sobi

I am trying to open svg file with Affinity Photo (latest beta), unfortunately image is displayed only partially, some elements are missing. You can reproduce the problem by opening the same file I have downloaded from wikipedia page: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Weltkarte_der_Netzspannungen_und_Netzfrequenzen.svg It looks fine when rendered with web browser but show up as corrupted when processed by AP.

What is the logic behind shadows/highlights and dodge/burn algorithms? Should I expect the same results from both? It looks like shadows and highlights tool has changed and now is less prone to clippings that degrade quality. Dodge and burn is still producing some muddy results. Is it possible to apply the same improvements you impelemented in s&h to dodge and burn tools? BTW, it would be great to extend a range of some adjustments, e.g. for exposure only -2 to 2 values are possible, seems to be too narrow in some RAW developing scenarios

I have observed some strange behavior. RAW file opened in Develop Persona. Clicking to enable / disable sections on Basic tab (like Exposure or Shadows & Highlights) is changing histogram and its calculated measures for one or two seconds. Even if Exposure or S&H sliders are actually set to zero and don't impact image at all. It looks like histogram graph is being refreshed before all pixels are counted then refreshed again, just a second later. This is causing flickering and false impression some changes has been applied to the image. There is no negative impact on the image itself, just an UI distractor.

Unicorns vs work horses, tool vs toy are just metaphors about focus and priorities how product is developed. I prefer quality over quantity. The list of functions/features is really long and I would say it's even "more than enough" at this moment. The problem is how some of them are implemented. In terms of usability, quality of produced results (processing) and productivity. There are glitches and lacks in core tools/functions that are waiting for improvement more than year. Light GUI is just an example, of course useful function for some applications but still it is nice to have. It is not as essential as other gaps that are frustrating and impacting everyday workflow. You know, I got a car with all options included and powerful engine but its steering wheel is square. Instead of correcting that steering wheel I am offered with new color... Professional tool is as good as the weakest part of workflow it offers, single pain points can ruin overall experience.

Maybe they are mysterious but they raise emotions and are good selling points. When new version of some application is announced the most hyped and commented by media are all that features that "do some magic". Like "content aware something" removing your mother-in-law instantly from family photographs ;) Term like "improved productivity", "better user experience" or "sophisticated highlights recovery algorithm" does not sound so sexy...

Do you really want a crop tool to remembers mode you selected last time and use most frequently? ;) No way, you have to set "original ratio" each time you use the tool. Because it is so surprising for product designers that most popular use case for photographers is to crop their photos and preserve aspect ratio. Is it really so big dev challenge to keep last setting or provide modifier keys to fix proportions when you drag crop selection? How long is this waiting for improvement, 2 years?

Because most of Affinity customers prefer "spectacular" unicorns, not "ugly" but solid workhorses and product managers know that? So, in the meantime please enjoy a new color of interface :) While using another "never-ending beta" software, where the priority is to add new "shining" features instead of polishing core toolset, to improve processing quality and productivity. Crop is an essential tool to every photographer's workflow. How it is implemented in Photo is just one example of many things that need improvements and hold people back from switching to AP. PS and AP have comparable, long list of features but it doesn't mean they produce similar quality results or offer comparable user experience. Please stop painting unicorn with another color, just deliver workhorse, reliable and comfortable for daily photographer work :)

I hope in the next versions Photo will pay more attention to improve quality and UX of existing tools and functions than making its list of features longer and longer. What looks nice on app store and marketing communication does not help on daily basis, when results produced by particular tools matters and small nuances of usability make difference and impact overall experience. Sometimes I have impression that Photo already has more bells and whistles than adobe's counterpart but when it comes to use its poor crop tool, clipping shadow and highlights processing, clunky vignette filter or lack of sticky setting after two yrs of dev, I give up and go back to camera raw quickly. There are more important things waiting for improvement than introducing a new color of user interface, really... Please make a tool, not a toy :)

Does the new 1.5 version remember tools settings? It is painful when you have to setup options each time you activate specific tool. Crop tool is an good example, for most cases photographers crop images using original aspect ratio of taken photograph, unfortunately the default mode is “unconstrained”. Additionally crop tool does not support modifier keys (to hold shift, alt, option etc) to constrain ratio when dragging selection frame. The same for export settings, like size etc.

