SrPx

Ehm....sorry .... (seriously) (for the record, I didn't want to undermine anything..... )

I want to pre-order a round trip ticket to Proxima Centauri b (Window, please). Wait... I believe I have some cash remaining from the last weekend...

Has anyone tried assigning higher priority to the task / process in one of those taskmanager's-like utilities ? (like Dtask monitor). I mean, setting priority as high instead of normal, or "very high". Dunno, maybe wont change a thing, but if you are noticing low usage, maybe this would help ? In my machine, it's not choppy (the zoom-in-out does show a graphic glitch of quads, but that could be my card, or sth in my system (does not happen in other apps, tho) I've been able by doing this to play games that are too much for this old machine (in some cases setting the process priority as high, in others as low, go figure) . Dunno, I just like experiments, in case some1 else around does, too.... That machine is impressive... [ My only grip is, for the tier it's in, 4.1 GHz (and in AMD's current lower ipc) is a bit low (for the price tier), still 1k GHZ higher than mine, lol) . Anyway, the 7th july will bring AMDs mainstream quite faster than these. ] You shouldn't see choppy performance, tho anything can end so if the task is really heavy, in every thing there's a limit. IE, mine can't deal with a 2 meters 300 dpi raster, layered image for painting (well, fluidly) neither have a brush larger than 500 px and still be fluid. Are you in game mode? or in the default one ? I know threadripper has that possible config for gamers. Oh, wait, watching the vid, you refer as choppiness that the image does not fully follow the gizmo when moving it... That seems to me more of another issue, rather than raw power of the machine. How do you have configured in Affinity's preference the performance option ? ("warp", your card, etc)

Indeed, in '95, at an advertising agency, it was only Macs for the design work (Aldus Freehand, ye old Quark (1987), and Photoshop mostly, oh, and a manual photo retouch lab, lol, with the pigments, brushes and all... Quadras and Classics). The PCs where there only for administration, green monitors and such, and a pair of IBM servers. And yeah, the Win GUI was a blatant copy (don't remember what the jury finally said, but to me it was clear...) from the Mac. To be honest, the Commodore Amiga 500, and later, 2000 was another way beyond its times, higher res and more focused in graphics than XTs pre 286, and all what came immediately since then, sound and mmedia creation than "PCs" (everything is a PC, btw, hehe). I mean, that thing was already multi core, lol. But for business reasons and stuff, like Mirai (a 3D general app) , things of huge quality and potential, just disappeared. If The Amiga had continued, we'd have, I believe, a much more interesting (geez, an Amiga 500.000 , haha. That would be such a wonder) market today. That's why I think competition is always good. We Windows users need Macs to survive (they might if they stop charging 1k bucks for a stand, lol), as well as it is needed that Intel wont sink totally now, neither AMD (which seems is reigning right now)....and...er...why Affinity is needed. About the OT matter, I believe a lot have gone OT here, if the thread is only to check how the roadmap goes evolving, and comment about that. Is just that its subjective what you could comment till declaring it OT. Certainly it is in the Suggestions forum section, but one can always start a new thread. I don't have an opinion, mostly as most threads go OT... About AD not being like AI, yeah, it has less features. I definitely like (also used AI for work in several places) more AD's UI, but that's me. It's also WAY younger. AI is from 1987, hehe. It'd better be good, right ?

