albertkinng

Absolutely! Hugging Face has been a leader since 2023! It’s the go-to platform for cutting-edge AI—so sign up and dive in. While not everyone recognizes the open market’s potential, those who do get a front-row seat to AI’s evolution. The best part? You can witness it all firsthand!

Yes, you know HF is the best place to test new AI technologies. Maybe they are using the platform for research. Good to know! Now I will try it out as well.

@carl123 @NotMyFault @Alfred 
Guys…
I’m sharing a video—not a link—so there’s no need to search online for a code that likely doesn’t have an official website. As I mentioned, this isn’t a downloadable app; it’s an open-source code that you can use or reference to build your own. I found this on GitHub, and if any of you are developers, you might benefit from the published code there.  
Trying to Google it or expecting a professional website for something not meant for mass use is like discovering fertile soil for farmers, only to have thousands trample it the next day—ruining its potential. The original post was simply a feature recommendation, yet the main focus seems to be whether it can be found on Google. A bit ironic, don’t you think?
 

I recently came across MagicQuill (this is not an app; it is a code you can add through API), which is an open-source and free tool, and I believe it could be a perfect addition for the Affinity developers to integrate into Photo, especially now that they're enhancing the software with AI capabilities for productivity purposes. Unlike many AI photography tools that focus on generating images, MagicQuill allows developers to adjust the code, providing us with the ability to refine and edit images rather than produce random visuals that aren't aligned with our needs. My goal is to restore photos, fix specific areas, and even remove elements from a scene for layout purposes, which MagicQuill seems uniquely suited for.
MagicQuill.mp4

I recently came across MagicQuill (this is not an app; it is a code you can add through API), which is an open-source and free tool, and I believe it could be a perfect addition for the Affinity developers to integrate into Photo, especially now that they're enhancing the software with AI capabilities for productivity purposes. Unlike many AI photography tools that focus on generating images, MagicQuill allows developers to adjust the code, providing us with the ability to refine and edit images rather than produce random visuals that aren't aligned with our needs. My goal is to restore photos, fix specific areas, and even remove elements from a scene for layout purposes, which MagicQuill seems uniquely suited for.
MagicQuill.mp4

It looks like you've used the effect layers incorrectly. Look at the backgrounds of the effect layers

2025-05-07 05-50-04.mp4    

Nobody imposed anything. I simply suggested why it is beneficial to the user community to attach files to posts instead of linking to them.
But, hey good luck getting help with your issue, whether you attach or link. That is certainly your choice. 

What I find so hard to understand is, given that this clearly is justified, why anyone posting to this forum would even go to the effort of creating the short URL, & hosting the file(s) it on some website when all that could be avoided simply by using this site's built-in facility to drag & drop the file(s) into the reply or using its choose files option. That should take no more than a few seconds, & almost certainly encourage greater participation & interest in the topic.

The skepticism is justified. Among the many things I'm not allowed to do digitally at work, clicking on short URLs is one of them. I haven't used one in years without first running it through a URL expander — but that's a power move regular people usually don't know about.
Think twice before clicking on short URLs. In today's digital world, they can hide malicious links. Always check the source and use a URL expander if you're unsure. 
https://checkshorturl.com

The fact that you want to continue this conversation shows how passionate you are about user preferences. If you don't trust a link, you don't click on it. That's reasonable. Various services like Dropbox, MS OneDrive, Cloud, Box, Google Drive, and AWS Amazon S3 all power eCommerce today by providing different options for users, including sharing files with a link.
I won't comment further on this because: first, it's off-topic from the original discussion, and second, there's an important distinction between making suggestions and imposing requirements.

I am by nature cautious, perhaps overly cautious. That is why I don't click on links like yours. So if you are fine with me and many others not offering you advice on your problem then that too is fine. 

@albertkinng, FWIW, many users are unwilling to download files from other sites for various reasons so when possible it is best to attach your files directly to your posts.
Also not sure what file you mean -- from the URL it looks like a folder or directory, not an Affinity file.

It isn't whether or not it is 'secure.' Even sites loaded with 'drive by' malware can be secure. (Please note that I am not saying anything of your is malevolent, just that it is one of the reasons some users are hesitant to go off-site for files that can be attached directly to posts.)

True, & it is one of the reasons I am hesitant to click on the link to find out what it is.
EDIT: @albertkinng, I know you think this is funny, but maybe if you do a search on "How much info does a website get when I visit it?" or similar, you might better understand why some users hesitate to go offsite without first knowing if or how that info might be used.

