Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

TheLostVertex

Members
  • Posts

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from Chris B in Unsharp Mask live filter goes a bit weird.   
    Happens to me as well, small radius are worse. Also happens in the develop persona. Version 1.7.0.129
  2. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from MEB in New Photos selection dialog crash   
    I do agree with you mostly. But
     
    A. The feature is there, so i am goign to abuse it ;)
    B. The 10.5 pro stacked 154 images in 13min and 15 sec, while my iMac13,2 stacked the exact same 154 images in exactly 11min. With a shorter stack of 17 images the iPad did it in 44sec and the iMac in 52sec. With a stack of about 40 images the iPad was 1min57sec and the iMac in 2min16sec. So the performance with the latest ipad is actually quite good. With shorter stacks where most of the time is I/O, it appears like the fast solid state storage makes it even a little bit faster. The larger the stack of images, the more it starts to favor my iMac.
     
    So it is a little bit silly, but not as ridiculous as it looks. If the only thing I have with my is my ipad while Im out, it is nice to know that I can be tethered to my camera and make previews, or even full sized images if I want to. 
     
    With is pretty awesome IMO. 
  3. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from donka in New Photos selection dialog crash   
    Fixed in beta 5. Successfully loaded and merged up to 170 images. 
     
    Great work. Its great to see all these problems slowly disappear. 
  4. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from Andrew Tang in New Photos selection dialog crash   
    I do agree with you mostly. But
     
    A. The feature is there, so i am goign to abuse it ;)
    B. The 10.5 pro stacked 154 images in 13min and 15 sec, while my iMac13,2 stacked the exact same 154 images in exactly 11min. With a shorter stack of 17 images the iPad did it in 44sec and the iMac in 52sec. With a stack of about 40 images the iPad was 1min57sec and the iMac in 2min16sec. So the performance with the latest ipad is actually quite good. With shorter stacks where most of the time is I/O, it appears like the fast solid state storage makes it even a little bit faster. The larger the stack of images, the more it starts to favor my iMac.
     
    So it is a little bit silly, but not as ridiculous as it looks. If the only thing I have with my is my ipad while Im out, it is nice to know that I can be tethered to my camera and make previews, or even full sized images if I want to. 
     
    With is pretty awesome IMO. 
  5. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from A_B_C in Pressure Sensitivity Issues 1.6.3 and .4   
    I can reproduce this issue, and I think I know what is causing it it.
     
    I believe this is a result of the fix for the blob at the start of the brush.
     
    It appears like there is an interval where it is starting at a low value and working its way up to what it reads for the dynamics setting. It feels like this is a set time period. IE if I stroke slow the period of ramp up will all be at the beginning of the stroke and everything looks normal. If I am fast with my stroke, the ramp up period shows through out my stroke.
     
    For the devs: I have found an easy way you test if these dynamics options are working as expected is to set the Size dynamic option to Velocity/Velocity inverse. Its very easy to move your stroke across the screen at an even consistent rate. Doing this clearly shows the previous blob issue, and this "ramp up" issue. And while I think it goes without saying, I can produce all of this issues on the Mac version of AP too.
     
    If I am correct about there being some sort of time based ramp up, then maybe dramatically shorten it or consider a ramp up based on pixel/screen space movement? Just thinking out loud :)
  6. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from donka in New Photos selection dialog crash   
    I do agree with you mostly. But
     
    A. The feature is there, so i am goign to abuse it ;)
    B. The 10.5 pro stacked 154 images in 13min and 15 sec, while my iMac13,2 stacked the exact same 154 images in exactly 11min. With a shorter stack of 17 images the iPad did it in 44sec and the iMac in 52sec. With a stack of about 40 images the iPad was 1min57sec and the iMac in 2min16sec. So the performance with the latest ipad is actually quite good. With shorter stacks where most of the time is I/O, it appears like the fast solid state storage makes it even a little bit faster. The larger the stack of images, the more it starts to favor my iMac.
     
    So it is a little bit silly, but not as ridiculous as it looks. If the only thing I have with my is my ipad while Im out, it is nice to know that I can be tethered to my camera and make previews, or even full sized images if I want to. 
     
