Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About SrPx

  • Rank
    Dedicated User

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,726 profile views
  1. These are particularly important when converting from RGB images to CMYK, to specific profiles. I typically would use relative (tho some danger of banding in some cases) most of the times (+black point compensation and dithering on, I believe I remember...), sometimes perceptual ( I guess if you have more colors out of printable range, or if having issues with gradients, you go perceptual, or just what looks better in a visual comparison if your monitors is well calibrated and all that). With some cases of important tones to be preserved in their intensity and saturation, I could use Absolute, but was extremely rare (I think I'd use it and Saturation intent only for checking some logos related stuff....). I too found strange back in the day that I wasn't finding in AP this option...Even if one is into RGB workflows only, is good for some rough tests when converting to a CMYK profile, even if the plan is doing it as a final step. Anyway, one of the things one gets ride of if going for a RGB - PDF/X workflow, I guess (mainly trusting in the print service, its machines or RIP.). Well, not totally, as will be needed any time you go from a wider color space to a narrower one, unless the colors on the source image happen to be in the destination image...
  2. SrPx

    Introduce Yourself

    You meant what Bilbo told Gandalf just to leave him alone, and how the wizard started talking about the different tone of that, compared to the one used before.... Not a dozen times, and impossible in 1970 for me, but have read those books at least twice... (some probably 3 times...and practically everything else Tolkien wrote) ...ehm..in Spanish version .
  3. S2209W, right ? Out of curiosity ( fully unrelated, is obviously sth happening with a color profile there, but wanted to chime in, as I think is a nice monitor) checked the specs (triggered me the "sorry, your monitor sucks if so" ;D ...am always interested in mainstream monitors with high end performance, if only to recommend them) , It is a non professional monitor, but very nice for a mainstream: contrast is 1000:1. Color space support, it just says 85% color space support in certain PDF, without specifying the space, ... only a foot note says that 85 is according to CIE1976...., while much more common (in monitors ads) is to refer to CIE1931, and that would mean the so very common 72% (said also in the tiny foot note). In all cases, IMO seems is a % of the NTSC space (so, 72% NTSC, nothing great, but can do), almost convinced of that. Typically means an almost 100% of sRGB coverage. Couldn't find anywhere if it is a real 8 bits panel or a 6 bits + FRC , I'd hate the latter, as is one of the specs that could trigger banding or noise in some cases. A better scenario for gradients and other matters than 8, is 10 bits, years ago only seen in pro monitors, counting on display port to be able to use it (in the g. card and as monitor connecting option). In a 6 bits you could have suddenly banding in situations you wouldn't expect ( I believe depends what's in screen at a time and other matters), and often not very predictable. Worse in mainstream TN panels. But as mentioned, as the gradient shows smooth in other apps, seems unrelated, then. And more of a profile conversions thing. I checked it, so, thought I'd put what I found as a side data or sth.... In that screenshot...He has a 32 bit sRGB profile the 32 bits field, but specifying (linear) in the name of the profile. What does this mean ? That this profile applies gamma of 1.0 (kind of removing gamma applied then ?). I thought sRGB can't be linear... and that conversion between linear <-> certain gamma (I think is from linear to gamma based, so, might be that his image was linear and once imported is applied a gamma, and then the banding happens?) can produce banding. But I know close to nothing about these technicalities. I'm just left wondering why in his trick to solve it he has to apply a gamma correction to fix the image after going to 32 bits mode. There's perhaps some stuff going on with "linear" and gamma, and I don't know if the banding could have some relation with if a certain sRGB or other color space and profile, inside Affinity or in his system, in the journey of that file to reach there, if it is doing some undesired stuff to the whole gamma space / linear thingy , forcing the banding appear. Sorry for chiming in....I just hate banding. I have loaded that image in my AP 1.7 customer beta, in which I have my now OS main profile, a sRGB custom profile from hardware calibration, lately (as what am sending to print, they base all in sRGB) and I don't see that banding. Neither when viewing it locally outside Affinity, nor in my Chrome.