In top bar once you grabbed the brush tool, setting stabilizer on, checked, of course, and then , if you notice, just to its right, there are to tiny icons: One is like an V, another like an almost closed circle. Pick the circle one (the rope is kindda less obvious in Window mode, but also, I like its behavior more). If you mouse over, it says in a tooltip (Window mode). Is not that you don't see it (I know that in PS you can totally disable seeing it) it is that with values from 1 - 10, mostly 1-5, you barely see it. But I've only used it for inking, and am more in the line lately of trying not to use stabilizers at all (in CSP and krita) for inking (as I don't need it at all in painting in any app). Yet I need them for very perfect line curves of half the canvas length or so. It would be really good if they added an option to disable "seeing" the rope like PS has (and you don't see it in CSP, either, I think you can disable the graphic line too in Krita) Edit: My advice (I'm nobody, just as a suggestion to try... ) would be, as a conclusion for the whole post: For painting, give it a try to the experimental feature on, no stabilizer, but work in larger canvases.... Maybe try to make faster strokes, it tends to eliminate any wobbliness, too. Crazy as it sounds, I was not aware of that post. Well, this clarifies many things.... Well, I definitely notice a better behavior with the experimental feature on (again, for what is inking). It's a very long time till 1.8, I'm afraid, at least judging the time to go from 1.6 to 1.7 (not so different to other brands (people is eager, that's part of what happens))... I guess I'll keep inking with CSP (preferably) or Krita in the mean time. Oh, I'm very detailed in my work (not always a virtue ;D ), too, but I get the detail in "insisting", I work in like 4x times the final canvas (or more, except the cases where the canvas is HUGE like one am working on now, as my pc is what it is....). So, is not like is going to lack detail or that it wouldn't end up in crisp detail. But in painting, variation in styles is huge, so I am not sure about what are you after, so, probably what you exactly want to achieve is only doable so? Curiously, in that very aspect (aliased brush) you paint like old school comic artists do digitally or scan their inks (similar, in a way) : They ink in 1 bit huge images like at 1200 dpi (some old method for B/W line art in print, I used to do that in the 90s), with aliased ugly pixels, as the huge resolution will avoid any issue (and files are lighter, etc). A lot of today's comic artists don't ink this way, though. Aliased or not, if you want each brush stroke to lay definitively (ie, Picasso could do that with his lines and drawings, he could contour-draw an entire human figure without proportions or pose errors. The rest of humanity, we make our blocky general shapes and movement lines first.... ;D ) just in that shape, and how you wanted to set it, no need to "fix" or add to it, I can see how it can be a nightmare. Because surely, for you each brush stroke is final, and you want it to be exactly as you want it to be.... But probably partially present issue in most software apps and most tablets, just enhanced here due to the precision issue. I mean... I know how accurate is my hand (and training) in paper and canvas, so, I know the technological stuff in the middle is removing a lot of control. In bigger or smaller degree, depending on software and hardware. Thinking about the reasons why you want it crisper... I don't know... maybe just working in even larger canvases, you would experiment the same crispness. In the end, reducing with a method like Lanczos non-separated, would give you very sharp edges, if the original canvas is huge enough. Is a major measure to make things look crispy, in art, as we all know. I'm, just suggesting not working just at 2x, but 4x, 6x.... Anyway, if you need every stroke to lay as final, yep, Houston, we may have a problem. But... I'd give a try to stabilizer on Window mode, not Rope mode, with the best tested value for you between 1-10 ( I'd just test it for the usual situations in my painting), the high Precision experimental feature on. I'd be to believe that combo + 4x the canvas size, would provide you with a workable environment for your style, in the meantime to 1.8 arrival (but personally I think that the revamp of the brush (or grid system or whatever it is) so not to have to use the experimental feature, could come or not, seems development can vary a lot, is an organic beast). Edit: Personally I would prefer only activating the experimental tablet precision feature (in your case, if you'd do so, maybe try more firm and faster strokes, it could very well eliminate any wobbliness, together with the experimental thing ON). As the stabilizer, until it gets (don't no when or if it'd get it) the possibility to disable seeing the actual rope, it's a bit annoying for an inker or a painter (I could tolerate it in inking as I ink way less than I paint, and 'cause for now I ink with other apps), so, I tend to not use it, if I pay attention to what I actually do lately when using Photo. Probably I have a mixed workflow, setting it ON or OFF depending on how disturbing I find the visual thing, or how bad I need for a particular line. As the behavior in tracing your sketch, making the ink lines, nope, that's perfectly fine now, for inking. At low stabilizer values (otherwise you wouldn't be able to make small features or have fast, impulsive expressive lines) , with or without the experimental feature activated (seems is better if ON...but some people wont need it at all, and need other things (this very case was part of one recent post I made in a thread about the shortcut for size and hardness of the brush )). BTW : If your profile banner picture is in the style that you mention, then your work is a lot more painterly than mine : You let the brush stroke more visible, more texture, and larger brush strokes. I'm more of an Ingres / Vermeer fanboy, so to speak, more blended, less of large brush strokes visible. So I "insist and build up" a lot to get a particular look (but the brush strokes are also visible, I don't do a super smeared and blurry thing either like many "too much photoshop in it" artists do... I think that's kindda ugly. Mostly as even reality is not that smoothed and blurred out)

Yep! The you get what you paid for is a rule that tends to apply (let us not forget that Affinity apps are an absolute bargain in price, despite being so functional).... Still... I'm of the type that prefer workarounds than paying a lot, specially if it's monthly.... If one is heading for many steps below in terms of paying...well...you'll find the sharp corners and the stones in the road, it is expected. In that sense, Blender (the 3D app), as a perfect example, provides with about the best ratio of what you can get with (quite some) effort in the learning curve (so, a lot of people don't endure it) but the huge outcome you can get from it (financially, too) versus what you invested financially (nothing, or some donations). It is so important (this flexible attitude) that is often the difference of having a sustainable set of expenses related to your artwork versus putting a lot of money in your tools. That said, for anyone having very nicely paying clients (not my case, I'm indy-friendly... btw, not meaning am unskilled / inexperienced... ) there's absolutely no question (probably most wouldn't be here), get the maximum that your money can bring, for tools. Time is more valuable, in those cases. I have my collection of doubts about considering that's the case with Adobe (even having handled it professionally for many years), but hey, to each his own.