    With is pretty awesome IMO. 
  7. Like
    TheLostVertex reacted to TheEponymousBob in Touch for gestures only   
    This feature is great for stylus work. But there seem be some instances where it hampers certain tools. In particular, I cannot set a "source" for the clone brush; touch and hold does nothing, stylus tells me to touch and hold.
  8. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from Daphen in Select All files and Select from iPhoto   
    When creating a new Stack, Focus Merge, HDR Merge, or Panorama the user is prompted to add files to the dialog. When add is clicked, the user is brought to a cloud storage file selection. 
     
    The first issue is that when using these features, there is no way to add images that are already on the iPad. Some way to add images from local storage needs to be added. These features use a lot of images and it is a big time and bandwidth waste to use cloud storage only for these.
     
    Second issue, all these features require selecting multiple images, but the dialog only allows selecting one image at a time. This is especially bad because it is cloud storage. A typical usage of these features god like this, "Click add; Select cloud storage service(it always defaults to iCloud); Navigate through a couple folders; Select an image; Wait for the image to load form cloud storage; Get kicked back to the file list dialog; REPEAT 100 MORE TIMES" 

    I could maybe deal with this if it was only the HDR feature that had this behavior since you are only selecting 3-5 images most of the time using that. But the Focus Merge, Stack, and Panorama features are all likely to use 10 or more images. Focus merging I typically have 50-250 images I have to deal with. 
     
    Adding a select all files, or allowing the user to select folders would greatly help. For instance, the google drive app has a select all command in the top right. 
     
    I understand that some of these issues might be softened by implementing drag and drop in iOS11, but it will not full solve the problem. Imagine selecting 50 images for a Panorama or Focus Merge with the drag and drop implementation, vs tapping a single button. It is a big difference.
     
    I hope these issues get sorted, because otherwise those features appear to work pretty well. Though I haven't been able to test them a lot, because I want to keep my hair  ;)
    -Steve
  9. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from jacki3wrfsef in No antialiasing in Live Stack Group   
    It looks like objects in a Live Stack group are not antialiased correctly. And easy way to reproduce the issue:
     
    Create some text
    Select the text and select "Live Stack Group"
    You should be able to see a very large difference in aliasing between when the object is in the group, and when it is not in the group.
     
    As far as I can tell, all objects are affected by this. No stack method has any influence on the aliasing.
  10. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from jaromvogel in Canvas Rotation Bug   
    I just noticed this as well. 
    Suggestion: Make the double finger tap set the rotation of the canvas to 0deg as well as zoom to fit. That would make sense to me as a quite way to set everything back to zero. Currently double finger tapping zooms-to-fit the canvas in its rotated form. 
     
    I am glad this option was added though. 
  11. Like
    TheLostVertex reacted to jaromvogel in Canvas Rotation Bug   
    This is a really minor bug:
    step 1) Enable "Allow canvas rotation in all tools"
    step 2) Rotate the canvas with any tool other than rotate
    step 3) Switch to the rotate tool
    The angle adjuster thing says the rotation is 0.0 even if the canvas is rotated, it should reflect the actual rotation angle.
     
    That being said, I love that you added this option! It makes such a huge difference when drawing.
     
    I would love it if there was a way to reset the canvas rotation without switching to the rotate tool though, maybe some sort of unobtrusive button that appears when rotated somewhere?
     
    Thanks guys!
  12. Like
    TheLostVertex reacted to ToraAkachan in Affinity Photo - iPad Two-Finger Canvas Rotation Gesture   
    For canvas rotation, it is necessary to select the canvas rotation tool (other apps simply use the two finger gesture for rotation). This is extremely annoying, when drawing with the Apple Pen, because it holds up the workflow big time. Would I be using paper, I would rotate the drawing pad with my left hand, while drawing with the right. At the moment I would have to rotate the iPad for that, which is not possible, as the iPad rests on a stand to provide a comfortable drawing angle. So at the moment, using the canvas rotation tool is like putting away the pencil, rotating the drawing pad, picking up the pencil and draw again. A total waste of time and a huge interference with the workflow. Also, the brushes are set back to default, every time I am switching tools, so after rotating the canvas, I have to customize my brushes again, after every rotation action (I have no use for a pencil with a 43px tip). It is NOT possible to save brush settings with the Assistant or in any other way, as indicated in the manual. It is also not possible to duplicate brushes, which is a shame.
    Also, resting the hand on the display, while using the Apple Pen, occasionally interferes with the pen's actions, carrying out unwanted actions - which is a no-go. Please change that.
  13. Like
    TheLostVertex reacted to MEB in Affinity Photo Customer Beta (1.5 - Beta 8)   
    Hi Andy,
    It would be nice if we could set a custom shortcut to toggle the pixel selection (marching ants) without having to go to the menu.
    Already there, i've missed it  :ph34r:
  14. Like
    TheLostVertex reacted to Andy Somerfield in Affinity Photo Customer Beta (1.5 - Beta 7)   
    Hi,
     