  4. A) You're welcome ! B) In the window/tab Stroke (View/Studio/Stroke) besides the blue curve diagram ( pressure) where you modify the curve thickness ( as how you want your stoke lines be automatically, non wacom dependent (or yep)) after drawn , to the left I mean, there's a button saying "properties". Hit that one, and even if you painted that stroke with controller not set to pressure (and/or with the mouse), so, set to "none", automatic or whatever, well in that window that pops up after hitting that properties button, set width variance slider to maximum, aaall to the right. So, even if that stroke was in the setting right there as "none" , when sliding the size variance slider all to the right, it swaps to say "pressure". And now hit ok there, you will see that now that curve is being affected exactly by the curve profile you are setting/editing in the blue diagram/curve (so to make start of the curve thin, thick in the middle, thin at the end. Or whatever any other thing you wish). C) Because, all changes of context are difficult, yet an opportunity for -different- better things... Cheers,
  5. You are welcome ( boring wall of text hidden (by me) below.... )
  6. Our brain is very flexible, pure bubble gum. Just is made of habits...train that lizard part of the brain to do things in a certain way, every day, some minutes, and the brain assimilates that without asking, by repetition is being told that it has to get used to it... and then it does. You get used to any workflow/UI, this way. Always if relaxing a bit the conscious barrier, the "what I expect to find and where" thing. Put those preliminary ideas in "blank" when confronting the new UI. I don't think indeed that can be done in two days. Sounds to me, tho, that most of the issues are solved if getting into the mindset / fast usage so common in general in professional applications (even explained in the About, clearly Affinity range is the professional take at it) of using keyboard shortcuts. Is simply faster with a little training. IE, ctrl+z for undo (and you can set any shortcut, like ctrl+z, in your pen side button, or any of the tablet buttons, or wheel of your pen-tablet, if you are using one. There are also special mices with X number of buttons, programmable ones, if you dislike the keyboard ( I wouldn't expect that in people working with text, but can happen). I have one friend, you wouldn't expect it from a PHP coder, he has one of those mices, setting ctrl z and ctrl y (redo in every Windows app on earth, some ppl don't know this. In PS u have also ctrl+alt+z or ctrl+shift+z to go back/forward in history) on the mouse buttons. No issue when the mouse has like 23 buttons.... I might get me one of those. Someday. I do use keyboard instead, on a side, tablet in the middle, mouse in the other side. A lot controlled by keyboard, as anyways, you need constantly the modifier keys in Affinity apps (alt, shift, ctrl ( and I guess command and whatever in Apple). So, surely a lot of tools without a direct tool icon, you just assign a key shortcut and problem solved. Pretty fast once you get used to it. Photoshop for example is like 3 times faster when using just a few shortcuts (ctrl + shift + i to invert selection, ctrl + e to merge layers, ctrl+g to group, ctrl + l for levels, space for panning, alt drag to duplicate something, etc, etc). It is waaaaaaaaaay faster, I know all the full deal of handling all PS upside down by point and click, as I handled it so for many years, but once I got to get used to keys, man, what a speed up after just two weeks... really really worth it.
  7. 1) Do you double click on a brush in the library, so to save the settings to each brush (what I do) or just hit the "More" button in the top bar ? 2) Check that in the top tool bar in "controller" , it is set to "pressure". Of course, also that once clicking "More" button, in that settings window, ensure you have PRESSURE, and not None or other thing instead. That thingy besides the curve. Also, check what curve you have, just in case. Same whole story if checking the settings once double clicking on any brush on the brush library. Definitely check the controller thing in the top bar is saying "pressure", as I mentioned. 3) In the brush settings when double clicking a specific brush (double click one that u see in the thumbnail that has size variance) , or when you hit the top bar's "more" button, ensure that size variance is to the maximum of the slider. 4) Other than that, even with Wacom, depending on the status of your OS, the wacom service could be killed by something. Just run your wacom control panel. If it gives an error window, you need to got to Windows Services at Settings (or control panel), and "restart" the Wacom service ("Wacom Professional Service"), wait some seconds. Then close and launch again whatever the drawing apps, in this case A. Designer. It might happen in some machines when recovering from sleep mode. Strongest bet tho is that it is # (2). Most probably the top bar one is on "none" .
  8. SrPx

