aliasing in this type of scenario, or whether other software forces the objects in the image to align to whole pixels when exporting or resampling.
  18. The version of Windows 10 you're running (1703) has been end-of-life for a year now. The fact that it hasn't automatically updated to a newer version would indicate there's something odd happening with Windows Update regardless. A quick search for your error message indicates possibly an issue with the Windows Update service or the Windows Module Installer service being disabled. Therefore, the first step would be to update to a newer version of Windows 10 before getting involved in troubleshooting your .NET installation issue. Windows 10 1803 already includes .NET 4.7.2 (however excluding Enterprise and Education it will also be going end-of-life soon), Windows 10 1809 already includes .NET 4.7.2 and Windows 10 1903 already includes .NET 4.8. Installing a newer version of Windows 10 will not only include a newer version of .NET, but it's possible installing the newer version will also resolve the Windows Update/services problem you have. You can download and run the Windows 10 Update Assistant from the below link: https://www.microsoft.com/software-download/windows10 You can find instructions on downloading and using the Windows 10 Update Assistant in the below links: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlQNrJ1bSU0 https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/81031-update-latest-version-windows-10-using-update-assistant.html
  19. Do you have your browser set to automatically delete browsing history, cookies, etc.? Or perhaps manually delete your browsing history regularly? That could be why the message returns. Try adding the below filter rule to the Adblock Plus custom filters section (I don't know what it's called in Adblock Plus, however it's called 'My Filters' in uBlock Origin, so it will likely be called something similar). forum.affinity.serif.com###elGuestTerms
  20. Microsoft don't take 30%. They take 5% if the sale was driven by the developer, or 15% if the sale was driven by Microsoft. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/windows/agreements/app-developer-agreement
  21. If you go to [Edit > Preferences > Performance], is the 'View Quality' set to 'Nearest Neighbour'? If it is, try changing it to 'Bilinear (Best Quality)'.
  22. When editing image files from a Canon camera in Affinity Photo, if the ISO value isn’t in whole stops (I.E. 800, 1600, 3200, 6400), the ISO value in the EXIF metadata is altered slightly when it’s exported, meaning it differs to what Canon set the metadata as. The camera is using Auto ISO, therefore the camera automatically determines ISO. This issue occurs both with a .CR2 raw file opened directly in Affinity Photo and also with a .TIF file exported from Canon DPP 4 and then opened in Affinity Photo. In the below image file, when the image is exported from Affinity Photo, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF ISO value from ISO 1000 to ISO 1037. In the below image file, when the image is exported from Affinity Photo, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF ISO value from ISO 2000 to ISO 2075. In the below image file, when the image is exported from Affinity Photo, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF ISO value from ISO 2500 to ISO 2468. In the below image file, when the image is exported from Affinity Photo, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF ISO value from ISO 4000 to ISO 4150. In the below image file, when the image is exported from Affinity Photo, Affinity Photo changes the EXIF ISO value from ISO 5000 to ISO 4935.
  23. While this only affects Canon files, the issue lies in how Affinity Photo is reading the metadata from the file. Instead of reading the ISO value from the EXIF metadata field, Affinity Photo is ignoring that EXIF field and instead using a calculated ISO value from a different field. When the file is then saved, Affinity Photo overwrites the EXIF metadata field with this calculated value—which it shouldn’t be doing, as that field already contains the correct value for that tag. Below is the ISO metadata from different camera raw files as displayed by ExifTool and the metadata values being used by Affinity Photo. Canon 80D (CR2 raw file) [ExifIFD] ISO : 2500 [ExifIFD] Recommended Exposure Index : 2500 [Canon] Auto ISO : 100 [Canon] Base ISO : 2468 [Canon] ISO : 2468 [Composite] ISO : 2468 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [Composite] ISO (This isn’t a tag written by Canon, this is a made up tag) Canon DPP 4 reads the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Windows File Explorer and Windows Photos app read the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] Recommended Exposure Index Canon 80D (TIF file exported from Canon DPP 4) [ExifIFD] ISO : 2500 [ExifIFD] Recommended Exposure Index : 2500 [Canon] Auto ISO : 100 [Canon] Base ISO : 2468 [Composite] ISO : 2468 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [Composite] ISO (This isn’t a tag written by Canon, this is a made up tag) Canon DPP 4 reads the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Windows File Explorer and Windows Photos app read the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Canon 20D (CR2 raw file from 2004) [ExifIFD] ISO : 800 [Canon] Auto ISO : 100 [Canon] Base ISO : 800 [Composite] ISO : 800 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [Composite] ISO (This isn’t a tag written by Canon, this is a made up tag) Canon DPP 4 reads the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Windows File Explorer and Windows Photos app read the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Fujifilm X-T2 (RAF raw file) [ExifIFD] ISO : 2000 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Nikon D5 (NEF raw file) [ExifIFD] ISO : 2200 [Nikon] ISO : 2263 [Nikon] ISO2 : 504 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Nikon D500 (NEF raw file) (Adobe ACR 9.5.1) [XMP-exif] ISO : 2000 [ExifIFD] ISO : 2000 [Nikon] ISO : 2016 [Nikon] ISO2 : 12800 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Olympus E-M1 Mark II (ORF raw file) [ExifIFD] ISO : 4000 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO Panasonic G9 (RW2 raw file) [IFD0] ISO : 2000 [ExifIFD] ISO : 2000 [ExifIFD] Standard Output Sensitivity : 2000 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO or [IFD0] ISO Sony A6500 (ARW raw file) [ExifIFD] ISO : 2000 [ExifIFD] Recommended Exposure Index : 2000 [Sony] Sony ISO : 1971 [Sony] Base ISO : 100 [Sony] Stops Above Base ISO : 4.3 Affinity Photo is reading the ISO value from the following metadata field: [ExifIFD] ISO ---- Affinity Photo is either using ExifTool behind the scenes and using the [Composite] ISO tag to generate the ISO value for Canon files, or it’s using the same logic that ExifTool uses to generate the [Composite] ISO tag. However, the [Composite] ISO tag is derived from [Canon] Base ISO multiplied by [Canon] Auto ISO divided by 100. This isn’t a tag written by Canon, this is a tag made up by ExifTool. So, although the issue only affects how Affinity Photo handles Canon files, the issue still remains: For Canon files, if the file has a valid [ExifIFD] ISO metadata field like the above files do, then Affinity Photo should be reading the ISO value from this metadata field. Instead, it’s using a different metadata field; then when saving a file in Affinity Photo, Affinity Photo overwrites the [ExifIFD] ISO metadata value in the file with a different ISO value. Affinity Photo shouldn’t be altering this EXIF ISO value—the EXIF ISO value should remain as written by the camera.
×

Important Information

These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.