    The Equations filter hasn't been documented as yet, but here is a quick synopsis:
     
    By default, x = x and y = y.. So, this means that, for example, the output pixel at x = 100, y = 100 will be read from the input pixel at x = 100, y = 100. Hence, the image does not change..
     
    So, let's change some stuff - try:
     
    x = x + 100
    y = y + 100
     
    We are now telling Photo that for output pixel x = 100, y = 100, read from x = 200, y = 200.. This has the effect of shifting the whole image.
     
    For a fancier example try:
     
    x = x + sin(y)*100
    y = y + sin(x)*100
     
    This will give a weird "waves" effect.
     
    The three sliders below are available in the expressions as "a" "b" and "c" - they control a value between 0 and 1.. so, let's try:
     
    x = x + sin(y)*100*a
    y = y + sin(x)*100*b
     
    This will still look wavey, but when we move sliders A and B, we will see that we can control the strength of the wavey effect in both X and Y.
     
    You can write pretty much any expression you want in the boxes - and recreate pretty much any "transform" style effect..
     
    Other constants are available, other than x,y,a,b,c - for example ox and oy refer to an "origin", which you set by clicking or dragging on the canvas - and w and h are set to the width and height of the document.
     
    I'll try to post some more interesting example of the Equations filter soon - but if anyone else can think of any - please share!
     
    Thanks,
     
    Andy.
  15. Like
    TheLostVertex reacted to Andy Somerfield in Affinity Photo Customer Beta (1.5 - Beta 7)   
    kirkt,
     
    Yes, here goes:
     
    SR = Source Red
    DR = Dest Red
    SB = Source Blue
    DB = Dest Blue
     
    and so on..
     
    You can use any of the channels anywhere, so for example,
     
    DR = (SR+DR)*0.5
    DG = 0
    DB = SR
    DA = 1
     
    This would set the output red channel to the average of the source and dest red, set output green to 0, set the output blue channel to 0 and output alpha to 1.
     
    You can use it to simply rearrange channels, or any other expression you desire - there are even things like power operators so for example -
     
    DR = SR^2.2
    DG = SG^2.2
    DB = SB^2.2
     
    .. would be an approximation of linearisation, etc.
     
    And yes - the "Apply" button is broken - we are rebuilding Beta 7 with it fixed - I will advise when that is done :)
     
    Thanks,
     
    Andy.
  16. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from MattP in Focus merge feedback   
    A quick update since I just saw beta 5 was released. 
     
    Using the large stack I describe in the first post here are the beta 5 results(and a recap of the previous test):
     
    Zerene Pmax: Completed in 0:28:00 Zerene used a peak of 12.8gb of memory, 0gb swap.
     
    Affinity Photo Beta 4: Completed in 1:35:00 Affinity Photo used 27gb memory and 8.7gb swap during image load and alignment, and 4gb memory with 3gb swap used during all of the"focus merge" progress bar, according to activity monitor.
     
    Affinity Photo Beta 5: Completed in 0:34:30 with a peak memory usage of 3.2gb(awesome!) and 66mb swap(I am not sure if this was due to Affinity photo or not, so we can assume no swap used)
     
    That is a nearly a 280% speed improvement from the previous beta. 
     
    The sources panel is fixed now and does not lag when scrolling or when activating the source preview button. There is feedback for when a source image is selected and loaded now(I do not believe there was a progress bar before?). Much improved.
     
    The weird image highlights appear to be improved a lot. Also as important, image alignment seems better. Beta 4 alignment seems a bit distorted, beta 5 alignment is much closer to reality(though I do see a tiny bit of warping, its much improved). Halos in this particular image seem improved. 
     