    A Gift from Gary this Christmas

    It is amazing nonetheless !
  9. SrPx

    A Gift from Gary this Christmas

    I'd have hit a "thanks" Like, (but is way past the first 10 minutes the day-likes count down start, so I'm obviously already out of likes) because I like Christmas cards (and like the brave people who still send'em) , and because will always up-vote anything with 3D low polygon count models in it. Both things bring sweet memories..... . If someone makes a Christmas with a quake 2 low polygon count model I'll make my finger bleed on the mouse button hitting the Like thing....
  10. SrPx

    Print Design

    Way to go, IMO. (or a Windows machine...) Er... not to harm Serif's iPad sells, hehe. (no worries, there are hordes loving the iPad, tho... )
  11. SrPx

    Trace Function

    Inkscape.org I almost use it just for that when the rare situations where I need it . Weird as it sounds, it did cut me time when doing low relief and embossing for game dices... (to be exported to blender and extruded/intruded/booleans there, to export the 3D mesh and send to factory). Also saved the day one gig I had to make in minutes, just vectorizing silhouettes for an event (friend event, open source thing) , with had like zero time for me to do that by hand. Inky saved the day..... Also as Inkscape has an amazing ink brush (very good control settings and response), and well, a lot of formats for import/export. You're never short of converters, you know, specially in the vectors world..... Still, for a ton of reasons related to how good AD is, and that there are some big limitations in the other one, AD is my main thing for vectors work since a while. But is really helpful to have that other free thing installed. I've done that with every major 2D/3D package I've got, at jobs or at home. What happens is that it has the great Potrace embedded. You need to tweak the settings quite, I even do so depending on the type of tracing I want (ie, not the same when u need a silhouette, than when is about making a pop art-like several colors poster). But as I say, auto-tracing is sth that only makes sense for my work like twice a year or so.... Still, as I tweaked stuff a lot, I get almost a clean result in a first go. Fast tips : reducing color detection to 2 - 8 colors, often 2 -3. And playing quite with the smoothing settings to get a good balance of accuracy/ fewer number of nodes. You want it clean and easily editable at the max, so that u have less work on a final cleaning. Like in most cross platform free open source software, be very sure to pay attention to updates. They improve a lot with every version but often don't have in place a system to warn you about updates, but in some cases you can subscribe to a mailing list. Inkscape is particularly slow in updates, but it has at least a few per year. Gimp is going faster, and Blender is super active. If you need auto trace, just get this thing, IMO. It's super fast and easy just exporting that in whatever the vector format you prefer, and import it into AD and then start working over it. Top menu ---> PATH ---> Vectorize bitmap. If I remember right. Trust me, it works. You only need to fiddle (no auto tracer does a perfect job out of the box. Or what I consider perfect, that is )
  12. Yep... This is what I do :). My work has visually seamless conversion when I convert to CMYK (when needed), and when provided as RGB, I know that if they internally somehow convert to CMYK (I know at least some do despite not being offset) nothing wrong will happen. I just know I always need to have my stuff in a "printable range". Also, if something gets some variation, luckily they tend to have some sort of faked proof system first, is far from perfect but allows catching some bad things...Remember, these are at the bottom, the cheapest companies, which are the one chosen by other people, not me... ... (or shouldn't). Been mostly works indigital painting, so is more of a visual habit while working in sRGB or Adobe RGB, rather than a scientific process. But in vector, flat colors, much easier... Anyway, been a long time since I had a problem with files sent to print to whatever the system, luckily... Sadly, not the case... I'm provided with very little material, although I totally adhere to their usual templates, as if not, is calling for problems... Is quite the opposite scenario... High volume client...rarely... in a pair of cases, but it wasn't me directly contacting with them, but the client, which is often a very bad situation, as they often don't understand what they are being told (that's indeed why they contracted you, but in the print stuff, seems hard to really get to directly handle the situation with the print company). I didn't know that was a possibility, will care to ask next time. As that could be extremely helpful. Heck, any info about their workflow is, as even some bits can let me see what's gonna happen to the file. Problem is when you are not provided with much clues.. My usual deal is do some works, the project author (often different each