DWright, thank you for explanation. I am going to save modifications that are supported by PNG, just want to set some other file name to make a copy of my file. It would be great to have Save As with option to select preferred file format and choose between the native afphoto project and PNG formats.

Could you help me understand the logic behind save function? following scenario: I opened PNG file, applied some edits, now want to save my modified file File -> "Save", just overwrites existing PNG file (without any warning!) To save with other file name I am trying "Save As" but it offers .afphoto file format only and I can't save to PNG. Why do save and save as use different default formats? How to save opened PNG with other file name without re-exporting? Of course, I can export my PNG to PNG, setting from the scratch bit depth, resampling, metadata, profile etc, but it is a little tricky. Maybe I am doing something wrong but this seems to be not so consistent, when your OSX is configured to hide file extensions you have no idea what format will be used so can end up with overwritten files.

"We also provide logs for each beta release" MEB, thanks for hints regarding change logs, I have found it for 1.4.2 b4 but can't manage to get one for 1.5 (probably not published yet?). What is a chance some improvements will be introduced to raw conversion engine and develop persona in 1.5 please? "we don't disclose any estimated dates. It's quite hard to predict them in software development" We are talking about software engineering, not magic :) Yes, it is quite hard yet doable, assuming road map is a high level document, on months, quarters or higher. I am pretty sure you do plan your development internally for project and product management purposes, but I can understand that disclosing dates is a tricky topic for other reasons. If you don't communicate any timeline, even roughly, on quarter level, then the road map is rather useless, you can put on it any feature people could ever dream about and they can wait years to be implemented :) IMO, for buyers it makes a difference if some feature/fix is now under DEV or QA, planned for 2016Q2 or queued 2017Q1 or later...

Serif deserves some kind of support (or at least sympathy) as it is the only company at this moment that can be a game changer on the market of creative tools, dominated by one big monopolist. On the other hand, its just a business, company is investing its own money in product development expecting future profits. So why we should pay for products that we can't use to support our own business or hobbies? Still, I believe we can support Affinity some other way, helping other users in the internet community, maybe translating resources to local languages, creating some assets that can be used with the Photo, creating tutorials, spreading knowledge or good words about tool etc It is always a big pressure for company to enable revenue stream asap, balancing what level of product maturity can be accepted by end users. The problem is there are various groups of users. Early adopters and enthusiasts that are willing to play with whatever is a nice tool or just a "toy", professionals that expect smooth UX supporting their productivity and business critical workflow etc I compiled list of various gaps I have found during my testing, points I have identified as a showstoppers, pain points or nice to have features. I hope it is going to help me to re-test quickly the next releases. I personally can accept software at early stages of its development when I know what is a developer's ability to address gaps in reasonable future. To make better buy/no buy decision it would be helpful to have two things in place: roadmap with committed estimated dates, to understand if feature or fix I am waiting for will be delivered next month or next year (I know dates in development can change but roadmap can be updated any time if needed).change log for beta releases, I am testing beta to see what from my list of "pain points" has been addressed or is being under development, so I can see what is expected from next version.

Could you share more details, what is your problem with color management?

MEB, thanks for explanation, I will follow recommended path with Apple. The main show stopper for me is Develop Persona and its destructive process, with no option to save the development settings. I am also not so happy with a quality of RAW processing (I have compared to ACR and Iridient results), e.g. how shadows boost works for Olympus ORF files. BTW, what is strange some tools from Develop Persona are better implemented in Photo Persona (e.g. Post Crop Vignette, Shadow and Highlights), providing better quality and level of control. Lots of minor glitches in UI, e.g. tools don't remember settings, export window doesn't remember the size of last export etc. Inconsistencies in UX, e.g double click on view or zoom tools buttons provides nice quick zoom (known from PS), nice but this work only in Photo Persona, does not in Develop etc. Lack of lens profiles and automatic upright/perspective correction is some disadvantage for my workflow (tons of architecture to process). Photo is a great application, I am impressed how good work is done by Serif. However, it still needs some development effort to say it's pro grade tool to fully replace adobe in my workflow. It does not make sense to work with Photo and still keep Adobe Photography Plan to address some part of the work. I will check out your next releases of Affinity tool to get back to Photo as soon as it gets more mature. It would be nice to have more than 10 days of trial to fully test such complex and feature reach application. David4, SurJones, thanks for your points, I am pretty sure there is a great community offering support for the application. I hope it will be developed fast, so I can switch back to Photo soon and discard subscription based software I really hate :)