    Really good job with the update everyone! Pretty much everything I mentioned appears to have been addressed. I will plan on looking into things more in a few days when i have the time.
     
    Attached is the beta 4 output and the beta 5 output of the previously tested stack. The changes in washed out areas and alignment should be obvious. 


  17. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from anon1 in Focus merge feedback   
    A quick update since I just saw beta 5 was released. 
     
    Using the large stack I describe in the first post here are the beta 5 results(and a recap of the previous test):
     
    Zerene Pmax: Completed in 0:28:00 Zerene used a peak of 12.8gb of memory, 0gb swap.
     
    Affinity Photo Beta 4: Completed in 1:35:00 Affinity Photo used 27gb memory and 8.7gb swap during image load and alignment, and 4gb memory with 3gb swap used during all of the"focus merge" progress bar, according to activity monitor.
     
    Affinity Photo Beta 5: Completed in 0:34:30 with a peak memory usage of 3.2gb(awesome!) and 66mb swap(I am not sure if this was due to Affinity photo or not, so we can assume no swap used)
     
    That is a nearly a 280% speed improvement from the previous beta. 
     
    The sources panel is fixed now and does not lag when scrolling or when activating the source preview button. There is feedback for when a source image is selected and loaded now(I do not believe there was a progress bar before?). Much improved.
     
    The weird image highlights appear to be improved a lot. Also as important, image alignment seems better. Beta 4 alignment seems a bit distorted, beta 5 alignment is much closer to reality(though I do see a tiny bit of warping, its much improved). Halos in this particular image seem improved. 
     
    Really good job with the update everyone! Pretty much everything I mentioned appears to have been addressed. I will plan on looking into things more in a few days when i have the time.
     
    Attached is the beta 4 output and the beta 5 output of the previously tested stack. The changes in washed out areas and alignment should be obvious. 


  18. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from MEB in Focus merge feedback   
    Im happy to provide some image sequences here. All images are jpeg. 
     
    Here is the image with the pink background(a 20x magnification photo of a knife tip)  utilityknife.zip (1.68GB) zerene comparision images
    Attached also are the stack outputs of Zerene Pmax with the provided jpegs. One was stack from image 1 to 283, and the other from 283 to 1. The automatic alignment option(where the software chooses the order) goes 283 to 1 for some reason, and so it produces the edge streaking. Both images the alignment looks straighter and less distorted to me. The sensor dust on the left side of the image provides some cues to the difference in alignment between Affinity photo, and the two different Zerene images. 
     
    Also here is a 3 part image of paracord, meant for stacking and then stitching into panorama. paracord1.zip(705MB) paracord2.zip(644MB) paracord3.zip(760MB)
    On the right side of the image the alignment seemed to be slightly distorted compared to Zerene's output as well. Also where the green weaves meet other weaves displays the artifact where dark sections appear lighter than they should, and in this case a lack of detail too. There are also a small alignment issue on the right side when creating a panorama, which I think is partially result of the alignment during stacking:
     
    Affinity Photo Stacks
      
     
     
    Zerene Stacks

     
    Both images do not line up correctly, but its worse with the AP stacks. It is also pretty hard to correct fully with the pano tools. 
     
    If anybody here on the forum wants to test this feature with the images above, feel free too. 
     
    Hope this helps some. And thank you for the reply. 
     
    -Steve
  19. Like
    TheLostVertex got a reaction from Patrick Connor in Focus merge feedback   
    Hello, I do a lot of focus stacking, mostly with Zerene Stacker. So I would like to give my impressions of the focus merge functionality.
     
    First, the stacking method looks a lot like Zerene's pmax method, or Helicon's Method C. But I do notice that Affinity is generating a depth map during the stacking sequence. Also there appears to be less noise and less increase in contrast that Zerene's pmax. Can the Affinity team elaborate on how they are stacking images? (Zerene method documentation: http://www.zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/howtouseit#dmap_versus_pmax HeliconDocumentation: http://www.heliconsoft.com/helicon-focus-main-parameters/ ) On to testing!
     
    Running on a 27" 3.4ghz i7 iMac with 24gb ram.
     