time) sends to print. Always a different company, even inside same project, depending on deals they find, or type of stuff to print. I even loose track, honestly. I'd rather prefer to print with one or two fav ones of mine, but I don't even dare lately to seek which are my fav ones, as people just go for their best bargain, and nothing one could say can change that.... I know, this all is far from professional, but what can one do... heh, I have a CMYK samples book in my drawer, I use it for the whole monitor calibration / room lighting thing, to get the colors I want in the screen look pretty similar to these CMYK mixes samples... But that's the only book of samples I ever handled (and pantone books when I was working at certain agency...) I don't have a really pro monitor, the Eizos escaped my budget in its day ( and lol, definitely are out of range now,)... I have a NEC Spectraview (European branch of the NECs "pro" line, I believe), and is around those numbers. A lot of my workflow is in the sRGB range, so, rarely an issue found... Also, gradients are smooth, overall is quite a good monitor ( yet a TFT (IPS), no LED! ). Wasn't cheap, and is probably a semi professional monitor, somehow. Still, I have it hardware calibrated (i1 display Pro) and the software included is great for that. I have a reasonable workflow, and when I get the samples printed (I usually get a totally free copy of the final product), well, is mostly fine for the price it was printed at. Lately pretty accurate, indeed. I had for some time, when I had two computers, a Dell supposed to be professional, 10 bits was quite a thing those years, supposedly great to be calibrated and all, but in my tests, this NEC performed much better...So, when I came to sell one of the systems, preferred to get ride of the Dell. Wish I had a better system overall, tho. Look, I've done all corporate image of a company for almost a decade, with a mainstream crappy 19" Philips, back in the day, only software calibrated (but to be honest, I had a ton of tricks(heck, I even knew how and where was located the color non-uniformity, light leaks, gradient cuts by the crappy monitor and not in real data, etc), and delivered my self to the print facility, they knew me, allowed free proof tests, etc...otherwise would have been not just a nightmare, but an impossible nightmare.). This all might seem cr4ppy (it is), but hey, in my area I've had friends with no contract at all (yup, and not immigrants) and sleeping in the office as didn't have a flat.... ! (and yeah, in the "first world"...) I have always had this issue (one of the many reasons I dislike laptops, only second to their usual inclusion of a 5400rpm or lower instead of a 7200, at least in the old times) where the people I work for , be it as a side freelancer, full time freelancer, or at the job (CEOs, CTOs, marketting people, the company's client, etc) would always have a laptop. And they'd expect that if a color does not show in their laptop, is MY fault...Because, they have a 3k or 2k laptop, how could it not display a color. Thing is, one gets the surprise of seeing great laptops with a very crappy contrast ratio screen, often really bad. Is not rare a 40% or less NTSC or Adobe RGB. A contrast ratio of 500:1 or lower... They get subtle clear tones burned to white, and loose dark tones, or, never get deep blacks (printed blacks are another total different issue, that'd be derailing this too much, but with this matter there's also issues when they check the stuff). Recently, I had this slight ( I tend to have even friendship relation with the project owners) argument because the man was not seeing the colors right. I finally convinced him to check the image in desktops, the more the merrier. He did so, and realized I was spot on. Indeed, got surprised once printed. I received the printed sample, and was really satisfying to see once again the colors just as I had them on screen. After my paragraphs above, you will have at this point realized am the worst to ask that... I don't really seek the perfect print company anymore, just care to know the tricks on each one, as much. In this, and anything else, don't follow the cr4ppy cheapo, follow better GbJack's advices... Anyway, as you asked, I find quite accurate the prints compared to what I design and illustrate in screen ( and I mean, quite a accurate) when I send to print to these ones : https://www.printplaygames.com/ ( works quite well for me) https://www.drivethrucards.com/ (just.... the last time I sent stuff there, the files preparation is more complex than in others. Can overwhelm someone not very used to stuff, but is at the same time an advantage if you handle well that stuff: is a more controlled thing, probably, to ensure great results. Also, they might have simplified the workflow since then.) https://www.thegamecrafter.com/ (only a pair of times, I believe, but they went really well ) Then... A few more... There's one that totally rocked for printing HUGE vector based posters I made for events, recently... Even more, a raster too, of