GrahamMYC

It was suggested to me that a workaround until the Affinity DAM is available would be to save the images in something like Photoshop Elements Organiser as .psd files (Organiser does not recognise affinity file formats). This sounded like a plan so I tried it. The relevant files are attached . At first it seemed to work, the ,psd file being accepted into organiser, and apparently showing properly. However, when I re-exported it and tried to load it into deigner, the background had disappeared (see screengrab) On examining the original affinity file, I noticed that the background, which had disappeared, was a fill layer. So it seems photoshop elements does not support Affinity fill layers. I was able to confirm this conclusion by rasterising the fill layer before exporting as a .psd. The file was successfully uploaded to Photoshop Elements Organiser and recovery to Affinity I am now wondering whether I can take the risk of forgetting to rasterise fill layers, and pondering whether there are other fearures that would not survive saving to Photoshop Organiser and recovery to Affinity Any advice or comment would be welcome. An Affinity DAM would be even better! coloring-page-simple-mandala-6.psd coloring-page-simple-mandala-6.afphoto

Windows 10. Sffinity 1.6.0.82 beta Could not delete a preset in the details section when processing a raw picture. The preset did not work.

OK. Noted.

MBd and R C-R Include me out of your spat please

I have been a Serif customer since 1991, and have kept many of their products up to date. Their achievment, capped by the still developing Affinity series is remarkable, and is to be celebrated. However, I remain an amateur, and I hope I am forgiven for occasionally seeking clarification or response to adverse comment, whether ill informed or not. At least that process provides a justification for a public refutation which might otherwise sound shrill.

All that said, I am looking forward to the truly non-destructive raw processing promised by Serif in the dvelopment programme

I too have heard these mutterings, especially from dyed-in-the-wool photoshop users that I regularly meet at my camera Club. That is why I started the discussion so I could judge the validity or otherwise of the comments. So your comments are really appreciated by an enthusiastic amateur

My peace of mind is restored, as I was sure it would be! Thankyou.

While doing a Google search I came across this rather disturbing article from 2015 http://loewald.com/…/affinity-photo-no-good-for-photography/ If that article is correct,then it points to a serious deficiency in Affinity. Yes, there was a later article published that went some way toward mitigating the problem, but only for Mac users http://loewald.com/blog/2016/09/affinity-photo-redeemed/ Does anyone know anything about this? Has anything changed in recent times?

Chris B: With regard to dragging to increase px ( or %) have a look at this video (Official Affinity) https://player.vimeo.com/video/187632201/ AS it turns out,I misreportedthe problem Working with Gaussian blur, the amount can be increased beyond 100 pix either with the mousewheel or by the slider method. BUt when you add noise the wheel will not take you beyond 100% but the slider will (though the number shown does not go beyond 100%). This works properly in AP1.5. (If you are wonderng why I would want to add that much noise, it is one way of adding rain to an image on a black pixel layer - you add a motion blur to the noise, and a suitable blend mode)

Yes - sorry

I was carrying out an exercise using the AP beta 1.6.0.82. I needed to add a lot of Gaussian blur (above 100%). This I did successfully by click drag to the right. But in the beta version the digital readout would not show a value above 100%. I checked this in AP 1.5, and it worked successfully. A minor bug, but it needs to be addressed sometime.

My error. This wonderful feature is already available in both AP and AD.

I note that in AD, you can select fonts from dropdowns of used, recent, and favourites. Excellent facility. Can we have it in photo please?

I was afraid that was the case. I have loaded eraser. It is not as good, but nearly so And thanks for the identifont link. It looks interesting

I recently viewed the Vimeo tutorial on Displacement, which used an Apple font called Chalkduster. It looked quite useful. Can you plse advise where it can be downloaded as ttf for use on a Windows machine?

