Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.

Asser82

Members
  • Posts

    141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Asser82

  1. Nice work, Hopefully GPU acceleration on windows will also get some love in the future. In addition a Lightroom like app would be cool, where a virtual copy of a raw file could be edited in Photo via Studio Link.
  2. Perhaps offer two denoise algorithms: 1) Fast and ordinary one (default) 2) Slow and perfect one (option) The ones, who select 2) have time to wait. The ones who do not care (1)), have fast develop times. Same strategy works well in DxO PhotoLab with ordinary denoise and prime denoise.
  3. I have also written to a resposive forum moderator to shortcut you to the NIK department, so hopefully things will go the right way. At least we will now, which side has work to do :-)
  4. I have already reposted the current progress here. https://feedback.dxo.com/t/maybe-improved-nik-support-in-affinity-incoming/7907 But speaking developer to developer would speed up things.
  5. Just for your information: There is a new release of the DxO NIK, which has targeted some crashes with Affinity Photo on Mac. They are explicitely working on a better compatibility with Affinity Photo now: https://nikcollection.dxo.com/release-notes/
  6. Or you buy AcdSee Pro for around 50€/$. It replaces Lightroom very well in terms of DAM for me and the payed amount is a one time fee for many years.
  7. DxO is becomeing more customer oriented. There is a public feature request board available. You can now vote for official Affinity support for NIK here: https://feedback.dxo.com/t/official-support-of-nik-plugins-with-affinity-software/3283/1
  8. First my heart jumped...because I thought spotlight might be the Affinity lightroom. But thinking about it, I remembered, that I read a RAW vs JPEG article on spotlight yesterday, which was great. So, thx for this.
  9. Yes, I also do not understand why a print layouting tool is preferred to a DAM / RAW tool. Looking at the Facebook follower of Adobe products: Photoshop: 7.6 Mio -> Affinity Photo Illustrator: 1.5 Mio -> Affinity Designer Lightroom: 1.4 Mio -> Missing InDesign: 0.7 Mio -> Affinity Publisher the Lightroom clone should come first, because it has a twice as large user base. But maybe such a tool is harder to make, because of the different RAW formats, camera/lens profiles, metadata stuff and undocumented raw features. Hence the decission, to postpone it to later. Making a DAM tool can really be a time sink.
  10. Maybe some sort of user defined preset or template functionality could help which could be applied as default starting point, when the user opens a raw. This way the user could set up the settings from the video as default preset. Today's raw tools tend to do more 'Auto' with more or less success.
  11. And if you make a DAM, please make the window which contains the preview tiles dockable. This will allow the user: 1) to dock it to the centre to see many tiles at once. 2) to dock it as filmstrip to the bottom to place a large preview window to the centre for culling It would also work with 1) only, but would not be that flexible.
  12. Cool finding, comment at the bottom: raw.pixls.us is used by darktable for regression testing of rawspeed and by RawTherapee. It is available for any projects that need access to a library of raw files.
  13. @Mark Ingram If you need some inspiration, have a look on IMatch. Not from the usability and visual design point of view, but from its capabilities and the possibility to be used with different raw development tools. Looking at it, Lightroom becomes really limited. Especially the metadata, version and buddy file handling are unique. Maybe this can help to make the right decissions. Wish you good luck.
  14. If you really make an Affinity Darktable, please consider: Hierarchical Collections, Smart Collections, Possibility to display photos in a whole directory subtree, XMP Import/Export, Batch Metadata Editing, Hierarchical Keywords, Search by Metadata Tags, Pass raws to external development tools (not as tiff), Stacks, Virtual Copies, Autostacking Raws and (jpeg/tiff)-versions using Regex on name or metadata, Token based batch renaming and destination folder definition on import and inside catalog. There are so many companies like On1, that bring out only partially usable DAM solutions.
  15. Oh, I like to speculate: Only unprocessed files from cameras are wanted, because you do not want to loose internal metadata like maker notes and you want to get real raw data instead of some linear DNGs or similiar. This is usefull for: 1) Testing and improving the raw engine (Needed for Demosaicing, Noise Reduction, Lens Correction, Lens Sharpness, etc). Also needed for regression and performance tests to measure how development goes. 2) Implementing a DAM / LR like tool, which imports OOC JPEGs and RAWs. (Here especially the preview generation and metadata extraction could be tested). If I would develop this, I would use LibRaw for previews and an ExifTool wrapper for metadata. Cold, Warm or Hot? :-)