huge size (was a pain to make in this PC (in my signature, I'm a cr4ppy hardware magician, you know.... ;D ) . I was surprised that as fast as I had to do it, absolutely no little issue showed up. Sadly, I don't remember now the name (and am in a rush) Then, several others for book covers... sorry, don't remember the names... A local one to print over cloth (I did that once for a software company on the US, had no time for a test, it was crazily complex, and also went well... yeah, a monitor calibrated and sane workflow is key.... ) I don't remember the name either, lol, but wouldn't be of help, anyway. At the end, you check, see if can do some proof test, and today most companies, well known ones, tend to do well the deal. Obviously, not mentioning the ones with which the stuff went bad. ( and wont do, no matter what) Again, follow best GBJack's advice. (and MikeW's ) New forum game : Count how many times I said "cr4ppy".
  13. [ Small side note: Well, I'd say is a stretch to make such a rigid division about what are Linux users and Windows Users. Till 2013 and since a bunch years before that date, I probably used Linux 50% of my time, or more (specially on the job). And many years before, I used it at home, many distros, and loved a term window, as was the logical continuation of my loved MSDOS geek times. I am not using it now, but I don't think I need to be boxed as a Windows-only guy, for whatever the interests....and I have been seeing posts here from Mac and Win users like me that have been or are yet linux users, despite not supporting (or partially) this idea... ] About rudeness from non linux users... despite not sure how to define myself about it (as explained above) , I have always spoken in an IMO very civil way. I mean, I always do, on inet and on RL. As so did a bunch of the old forum members around (mac, linux, and windows users...).... I would see as very dangerous the technique of considering rude (so to get those not pushing in my direction out of the debate) whatever opinion does not strictly align my own criteria. That's a pretty dangerous road, indeed... I have seen very polite Linux users ( my overall idea in past decades is that Linux users EXCEL in kindness. Maybe is an old timers thing...) . And some very rude ones, BTW.(some calling names, even). It seems my take at it (go help the big old buddies in FOSS graphic apps) does not find any support/echo among any of the type of users, whatever the platform or membership age....so I'll let it rust just there (so, great for you! )... But wanted to discuss some stuff, as found some statements slightly strange, wanted to at least say something about them.... (Mostly because a few of them did surprise me quite a bit, gotta say. Forget the agenda idea. I have ZERO agenda in this. Or anything Affinity or any software related. ) If I have any plans Affinity related is to use in the future AP and AD on a daily basis. Right now I don't as I use CSP (Clip Studio Paint) on a daily basis, but mostly because the major project I'm in now, been for a while and all natives files are CSP, and my work now is very much fitting to CSP's strong points (and because I freaking love the tool). If there are some features that are not in Affinity suite but yep in Adobe, then not one single isolated project might make sense to do it with Affinity, if the feature you need is not there (or if you edit video and need Premiere and no alternative(Davinci) is of your liking, or etc). Now, if is not the case (IE, my case, mostly because I'm the king of workarounds: I have worked professionally at a company with Gimp and Inkscape, after that, nothing can stop me, lol.... ) there's all reasons to use AP/AD in a daily basis. There's a bunch of people already doing so. Even full studios. I could do already quite well with those two, and I'm a full time freelancer with as well experience working at a lot of companies as a graphic designer, game artist, 3D grunt and several other hats. There might be some interest for the sake of the argument in considering AP/AD as a toy or just a hobby tool, but that is not what they are, IMO. But fine if you think so. That might be a big chunk of ppl. But... hehe. What makes you think a freelancer does not use his/her apps, tools every freaking single day ? A full time freelancer has to, I can assure you that. Even when I worked in that bunch of companies, I used to do freelancing on the side, I'd run at home whatever my app of choice of the moment and bang some work, at least 2 -3 hours a day....Maybe one day wouldn't for being exhausted for a long day in the job, but that used to be very few times. Also, after quite some time around these forums, what I gather is that there are studios and people using these daily that have told to do so (and those are the ones that tell it, among the ones that care to visit these forums...)