John Rostron

WARNING: for the technically-minded only! The Noise functions in the Filters > Distort> Equations facility are supposed to add (unspecified) noise to an image. The only description I can find of this is in the video by James Ritson. He first duplcates the layer and then uses either noise(x*y)*a or noise4(x*y)*a in his equation. This produces a grain-like effect over his image. The documentation for equations is limited. There is the Expressions for field input in the Help system which gives, under : Noise(seed/x,y), an explanation: Generate 1D noise either from a seed or based on X/Y input with similar definitions for noise2, noise3 and noise4. James uses both the noise and the noise4 functions. In his video he is using the single seed parameter x*y, with the magnitude controlled by the a parameter. I have been experimenting with these noise functions and present here my findings Although the Expressions for field input names the functions Noise ... Noise4, with a capital letter, these will not work. You need to use a lower case n for noise. The function noise2 has no effect. The functions noise, noise3 and noise4 seem to produce identical visible results. The histograms are also identical. Using a single parameter, either a simple number, or an expression such as x*y, has no visible effect unless the Full option is selected in the Extend Mode at the bottom. When using two parameters, they need to be different in the x and y axes to produce any visible result. Multiplying the parameters by a number, such as noise(10x,10y), has no visible effect. I show here the effect of varying these parameters on a simple gradient field: Here is the effect of x=noise(x,y) and y=noise(y,x): The results for noise3 and noise4 are identical, as are noise(3x,3y) etc as are the histograms. If the parameters are the same, say x=noise(x,x) and y=noise(y,y) You get a very different effect: Almost like a tartan effect. If the noise functions are the same in both x and y such as x=noise(x,y) and y=noise(x,y), it works OK, but if you use x=noise(y,x) and y=noise(y,x) there is no visible effect unless you select Full: The difference between using Zero and Full in the Extend Mode at the bottom is subtle. Using Full seems to convert the image into a monochrome effect with the background invisible. However, the noise is based on the luminance of the background. Just for comparison, I append here the effect of the effect of the Add Noise filter (Filter > Noise > Add Noise...): You can control the intensity of the noise here, which is more than you can in any of the noise functions I have described. In conclusion, I would recommend that if you want noise, then use the Filter > Noise > Add Noise... option above until such time as the devs at Serif come up with a more understandable noise function in Equations. Having said that I am not holding my breath on this. Using noise in equations is probably a minority pursuit amongst users and the Add Noise filter is much easier. John

Use the search facility to look for free macro. You might also like to look for "free macro". The former looks for both words in the same posting; the latter looks for the phrase free macro John

I thought it was worth a mention though. John

I take it you are referring to Filters > Distort > Equations. You need to look in the Help system for ''Field Expressions'. It includes all the standard arithmetic, algebraic and trigonometric expressions. You can use these in any context where you might input a number, such as Document > Resize, where you could put 50% or *0.5 or even sqrt(w). (w is the width.) John

But there is for pixel-based bitmaps, the Mesh/Perspective tool in Photo. There is also the Liquefy Persona, again in Photo. Which are probably not what you wanted. John

It might be possible to do that using Equations, which could be incorporated into a macro. It would be straightforward to write a macro to add a fixed amount (such as 20px), but rather more complex (but not impossible) to have a more general macro with the increment as a parameter. John

If you have a well-defined curve such as part of a circle or a sine wave, then you can do it using Equations (Filters > Distort > Equations). I have produced some macros for doing this. If you can tell me exactly what you want, I can point you to something useful. Try this for starters: John

If your layer is indeed a (Pixel) layer, then it does indeed look like a bug. John

Select the layer/object and click on Layer > Rasterise. John

If your selected image has (Image) against it in the Layers Panel, then go to Layer > Rasterize. This should convert your layer to a (Pixel) layer, and your selection should work. If it was already a (Pixel) layer then I'm stuck. An Image layer acts as a single object, not as a collection of pixels. John

