John Rostron

I am so used to have a cancel option for batch processing I was a bit surprised it wasn't there. No loss for me as I was testing it on a backup folder.

Many perfectly workable plugins have this "unknown" status. I would guess that the plugin does not provide Photo with some crucial bit of information that Photo is looking for. Hence the option to allow unknown plugins to work.
John

It will paste into Affinity Designer 1.6.x but each line is a separate layer and not bulleted style, although it retains the bulleted number and full stop.

Hi Zentradis,
Welcome to the forums
The settings shown in the below screenshot should give you the same results you got by using the Channels tab.
Thanks
Callum

Hi,
I like using affinity designer for my vector artworks. But after finished my vector artwork i save it .EPS format after this i upload it for sale in stock service... Stock service giving me warning "Your artwork included bitmap pixel" ! Later i will open it in Adobe Illustrator then i see really bitmap pixel parts there ! But i never touch anything pixel art !?How is it possible Affinity designer without my command itself add my vector artworks bitmap pixel pieces ? How can i will stop doing that ?

I assumed that the inspired, professional, creative and fast users of Affinity would put two and two together, and if not, ask Google.

Even with layers, I prefer the route PhotoLine takes if I do a save As or an export:

So here I took an existing PL document and am doing a Save As (but the behavior is the same if I have never saved an image and I have used any type of layer on). Yep, there's a dialog to press Yes or Cancel on. But it is still quicker. And before I close the document, I can still add layers, change layer effects and/or adjustment layers and doing a plain Save saves in the format I used to Save As or Export. (Up until closing the document. Then it becomes a potentially flattened image like in the case of a PNG or JPG. TIFF will retain layers.)

Sorry about that. The 'this' should have had a link attached. I was just trying to encourage @Bruce E. Gallie to follow the link to the PagePlus site.
John

Thats right - sorry, the upload didn't work quite as I had expected.
 
Possibly - but other software is able to deal with it. The shooting conditions aren't the issue, I know that the results I want are obtainable and the files aren't lacking the data; its extracting it in Affinity which seems to be the problem. The photos did encompass the tones I wanted, yes.
 
I've tried that - it can make it a little worse and a little better, but that sun halo is still present and blown out no matter what I try. Other tone mapping variants all have the awful halo, and the random gradient to white on the right hand side.
I will upload them when I get home. I went with screenshots because I was a little used to forums being limited in how large attachments can be, and only just realised that the upload limit is quite considerable! If I upload them into this thread, can people download them from here?

Nice to see some photographic images in the Share your work forum. It would be nice to see some information as to what (if anything) you did to the images. 
John

I love procedural texture live filter and would like to offer a few
1. normal map from intensity  generator
2 curvature from normal map
3  distorting  based on  other layer normal map  vectors
4 distorting based on other layer greyscale gradient / slope
5.  "edge detecting
 
Also would be nice to have a kind of inputs  based on document layers.    something  like layer1 alpha  + layer2 alpha - layer5 red channel .  
Substance Designer could be a good source of ideas of what might it be.  I have to use this newly acquired  by Adobe soft every day . It's very powerful but  I hate how tremendously inconvenient and artist unfriendly it is really.
This new "procedural texture" thing could really be a simple and  easy replacement if only had a few right "filters" . 
 
ps. I see this procedural texture filter is kind of programmable  but after trying to read the help I can say I don't understand a thing. Would be so much more helpful if it has a kind of node based interface where we, not codding people could just construct whatever we want.   Something Blender style please
 
 

Also known as fogbows, as was the case; brilliant sunshine and slightly foggy.

To quote the standard Serif response:
John

I'm wondering if @Anonymouse is trying to remove chromatic abberation rather than dealing with atmospheric effects like scintillation.  It would be helpful to see a sample image.

An exercise in working in black and white using Affinity Designer. What I need to do is find a few brushes I like and save them in a new folder of favourites as I find there too many options in the standard brushes and I loose track of where I am. I like the sprays and splatters as they give good textures. Need to play around a little more to find pencils/charcoals I like. For this image I sketched an idea in Procreate, then placed it into AD where I created basic vector linework before adding textures in pixel mode. I'd be happy not using colour anyday. 