I see what you mean.... In all honesty, yep, the wobbly could still be there. Now, I don't know if we speak about the same thing when mentioning digital painting. For an insist-and-build-up, glazing technique, like, in an oil painting (gosh I miss it so much...) that is how a lot of us digital painters work (specially realistic styles) , IMO is not an issue in Photo. Now, for line art, comics inking, or any illustration based in ink lines... It can be. With the stabilizer, in Window mode, not rope, and... (well, I'm seeing better behavior with this ON, at preferences/tools) " high Precision Tablet Input (experimental) " checked (marked, ON), I can ink decently with this, IF I set a very low value of the stabilizer. Like from 3 to 5. As higher, I agree, any stabilizer removes too much control. Truth to be said : My current focus with photo is painting, and of course, all image editing. Inking....I yet use Clip Studio Paint, as it allows me to ink well without stabilizer (that said, with a wacom (not in paper), I used to need before some low stabilizer setting ON. And... hmm...I believe even with zero stabilizer, CSP makes some sort of line stabilizing. But IMO, that, neither any stabilizer is really giving us any advantage. It just compensates a little, not fully, for the tech not being just there, yet. I can draw lines perfectly steady in paper. IMO, the technology is yet in the middle, lowering precision. The effect you are noticing is sth that the hardware does in "cintiq alternatives", and even in MS Surface (N-Trig replaced Wacom there, sadly)...Thing is, what is not good is if it happens due to software, as -and of cours,e because we can't afford loosing accuracy in so many fronts- I can imagine then, a Surface with the added software wobbliness is terrible. (as hardware and software jitter, "joining forces"...too much ) I can see how, with stabilizer I can ink well in Photo, and digital painting offers no probs (of course, performance for large canvases could get some help, but they'll keep improving performance (after all, I think it's shared with the performance of handling big images, and they work on that a lot), till they match the crazy status in that of CSP ), at least in a realistic, build-up style (ie, like Vermeer, Rembrandt or Velázquez (or many others) would paint, saving the astronomically huge distance in skills with any individual of these two last centuries, of course ! ). Now, if you require the same line accuracy (one stroke must lay perfect in a first chance, like in inking, instead of doing a build-up like with oils/acrylics) then I get that for you might be a show stopper. Specially if can't afford to set the stabilizer on. (low values allow a lot of nice work, anyway). As I said, I typically sketch and ink in CSP (before I used to do it in Krita, Open canvas, and some others) , even paint there, too. And Photo for me is a digital painting tool and an image editor, I don't have it as a prob. Also, maybe is affecting my opinion that the brush lines were worse in previous AP versions. (there have happened very, very noticeable improvements). My tablet is much larger (not sure if higher resolution) , is an XL Intuos Pro 4. I know for a fact, testing, that the larger the tablet, the easier one makes line-art, btw. This (handling a small or medium tablet size) could be heavily diminishing the experience for both inking (specially) and painting. My favorite size and brand I recommend these days is the Wacom L (I even prefer it to a Cintiq, in certain aspects). Not denying the wobbliness, I can notice it in the lines if inking with no stabilizer on (as said, with high Precision Tablet Input (experimental) ON, seems that the lines get much better. You might want to try it, just in case. I believe you need to restart, the app, but not sure).

Are you drawing with the stabilizer on? I don't have this issue.. Without it, it might show in very zoomed out. I have a Wacom Intuos pro 4 XL, and with it on I have zero issues.