I concur with @casterle. We must think on the same wavelength. John

I was recently made an offer I could not refuse to upgrade my Filter Forge 7 to version 8. There have been hints that Filter Forge has been working to get FF to work with Affinity Photo, so I tried it in both AP 1.6 and AP 1.7 Beta. The plugin installed OK in both programs. Curiously, although the folder was present in the Photoshop Plugins dialog box, the actual plugin was not listed in the Preferences. When I went to Filters > Plugins Filter Forge 8 was listed in both. In AP 1.6 when I selected FF8, I immediately got an error message (which has been submitted to Filter Forge). In AP1.7 Beta, when I selected FF8, the plugin interface appeared and it invited me to register, which I did successfully. However, when I selected a filter to apply to my image, Filter Forge closed and left Affinity Photo Frozen. I had to use the Task Manager to close AP. I tried again today with AP 1.7 Beta and FF8 gave me the same error message as in 1.6, but did not freeze AP. Filter Forge have said here: "We're trying to contact AP developers to fix the problem. How they'll answer us soon and we'll be able to make Filter Forge work under AP again. Meanwhile we suggest to work with Filter Forge in a standalone mode and use copy and paste feature to drag images to and from AP." I shall have to stick with the standalone for now. John EDIT: I seem to have posted this in the wrong forum, in the Suggestions for Affinity Photo on Desktop. It was intended for Affinity on Desktop (MAC and Windows). Moderators: Could this be moved please.

Remember that you an download the free trial of Affinity Photo which will work for ten days following your first use. You can try out your existing plugins to see if they work. In general, only 8bf plugins work, and only then if they conform properly to Adobe's specifications. But there are many that work perfectly. Adobe actions and scripts will not work, but if you want a particuar action, then you might find that someone on this forum has written a macro that does the same job. (Then again you might not!) Give it a try. John

So @Magi did. I must have been looking at the earlier screenshot. My comment about not sideways-stacking still applies though. John

As @dutchshader implied, you need to display thr Layer panel. Click on the Layer tab (next to the Adjustments tab). You only need a single screenshot at a time. Showing several stacked sideways in one image makes it more difficult to see each one. John

No. There are too many degrees of freedom in the original problem. My suggestion of a cyclic quadrilateral is a proposal to constrain the possibilities. John

Whilst you are boggling, scroll down a bit further to Parameshvara's circumradius formula. If you create a circle with this radius you can more readily (!) fit your vertices to this circle. John

One way of fixing the diagonals (and angles) would be to declare that they constitute a cyclic quadrilateral, with all the vertices on a circle. That being so, then there are simple formulae for the length of diagonals. Look at the Wikpedia page on Cyclic Quadrilaterals. You will need to scroll down to the heading Diagonals and Angle Formulas. John

I applied the Mesh Warp tool, dragging the top-left and top-right corners outwards and got this: The lamp on top of the post is bent with respect to the axis of the post itself. To fix that, you would need to cut out the lamp, then rotate and paste it back. Like this: John

The name you are looking for is an irregular quadrilateral. Two possible algorithms could be: Draw a series of four line segments of indeterminate lengths with the angle between each less than 90degrees. . Rotate so that the first line is horizontal and adjust the length to the first target. This will appear in the Transform panel. Then rotate so that the second segment is horizontal and repeat. Create four isolated lines, of your target lengths, and then move and rotate them individually into a quadrilateral shape. This has the advantage that the line should keep their fixed lengths. You could now create a new four-sided polygon and drag the four vertices to overlay the endpoints of yous first set. I have not tried these ideas. They are just thoughts. John

I have created several new macros. However, when I wish to enter them into a new category I get an error as follows: Click on the hamburger menu at the top of the Library Panel. Select Create New Category. This creates a new category called Macros. Click on the Hamburger menu for this new category.Select Rename. I now get an error message saying "You already have a macro category named 'Macros'.Please choose another name." (Note the lack of space between Macros and Please.) I now click on Close and I am now able to choose another name. Needless to say, I do not already have a category called 'Macros'. John

@Alfred, @PaulEC. I posted my original message without the second line. I edited it a moment later, during which @PaulEC stepped in. John

You need to post this on the PagePlus forums at https://community.serif.com/products/pageplus It would also help if you indicated what the problem was. John

What do you see as the difference between an image and an entire photo? John

Fair enough. John