    First test: 53 images, 6000x4000 16 bit uncompressed tiffs (each 144mb)
    Zerene Dmap: Completed 0:08:30
    Zerene Pmax: Completed 0:03:51(ran directly after Dmap, so I believe alignment was cached). Fresh project with no previous alignment: Completed 0:05:32
    Affinity Photo: Completed 0:05:50
     
    So I stepped up the next test to see how it scaled(not well).
     
    Second test:  283 images, 6000x4000 16 bit uncompressed tiffs (each 144mb)
    Zerene Pmax: Completed in 0:28:00 Zerene used a peak of 12.8gb of memory, 0gb swap.
    Affinity Photo: Completed in 1:35:00 Affinity Photo used 27gb memory and 8.7gb swap during image load and alignment, and 4gb memory with 3gb swap used during all of the"focus merge" progress bar, according to activity monitor.
     
    During stacking, Zerene would make full use all CPU cores. Affinity photo would use very little cpu during image loading and alignment, and about 50-60% utilization during the "focus merge" progress bar. I think the way Affinity Photo handles loading images and aligning them can be optimized a lot more. Most of the time for Affinity Photo was spent loading the images(before the "aligning" progress bar appeared). 
     
    Retouching in Affinity Photo feels much slower than Zerene. Switching source images seems to take a longer time. But much worse than that, scrolling the sources windows hangs, and gives a spinning beach ball for several seconds each time you attempt to scroll through it. Having the ability to paint from source images onto layers is great, but the performance is truly terrible. When scrolling through a list takes 10-20 second PER ATTEMPT, I dont think this feature is practically usable in beta 4. Speeding up loading of source files and fixing the scroll behavior seems like the most needed improvement for the Focus Merging feature.
     
    Comparing images from the 283 image stack, there are some noticeable differences.  I choose this set of images because I did not feel like Zerene did a great job with it, and my camera sensor was particularly dirty. Affinity photo shows halos around edges some, and the alignment looks like it is warped compared to Zerene. Dust patterns are very different between Zerene's Pmax and Affinity Photo, so it does seem like Affinity is stacking with some other method. Noise is noticeably lower with Affinity Photo. Contrast and color is also generally a little better than Zerene's Pmax. However in multiple test images Affinity photo renders spots that should be the darkest parts of the image as being much brighter than it should be. (See the attached images, and notice the dark section in the Zerene image vs the pinkish section in the Affinity image.) Overall I think Zerene renders the subject truer to life, mainly due to the much better alignment. The warping in the Affinity image is very noticeable in some parts of the image. 
     
    Finally, a word on nomenclature and me being an idiot. The first time I went to run the 283 image stack, I had accidentally used the option "New Stack" rather than "New Focus Merge". This lead to about an hour and a half of nothing happening before I decided to abort the operation. I only realized what I had done later, because the "Stack" dialog has a dropdown menu for how to align the images, and the "Focus Merge" dialog does not. Normally I, and I think most people, refer to this operation as focus stacking, so it was a mistake of habit and not paying attention. But it would be nice if the dialogs were a little more distinct to help prevent such user error. 
     
    Overall, Focus merge works pretty well I think. It certainly has a lot of potential. I would summarize my suggested improvements as such:
     
    -Add some UI feedback while images are loading into memory(it just looks like it is hanging until it gets to alignment)
    -Add alignment options in the Focus Merge dialog. It looks like it is doing perspective alignment? I believe a lot of images would benefit from only scale/rotate/translate
    -Improve memory management and loading for images, I am assuming this is the biggest performance slow down
    -Fix long load times for selecting source images
    -Fix hang when scrolling in the source panel
    -Fix issue with darkest part of of image being light and washed out(if this is actually a bug, and not a limitation of the stacking method)
    -Make Focus Merge dialog more distinct from the Stack dialog...to help with people being stupid and tired like me :)
     
    I hope this feed back helps you guys. I look forward to seeing any improvements made. Also, if larger test stacks would help you guys in development, I would be happy to provide test images if needed. 
     
    EDIT: I just tested selecting source images again, and the delay for selecting the image wasnt very bad at all, ~1sec. So either it was worse when testing it before, or I was exaggerating in my mind how it felt for some reason. Scrolling the source images with the scroll bar is still as described though. From clicking to scroll, till the source panel becomes responsive again, it takes no less than 10 seconds.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.