  16. When I am at home I will try to use the exiftool to restore the metadata. Should be something like that: exiftool -X -b -makernotes -all a.jpg > a.xml Work with Affinity Photo exiftool -tagsfromfile a.xml -all:all a.jpg Perhaps -all arguments can be removed, if the problem lies in makernotes only. If this works, I will write a batch automation application while this is not addressed.
  17. It might be the Makersnote, but the delta seemed to be much greater. I would not expect the metadata to be changed at all, except maybe the modification date and the creator tool. Lets discuss this in the bug forum, so we do not have two places to look at. Goto here:
  18. I have this problem also: I import my Canon RAWs in Lightroom and develop the JPEGs in DxO PhotoLab. The lens information produced in the JPEGs is OK at that point, because Lightroom combines the CR2 and the JPEG under the same lens filter (Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM) after DxO export. Now I want to remove red eyes inside the exported JPEG in Affinity Photo. What comes out is a JPEG with broken metadata. DxO can no longer find the lens that belongs to the Photo, Lightroom assigns the Photo under an own Lens Category which is different from the one of the RAW. Parsing the Affinity modified JPEG with "ExifTool" reveals that many of the Canon specific metadata tags have been lost. This is a serious bug and makes AF photo unusable in environments, where tools must work together.
  19. I have started with Lightroom 6 + Affinity also. But the created TIFF sizes were to much for me, so I have changed my workflow further. I just do not want to spend >100MB on each photo.
  20. This is also the reason btw. why Adobe can do what they want. They just have "locked in" all their users, because the users do not want to loose their edits while switching to another tool. Even if the develop results are bad compared to others tools. As long at there is not a standard raw format and develop process defined by IEC or something and as long as all camera manufacturers have their own format, nothing will change. So you have to make a hard break at some point, where you use Lightroom for your "before 2018" catalogs and create new catalogs or workflow within a new tool.
  21. I can answer this more precisely. As in any RAW development tool the non destructive edit operations are stored only in the catalog of the tool or in a XMP or similar sidecar file next to the RAW on disc. This depends on your lightroom settings. However the information in such a file has only a meaning to the tool which produced it, at least in full extent. There are parts like star ratings or embedded previews which can be reused by other tools, but the other settings like "Clarity" or your local adjustments cannot be used by other tools 1 to 1 because the underlying RAW engines are different. This is the reason why Lightroom produces a "pre developed" TIFF when it transferes the image to another tool via "Edit In". Another tool just does not understand the Lightroom language and even if it understands it, it has not the code to reproduce the same results. What this means is: 1) If you use "Edit In" you automatically generate large additional files, which consume up your disc space. Additionally your image manipulation process becomes destructive at this point. You just cannot change your Lightroom edits afterwards and reapply the external editor's changes. 2) If an external editor has to use the RAWs directly instead of generated TIFFs, then a Lightroom plugin must be provided by the external tool, which passes the selected RAWs to the external tool. But again the RAWs are provided as they were imported from the camera. Your Lightroom edits stay in Lightroom. This is not Affinity specific.
  22. what is the definition of "personal use" and "control"? If I am the only one who uses it, is it sufficient for personal use, even if someone else profits from it? I have a dedicated/non shared pc at work which I do not own. Is this enough for "control"? Or short: Can I use one license for my private photos at home, and as an image editor at work?
  23. In topaz clarity all colors seem to be washed out, when the photo is a 16bit prophoto file. It even does not look right with adobergb. only srgb seems to be OK. So I have to convert to srgb in AFP to see accurate previews in Topaz, is this a known issue? prozessing tools: LR6 -> AFP -> Topaz.
  24. Hi, there was a thread here, which was not commented yet: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/34531-blurring/ For many people the usage of blurring is very limited, when there is no way to prevent bleeding on selection/image borders. See near the end of the thread for a summary.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.