...For their work or their hobby. If anything, is a matter of time, not the tools capabilities, this is super obvious to me (Affinity is relatively young, and people is slow in acquiring new habits , new tools, or hearing about these) Oh, about indie developers... A pair of years I made my hobby (was a frontend and g. designer at a company) a sort of activity in making web games with a friend (he worked on the code). He as a full time indy developer, coding in AS and Java, worked daily including Sundays. I myself, mostly in daily basis. Without pretending it (trust me), I have to disagree here as well. I need to pay some outstanding bills (been so for a while), so, sticking with this cr4ppy machine, but for a while I used to have an i5 in the besides table to my main one with this i7. And a second professional (~ish. But still, often calibrated too, and around 600 bucks) monitor in that other table. I'd 3d model with mine, but often would render the 3D Blender stuff (with cycles) in the i5. Also, it got very useful in the years I worked with certain company that had me as a remote worker, so I could very much isolate the very delicate data of that particular company. If you cover various fields, and are into several gigs at once, this is super practical. I'd be rendering a video in one, and dedicating most cpu threads there, or the same in 3D rendering, and doing actually something in the other machine. Sometimes rendering in both. Having a network connected external HD to share fast the huge files. What is more, waay back, I used to have several Linux distros, and a pair of windows installed all in the same machine (back then I only had one, like now) "multi booting" in same machine, like, constantly. And the several distros was only for pleasure and my never ending curiosity. Now, think about it back in '98 and early 2000s...with those tiny hard drives... So, as you see, being my experience like this, I can generate now an accurate global statistic about the matter in what refers to all freelancers and indy developers in the world: I know this empirically, because this is me. Not so inferior/limited, lately.... And is getting better and faster, now. The google projects thing seems could be of help, if not at the scale of Blender, yet yep quite a bit... Also, it has very recently received a huge donation of 100k (way to go!), end of August. I mean, things are moving finally there... Beware attacking the old timers, there's a bunch around you here, mwahaha. (silently surrounding you..... ) BTW, quite some Linux users are getting kind of old, now.... Besides finding that actually rude and discriminatory itself (btw, about your "oddly fierce" comment...some self criticism is healthy, too...) I can't agree... am In my mid forties, but about "old people", whatever that wording really means today, but Picasso was extremely creative in his years as an "old man", and Hokusai was in his seventies when created The Great Wave off Kanagawa's. Indeed, dunno where I read long ago, that the man started to paint at the age of six (like me, lol...with an embarrassing difference in quality) but seems that he confessed that only in his late years was when he found the style he had been looking for all his life.... About old people solving for x... Ouch...You got me there.... tho, I might be able to do that, yet...I started Maths career back in the day... but at some point swapped to Fine Arts for.... Greater affinity. [ * Runs away very fast..... * ] Nope. I strongly doubt anyone sensible enough might have thought it that way...It's different teams, for all we know. This is a forum. You shall expect to read opinions in a forum, not only posts promoting a single direction of action. Yeah... I've been lately in 3 of them, as someone making graphics (g. design and illustration, some 3D too). In one of them we failed to get even a 40k goal ( I have this theory of mine that the days given are a bit too short...). Yet tho second round of it we well passed the 100k and kept growing. In the others, the authors got it too, but I had not made THE FULL graphic content, had a smaller part, so, not that I'd be equally proud, lol... Still, I think I have just been lucky or chosen very well the gigs (it's 3 out of 3, for now...), the project authors, 'cause in general is a wild bet.... Now... I can very well see that for example that first failure (which was mostly we were not addressing well our audience) could strongly damage an established company. That first fail made no harm to us, as the company was unknown yet, but I can see this is a high risk to take when there are salaries and families depending on it, etc... That said, I love kickstarter. With a passion. Yeah, me neither (Spanish). I get usually his jokes, just with a little delay of only a pair of hours or weeks. They're actually good. Don't feel bad, I got lost with the 'so moved' one... I guess I'll catch it by January or so....
  14. A bunch of the ones (print companies) I have dealt with (digital POD sites) do not, many wont let you give them a PDF... And yes, I know that is not offset, but digital printing. In the end, I don't chose the company to print with, neither a lot of other matters...This for doing graphic design stuff, but also (and mostly) illustrations.