You can’t be sure of that, especially if there’s a URL shortener involved. For example, the free Core Skills download that complements the Affinity Designer workbook is at http://affin.co/coreskills but it acts as a download link for a zip archive.

Exactly! Same case here.

Their goals are set very high and that's definitely respectable.
For the fun of it, I just checked how well does VS live up to their "Open Native AI" claim. I have quite a few old complex *.ai layouts that I had to save without the PDF stream to keep the archive file size reasonably small. I randomly picked one (a CD digipak layout) and VS did crack it open. Not 100% accurate but all basic elements were there, editable, i.e. with some effort I might be able to rebuild the layout without having to start over again from an already flattened PDF/X-3.
Respect.
From all ADe (and AI, for that matter) alternatives I've tried so far, for me VS is the one to keep. Personally I see VS sort of as an equivalent to GraphicConverter: it never was my go-to bitmap editor, but it always had a spot in my Applications folder, ever since the Mac System 7 days.

I have not tried the beta version nor would I describe the UI as horrendous but personally, I find things like having so many of its tools having a pop out with what so often amounts to different options for the same tool very hard to get used to compared to how Affinity handles that. I also miss having a status bar. Is there any way to add that bar or customize the Tools panel like in Affinity?
Overall, it just seems very cluttered with far more buttons & such than I think it needs to have.
Also, a lot of things do not seem to be working as I think they are supposed to, like Panels > Toolbox Style > Two Column Toolbox not changing that panel to 2 columns.
I'm using version 1.1.114 if that matters.

I want to express my opinion without causing offense, but it seems that this forum is not intended for reselling other apps. Every tool is designed to assist people in meeting their specific needs. To illustrate, when you need to build something, you have numerous options for hammers. You purchase the one that feels comfortable and performs well according to your requirements. There are countless hammers available, and surprisingly, I haven’t come across anyone complaining about the lack of a round tip on a Milwaukee hammer compared to the perfect round tip of a Stiletto hammer. Nor have I encountered anyone trying to advocate that the only hammer worth buying is the Husky one. Ultimately, a skilled builder chooses the hammer they are most proficient with and includes it in their toolbox. As I mentioned before, and I reiterate now, the best tool is the one you have mastered.

It's disheartening how some people here no longer find Affinity sufficient. The accumulation of "facts" since the 1980s seems somewhat unjust towards a company that doesn't owe us anything. While we may dream of certain features, their absence doesn't mean the software is outdated or inadequate. I wish you could have experienced the growth of these design apps as I did. I used Freehand 8 and Photoshop 5.5, and I can assure you that Affinity VERSION 2 is significantly more advanced and powerful than those older versions when they were at version 8 and version 5.5. As users, we shouldn't judge based solely on our desires but rather on how well the app currently functions. By doing so, we can contribute to its future improvement..

It's sad that a real observation about a design flaw triggers some people's affiliation to a certain app. Let's pretend that you are right, and it's perfectly designed with a target audience in particular. What happens if the new user, a never experienced in Affinity ecosystem designer coming from maybe Pixelmator find that in the settings. Obviously, will start looking for a way to create art boards. Frustrated will be here looking for answers and someone here tells him that is there for marketing reasons and if he buys Designer he will be able to create those art boards. Do you really think that will make him happy?  As a UI/UX designer under Sketch software, working for agencies more than 20+ years, it is in my opinion (one that should be respected because has not been said to insult anybody here) a flaw in graphic user and experience design. Why? It's not directly related with the app functionality. Primary rule of UI/UX. 
Hope you can understand my point. 

+1 for this functionality on the Mac. Docking Parity between Windows and Mac please.

Many thanks

Obviously, you are aware that APh can be used for design purposes. My previous comment was directed towards those who view APh merely as a Digital Asset Management (DAM) application or, even worse, as a supplementary tool that requires a complete suite to accomplish anything.

So, according to your explanation, it seems that Photo is not actually a replacement for Photoshop, but rather an alternative to Lightroom. Initially, I had believed that Photo was a substitute for Photoshop. Ever since Photoshop 5, I have been using it to create promotional and advertisement designs that are filled with creativity and innovative design elements. Yes, it does allow me to make adjustments to images, but I primarily used it for design purposes after discovering its capabilities. It's good to have this clarification now, as it helps me set appropriate expectations for what Photo can offer.