Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DarkClown

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Munich, Germany
  • Interests
    Photography, Design

Recent Profile Visitors

1,429 profile views
  1. I'm not 100% sure if this is it ... but we might give it a go ... 8fdfb8f0-587e-4cbd-bbdc-740996d98f43.dmp
  2. just FYI: AP latest beta crashed without warning when I moved a point of a mesh .... (not reproducable)
  3. Yes, I re-checked the settings ... and found it - the settings were different in my Release and Beta version. Question solved ... Thx Joachim.
  4. Danke für die Infos ... war mir so bisher auch nicht völlig klar!
  5. When AP is called with a document from an external program AP and AP Beta behave differently. The release version opens the document as docked window while the beta will open the document as float. Is there a setting for this behaviour or will the next release of AP open documents in a floatin window as standard as well? Cheers, Timo
  6. I wonder if there is a way to change the preset of the source layer for many tools from "Current layer" to "Current layer & Below". By the looks this setting is not saved anywhere (what a surprise) and constantly for every tool seperately re-set back to "Current layer" for every new(!) picture. The required setting is not even kept as selected within an AF Session! So the majority of my work spend on retouching larger amounts of pictures is to simply set the parameters from what the programmers strongly believes I need back to what I really need. AP ist recklessly wasting my time by ignoring my needs. Maybe there's some kind of hidden setting or "Ini" file where the standard settings for tools are located an can be changed? Cheers, Timo
  7. @kirkt: True, the precision gets better with higher zoom factor. And of course I do the adjustments in 100%. But this is by far not high enough to be able to steer the slider precise enough. The problem is significantly increased by the fact that BOTH axis are the base to the value (it would ba a lot easier if only the x-axis would be the parameter). Eventually it's a lot easier to just click the slider itself and adjust the value this way.
  8. Mark, I don't mean to be nagging all the time. The functionality seem to be cool and an easy way to edit parameters. In terms of the unsharp mask dialog (and I'm aware this might be different in other dialogs) reasonable radius levels range from 0.2-0.8px ... This on the other side is an value area for the dialog that is extremly hard to acomplish with the current method. While higer values can me accessed a lot easier due to the nature of the implemented algorythm. Of course I can always reset the edit field value or general setting but the feature only makes sense if it makes things easier. (Workflow! ) Before I try to luckily hit the right number with the mouse I'll always choose the manual keyboard edit since it's not connected to filigran mouse juggling. Making a long story short: Maybe you should re-think the intuitivity (it now took quite a while to figure out and explain the basic functionality to an not unexperienced user) .. and effectivity (despite the fact I love the idea the way it's implemented will not make me use it in future since it is not as efficient as it could and needs to be - from my personal perspective). Feels like you missed out on a good opportunity ... excellent idea but struggled on the last meter ... maybe keep my input as a remark for future improvements ... Cheers, Timo
  9. So instead of just finding the original horizontal (or vertical) starting point you have to adjust the mouse to X AND Y axis (radius) in synchronity to adress lower values of the field. I'm not sure if you ever tried that in practice ... aside the fact that you increase complexity of handling by another dimension this procedure is far away from "intuitive". It seems like a gambling game for underchallenged people who enjoy mikado ... Just my 2 cents ... guess that I'm back to the keyboard. But I really liked the idea and the function! A medal of honour for the initial approach
  10. Meaning? To be able to adress the full value range I need to precisely find the mid of the document and start dragging from there?? How is a user supposed to find this spot in a 24MP photo? In case this is correct the function is simply not usable ... it seems simply impossible to get down to reasonable values for the unsharp mask radius (of e.g. 0.2px or 0.3px) if you precisely have to hit the mid point of a huge document to reach this value. Aside this: is there a valid reason for this behaviour? Horizontal difference from any starting point would easily make the function perfect, understandable ... and usable. Cheers, Timo
  11. Hi Chris, sorry, I didn't fully understand what you try to explain. As I showed in tha previous video the problem existst independent from wether I use the X or the Y axis. I gave it another - more analytical - go in this video. Marked the center for X and Y in a small document. started with a clear radius offset and moved the mouse from the one side to the other. Even at the center the value never reaches something even close to 0px. Please check this other example ... Cheers, Timo dragging2.mp4
  12. In that case maybe someone should move it to the "Bug" section ....
  13. What Program? And what do you mean by "templates for all the major social media"?
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. 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.