John Rostron
-
Posts
3,513 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by John Rostron
-
@Jbrunetti, i recall that many years ago, when digital photography was just coming in, that digital images were not considered as valid evidence for criminal work because of the ease with which they could be manipulated. Clearly this is not the case now. What safeguards are now used to ensure that digital images maintain their forensic validity? I know that this is off topic, but I thought that forum members would be interested in the answer. John
-
Not at all. If you have a spreadsheet, you can do the sums in that. PS, Python is not all that hard to learn. I have not done much Python programming, but I have written one application in it. John -
I think that generating the SVG is going to be your only realistic solution. I have no experience in SVG, but the following might work: Generate your first two tick marks in Designer. Export the design as SVG. Examine the file to see what the markup looks like. Use your spreadsheet to generate appropriate markup for the other ticks. Load your generated SVG back into Designer. I know that this is easier said than done. I would see it as a challenge! If you are not in any hurry, I would be willing to have a go at it. John
-
I presume that you are after a single final image, with the three flowers all in focus. Why not try it and see? I see no reason why it should not work. John
-
affinity designer Breastfeeding Vector for Picture Book _AD iPad
John Rostron replied to JM_IBCLC's topic in Share your work
Nice illustrations. However, the pedant in me would like to point out that young male lions do not develop a mane until they are fairly well grown, and even then it looks fairly scruffy. I speak as one who acts as a scientific consultant to children's picture books. John -
Just click on the Develop button (top left). John
-
I think that a mnemonic that relies on a variant spelling is of less than optimal utility. John
-
I told you that it was what I recalled. I did not say my recollection was accurate. I met this mnemonic at school, probably over sixty years ago! John
-
I do recall there was a mnemonic for the decimal digits of pi that began "How I wish I could ..." I recall that Archimedes" featured somewhere for 9. John
-
When I said 100%, I meant 100% zoom, that is one pixel on your image corresponds to one pixel on the screen. You can zoom in by clicking Ctrl/Cmd-1. You will see that the label on the tab at the top left of the image will say 100% (amongst other things):. This is a screenshot of a raw file freshly loaded into Affinity. When you upload your image, the Forum software may resize your image to ensure that it fits on the screen. This will destroy the 100% zoom and makes it difficult to compare images. I suggest that you take your screenshots with the onscreen image at 100%, then select the same rectangular area from each of you three images which show the detailed area. I would suggest cropping to about 640 by 480. These should upload without distortion. I attach below a cropped area from your first image, just to show areas which I assume you would like sharpened. John
-
And were they with the image at 100%? You don't need the entire image on the screen, just those parts where you need to see the detail. John
-
How did you create those 'raw images'? A raw image is not printable. I would guess that what you have uploaded is actually a screenshot. This would not mean much to us unless you had it 100% on your screen. John
-
I have responded in your original thread on Layer problems, where it belongs. John
-
This is a response to the message you posted in my thread on Vibrance sliders. Since I no longer have Photoshop (even my legacy CS5 has ceased to function) I cannot assess how these adjustments appear in Photoshop. Can I suggest you upload: A high quality jpg from you best result in Photoshop, A high quality jpg from your best result in Affinity. John
-
Do you mean that the original file was a tiff that was loaded into photoshop then saved as a psd? I have looked at both your aphoto and psd files. In both cases and using a single adjustment layer, I observe: Setting V=-100% and S=+100% is very similar to the original background. Setting V=0% and S=100% gives a full saturation for the colours. Setting V=100% and S=100% gives a full saturation for the colours, possibly more saturated than the previous. If that is what you want, then just adjusting Saturation to 100% seems to do what you want, leaving Vibrance at 0% In Affinity with the Vibrance/Photoshop sliders, it seems to apply the Vibrance effect and then the Saturation effect. John
-
After some experimentation, I find that the Vibrance Adjustment Layer works as expected in almost all circumstances. The exception seems to be png images obtained by screenshots. I do not see this as a real problem. John
-
I have downloaded your files and I can see very little effect in applying the Vibrance adjustment layer with V=-100% and S=100%, even when it is applied three times. I would question why you are using those parameters. Vibrance and Saturation are very similar in what they are trying to achieve, just using different algorithms. Why, then, are you applying similar procedures in opposite ways. Surely they are going to counter each other. The outcome of this antagonism is likely to be unpredictable. Whether you are using PS or AP, you need to ask which one of these you are going to use and stick with it. John
-
Yes, it could be reticulation caused when the emulsion expands and wrinkles. Ironically, in this recent post was asking how he can get a reticulation effect into his images. John
-
You can copy and paste a 14 decimal place constant just as easily as a 2 decimal place one. John
-
That is what I was trying to do. It seemed to work with one of my own jpg images, but not with your images. The vibrance adjustment layer allows you to alter both vibrance and saturation. I was able to set these to -100% and 100% as you have done. I also tried using the vibrance adjustment layer to set vibrance to -100%, then using the HSL adjustment layer to set saturation to 100%. The two procedures gave different results but, as said, I was unable to apply this to your image. Could you provide the actual image that you were using, rather than a screenshot, so I can try on that. John John
-
Scanner Problems
John Rostron replied to JackA's topic in Pre-V2 Archive of Affinity on Desktop Questions (macOS and Windows)
@JackA, I cannot work out from your responses whether you have tried dedicated scanner software (I use VueScan) and loaded the saved image from this into Photo. John -
Affinity photo: Divide blending mode
John Rostron replied to joconnell's topic in Feedback for Affinity Photo V1 on Desktop
You can actually implement the equivalent of divide using Filters > Apply Image. Just tick the Equations box and enter the equations: DR=DR/SR DG=DG/SG DB=DB/SG Or you could reverse the two if you wanted: DR=SR/DR DG=SG/DG DB=SB/DB However, I can see no easy way to automate this as a macro. John -
To convert from natural logs to logs base 10, just multiply by 0.434294481903252 (log10(exp(1)). You can easily include this constant in your expressions. John
-
Affinity Photo has supported many Photoshop-style plugins since I have been using it. They must be .8bf plugins, typically those that affect an entire image layer. See this list here from @MEB. Miguel's list is incomplete; many plugins are flagged as 'not tested'. If you are interested in a particular plugin, you can do a search for it to see what others have said. John
-
Scanner Problems
John Rostron replied to JackA's topic in Pre-V2 Archive of Affinity on Desktop Questions (macOS and Windows)
If you have Photo allready open, then the extra time is just a few seconds, if that. When you say "it doesn't seem to work" do you mean the saved image does not load into Affinity Photo, or that it loads, but that the image is flawed? I assume here that by 'Photos' you mean Affinity Photo and not Apple Photos. John