Watch the second of the videos on Text on a Path: Worked Examples.
John

In a recent post in Questions, @Maxxxworld asked how he could warp an image to apparently wrap it around a bottle. I posted a solution to his problem there, which I expand upon here.
Consider the facing semicircle of the bottle as seen in this diagram:

The visible part of the label extends from -90 degrees (on the left, not shown) to 90 degrees on the right. This will correspond to the width of the original image. This will project onto the final width of the image (the line below). The final width is less than the original width by a factor of pi/2. A bit of trigonometry shows that the sine of the Angle indicated is given by (x-halfwidth)/halfwidth, where halfwidth is both the label and the final image.
Putting this together and re-arranging a bit gives us an Equation:
x=(asin(2*x/w-1)*w/180)*pi/2+w/2
A bottle is typically viewed from above, so that the label has a curve, typically with a dip in the middle.This can easily be simulated using equations, using:
y=y-Const*x*(w-x)/w/w
The Constant determines the depth and direction of the curve. I have used the expression w*(0.5-a) as a scaling factor, where a is a parameter chosen at runtime. This will change the curve from negative (curving down) at the default a=1 to positive at a=0. Inserting this into the equation gives:
y=y+(0.5-a)*x*(w-x)/w
Note that the w in the numerator and denominator cancel out. The value of (0.5-a) determines the curvature as described above.
As an example, here is the Great West Window of Chester Cathedral. I chose this because it has lots of verticals to see how the filter affects it. (It has verticals once I had put it through the Mesh Warp.)

And here is the image after the filter:

Before filtering I cropped it close to the sides of the window and then Rasterized it to remove the invisible sides. I then added space at the top and bottom to allow room for the curvature part to operate. I then followed this by Clip Canvas to remove surplus transparent ends.
The calculations for this filter are complicated by the algorithm that Affinity uses to effect these equations, which I explain in this Tutorial here. I have created a macro that effects the filter, and then uses Clip Canvas. By clicking on the cogwheel, you can alter the degree and direction of curvature.
EDIT: I have discovered that this macro will only perform once (per Affinity Photo session). I add here a version recorded in version 1.8 which does work properly in Photo 1.8:
WrapAround1.8.afmacro  
I alos onclude here the original macro, recorded in version 1.7:
WrapAround.afmacro
John

ok. I think this thread has gone far enough.
 
@Jowday - as has been pointed out, the OP is not particularly constructive and suggests that no work has been done, at all, in the past years.  That is absolutely not the case, and the evidence is clearly documented on this forum.  Numerous items from our road map have been completed since our initial release - these have also been balanced with ever changing industry expectations. The OP alludes to basic features being missing, but does not state what these basic features are.  Without such information, it is nothing more than a rant, and gives us no insight into what this particular user expects.  That is helpful to no one other than the person letting off steam.
 
I'd also add that what many people view as "basic features" are often those that didn't appear in other software for many, many years, or are actually quite niche, or very often are not actually that "basic" - certainly not in terms of their implementation.  It takes considerable time to implement any tool from point of view of performance, precision and usability.  Our decision not to put out half-baked solutions is one we stand by.  There is plenty of evidence in other software where features have been rushed out and bad choices have become entrenched.  It's easy to make blanket statements about how we are not meeting your expectations when you don't have the complete overview of what we currently have and where it has to go in the future.  We also have many customers who are very happy with the direction we have chosen.
 
As has been stated - you are ready to compare our performance to other development teams that are ten or even fifty times the size, and with software that costs more than ten times as much.  While the comparison is flattering, I'd ask you to consider how your expectations of parity with those you are comparing us to can possibly be realistic.

I started a thread on wrapping a label round a bottle. If you enter the following in the search box:
It will give you the link.
John

I gave that source as it did refer to a 'complete arc', which no-where else did. My point being that the term 'complete arc' is essentially one which you can define as you wish, as @DesignT has done.
John

Innovators create new designs, dialogues, icons, logos, functions, code and routines - others just copy them, in part or in whole.
Apple is a good example of this with its computers, laptops, iPods, iPhones, iPads, software etc.
Also ask Serif why it created it's own file format rather than just base it on something already done by someone else.

An arc is defined as part of a circle, which is just what you see most of the time with a rainbow. If you wish to emulate a natural rainbow, then it should be an arc of a perfect circle. If you want to be even more natural then you should include the shading described above.
John

Sorry, no pets on school grounds.

This pic also illustrates a feature of natural rainbows. The background is darker to the outside of the inner rainbow and lighter to the outside of the outer rainbow. Again a consequence of the optics.
Double rainbows are commoner than you might think. 
John

Also, both the primary & the fainter color-reversed secondary rainbows are brighter than the surrounding sky. Their apparent brightness can be affected by atmospheric water droplet size & shape variations (like where rain is falling in sheets) & even by impurities suspended or dissolved in the droplets, which can diminish the observed brightness of different spectral colors, most often the shortest wavelength ones visible near ultraviolet end of a rainbow's spectrum.
Considering all that & that digital camera sensors do not have the same sensitivity to different wavelengths of light as does our perception of them, getting a good photo of a rainbow as it appears to an observer on the scene, or creating an artificial simulation of one, is probably a lot more difficult that it might seem.