In AD, you can apply textures to the stroke round an object. It looks like the same facility should be in Photo (the textured brush option ezists in the path dialogue). But it does not seem to be working,

That is most encouragingm and what I expected. But what is the best mechanism for (say) (a) keeping my library of images on a NAS attached to my network at home, and accessing such a file from the Ipad Pro (b) saving images on the Ipad Pro using wireless transfer from the camera, then transferring them from there to the NAS. (MY NAS is a very basic Synology system. (by the way, I am 76 and really am grateful for the time and trouble people take to answer what must seem to be basic questions)

It is becoming increasingly clear that it will be a very long time before there is an Android or Windowa equivalent of the Photo/ Designer for Ipad combination.- if it ever happens. Some of us have been Windows users for years, largely because there are some technical sectors where the apps we use are mainly available for Windows. But it is laso clear from the reviews that Photo for Ipad is a brilliant piece of software, and seems to be a delight to use. That begs the question of whether there is an effective workflow that would allow the use of an Ipad Pro for offsite work in combination with a Windows based system back at base. How would files be transferred between the two? Would the expected DAM address some of the issues of interchageability? I am sure I am not the only person to want to avoid being trapped into the Apple family of devices. It seems once in, there is no way out! Comment and advice welcome.

Thanks for the clarification. I cold not imagine it would be otherwise, but I was not certain.

I gave a presentation about Affinity to the Southampton Camera Club. It is one of the oldest camera clubs in the country and runs an international photo competition that is widely supported from many countries. As suggested on this Forum,I used some of the Serif promo videos and a couple of the tutorials. The audience was probably 60% professional or seriously competent amateur photographers, and 40% amateurs, like me. If you cut the first group in half, you would see “Photoshop” written there like a stick of rock. The presentation was well received, and all acknowledged that Affinity was a serious product. The amateurs could see the cost advantage. The professionals, and semi professionals, however, had some criticisms (based on having tried Affinity). The principal ones were 1: Files are very slow to load into Affinity Photo. It was suggested that this is because Affinity is a 32 bit program, not a 64bit program. I queried that assertion and suggested it could be that the way Affinity handles live views so well including real time repaints, such as real time views of blends and brushes, and scans of large files might mean the files would take a bit longer to load at first. Clarification requested. 2: The print functions were regarded by some PS addicts to be poor (to the extent that they looked like an afterthought), though others suggested this might be due to different terminology. I have seen suggestions that print improvement is high up the priority list. More clarity please. 3: The RAW engine was regarded as much poorer than Photoshop. I pointed out that it is planned to make the RAW operations non-destructive, Additional comment welcome. 4: The absence of a DAM (data asset manager) that could match lightroom’s file handling capability was seen by many (including me) as a major weakness, and it was suggested by one PS acolyte that by the time we were charged for the DAM we would be up to the cost of Lightroom (which, of course, ignored the fact that Lightroom is only available on subscription). I pointed out that even if major pais-for upgrades (i.e. Version 2 etc) came out every 2 years, Affinity would still be easily competitive with Lightroom on price. Even the hard bitten PS professionals welcomed the real time display of brushes, blends and filters, and the automatic addition of masks to filters, It was a relaxed and friendly discussion, and it was clear that even the professionals expect Affinity to put right its weak points. I would love to be able to respond to the comments in a positive manner.

AP...... I like the new light UI, but some of the textcontrats is unacceptable (see attached file) I did report this problem before the last beta release was made, so I hope it can be corrected soon. Dark grey on black for the categories, and white on pale grey for the items is a no-no.

Looking forward to the Android version Great work you guys. Keep it up!

Thanks MEB. All is clear.

I tried to add new objects to the asset library using the new light UI (W10 version) 1: The category and subcategory font were black on black (i.e. invisible) with no obvious way to change that 2: Also discovered that any library items already loaded in the live version would have to be reloaded from scratch. This is time consuming and irritating. One might hope that when the final 1.6 version is released, it will automatically load features from library already loaded to 1.5. Otherwise, keep up the good work!