I hit ctrl + s every ten seconds... (almost....well, probably every ten minutes )

Affinity Photo is good now for digital painting. (I wouldn't do digital painting with A. Designer, although is technically possible. IMO, Designer serves well for vector based illustrators, and Photo, for raster based (more of my case, tho I also do vectors) illustrators and digital painters (the distinction is not easy to make, IMO, among certain types of professionals). I have used Photo already for painting, it is quite fine at this latest version (1.7.1 ). (I'm pro, not hobbyist)

I do... Was quite better than 6, more stable. And 2.x .... Back then I found it mostly on the macs, at companies. But Corel was strong already. 4.0 added a particular way to make text editable (is crazy to remember this, now) ... I was actually criticized (in a very silly way, later on discovered the motivation) in a job interview for not considering it the most important feature in 4.0. (or 4.1, can't remember which one was) Not that you could not add text, it was a better way to edit it... Adobe has taken a huge role in developing the industry, but I'd say Corel has done so, too, as many other companies, and back in the day there were a few contenders, and if Adobe wasn't there, now others (existing and new ones) would take the place. So, if it wouldn't have been Adobe, would have been any other. Is the pros who make the stuff, they are the key, with whatever they want to use.

Does the current macro system help you a little in this ? I know is not super advanced, but...might smooth some sharp corners. Photoshop actions work a lot like this. Also, maybe the scripting if it comes here ( I wont care if is JS or Python I kindda like both syntax..maybe python is easier), would also help, so to very specifically create your own "AI" .

Voted up your post as I am a huge fan of CSP for the mere painting/drawing aspect of it (while image editing, is all A. Photo's terrain, and lately, Photo 1.7 beta is a great painter tool as well) . But posting solely to mention that specially the color picker case, if you have a wacom or any tablet with a pen having side buttons, you can surely configure that one to hold alt key, as does exactly what you described, once you drop alt key, it's back to the brush [yep, obviously is rather interesting to have it so for other tools: is the great trick for comic colorists (actually, most of a case for flatters) to do the flats, with hot-triggering back and force the lasso, picker and other tools...]. With the real key directly, not in the side pen button, it has top performance. When configuring in my wacon pen (in my machine), it offers some performance delay or not activating at times. (can be very well a specific wacom's driver issue, or my arcane PC, or glorified typewriter). I have avoided that TOTALLY with a tool utility that sits in between the pen and Photo, so that I don't set ALT in the side pen button, but a non existing, virtual 5th button mouse (triggers nothing else, as my mouse is 3 buttons) which the utility -through my x-mouse configuration- interprets as an ALT key signal. Works at LIGHT SPEED, as fast as the real key or faster. Anyway, if used to the keyboard (I am for any other function but that one...I mean, I can, I used to, but is freeing to paint relying more in the pen), alt key is your friend, and works great for the temp color picker you are willing to have, so to have always the brush, and temporarily the picker. So, this functionality (identical to PS in that regard) is already there, for the picker, that is. You can also config the alt key in any tablet button, if so you wish. Or, with the help of this free utility ( X-Mouse Button Control ) , or a software that assigns functions to your mouse buttons, if u have that, you could configure the alt key in one of those. People having a gaming mouse, (and used to that of triggering many functions in a mouse, and not having carpal tunnel or the like, obviously) can do this very easily (ie, a razor mouse) . I haven't tried that, though. I have a Lord Of The Rings' length-wise post somewhere around, explaining step by step how to do the side button trick with the utility. But only if you notice performance issues while picking color with alt in the side button of the pen (with just the key NO ISSUES) . Which most clearly wont be an issue anyway if a single one or more of this conditions apply a) you have a newer PC than 2009, b) you are not picking colors like crazy all the time using a glazing technique to find intermediate tones (ie, instead of using a blending brush or etc). c) It's an issue with my old Intuos Pro 4 XL, and its interaction with the Wacom driver, and all other tablets are fine. Anyhow, with my config, zero probs. Reason why my only desires for Photo and Designer are stability and performance. (a bit OT, but warp for designer to any shape shines to me as quite important). Maybe adding TGA would bring quite many licenses (but I can see how this would also need a revamp of the channels handling, is not just the format). Just like in AD (sorry the OT again) DXF would for the world of laser cutting business and many related. Those 3 things alone might bring quite many purchases, but...IMO, we'd have nothing for pro work without performance and stability. With these two, no matter what people say, you can workaround the others (meanwhile, but...most features requested are actually a must, sooner or later...very few -at least among the pro- are asking for irrelevant ones), even if difficult. But with stability issues, bugs of probs with performance... much harder. (not saying the tools have them in abundance. ...any app has these one way or the other)

Huge plus if you are making a graphic novel, then. I am a "comic artist" (very realistic "vibe", but I quite appreciate other styles when those so well constructed), well, kind of. If is there going to be a preview somewhere, please, let us know !

Are you sure of that? I have it in light grey, but I don't notice the difference....