krbo

squeezer, I will not expect that Serif will solve color correction, saturation... for your camera by your expectation. I 'm not sure are develop assistant corrections camera model dependent or even RAW format dependent, but if they are - then including TZ95 may have some benefits. You are using well known Panasonic RW2 RAW format independent of the camera model and that is that - AP reads it and shows it to you as it was recorded by your sensor - the real meaning of RAW. Will you deliberately switch on some corrections in assistant is up to you but only way to get clean data is keep everything off no matter how dull it looks - that's why are you here to correct it as you wish instead some unknown japanese engineer making jpg out of it. Lens correction is another thing Serif has nothing with, they are simply using (as many others) ready made free data called LensFun database and to get your lens there somebody somewhere in the world must go through a tedious process of preparing a lot of pictures and making correction data for optical distortion, chromatic aberrations and vignette (for free in his spare time). Having TZ-70 and FZ-1000 before I know how horrifed you are with wide RAW shot, there were times I had no will to correct them and opted a JPG from camera. There are some good things: 1. you can do it by yourself, include it in LensFun project and help all other TZ-95 owners in the world 2. you can help LensFun database maintainers by sending required pictures and they will process them 3. or you can at least try to clone existing data of the similar model as we now can add external lens data into a 1.7 beta (as I see in LensFun compact-panasonic.xml data nearest match is DMC-TZ71 with distortion and CA data (no vignetting data)) detailed info about 1. and 2. can be found on LensFun home page: http://lensfun.sourceforge.net/lenslist/ for 3. search this fine forum about adding external lens profiles into a 1.7 beta

Thanks Gabe, such feature will be a great help for big stack users.

hi, recently a group of us, AP users, in "Affinity Photo - Tutorials" facebook group are discussing making a so-called FB 3D photos for which you need a photo and it's depth-map simultaneously uploaded where FB combines them in a 3D effect photo. so anyone trying this will have a really great help from depth-maps generated in a focus merge process only if we can save/export them in some photo format (Helicon and Zerene uses TIFF) I think it will be a very small effort from Serif developers as depth map is already there, just save it somewhere.

that's not a bug, it's AP usual behavior I also wish editing a large stacks can be saved and resumed, wrote here once about that but nothing changed

You would like to see thumbnail of raw format? I think it was said before AP will show you exactly what your windows version sees, no internal raw thumbnail viewer - internal Windows stuff only. As you, I also can't see Panasonic thumbnails as my Win10 doesn't know anything about it but I see DNG thumbnails from Pentax but no DNG from Huawei, no CR3, no ARW... If you need to see them and lot more and send to edit from viewer may I suggest you a Fast Stone Viewer - great free software

maybe it's intentional, dunno

Win version - closes by itself after closing last picture, about 9 of ten times (so not always) on two different PCs sometimes after next start there is a warning about unsaved picture (even it was saved before closing) found, also not always no crash report or any error shown

Would like to have option to reorder adjustments and filters in Layer panel via right-click menu entries like "Move Up, Move Down" (maybe even "Move to Top, Move to End") Sometimes it's tedious to grab filter, slightly move it with mouse, spotting a blue bar and release in right moment - simple right-click->"Move Up" will be much easier

Hi, have some macro steps reorder problem i Win 284 beta: Here is macro (an old one which I reuse on every new version): so it's denoise-clarity-high pass order and after running I have: completely reversed now there is another problem: none of the nested filters can't be moved to a first position (directly below Pixel layer) with a mouse, I can move filters down or up as long as it is not top most position. moving and dropping on to a Pixel layer itself always put everything on a last position in chain finally tried to make a new macro in this beta version - also had to take steps reversed - first add high pass, then clarity and denoise to have them in proper order

almost unoticed: this is a great new feature - immediately added my Oly Mk2 lens which is not (yet) in lensfun database but is optically equal to a Mk1 - simply copied data with proper EXIF name tag and it works great - thank you!!!

Hi, it took time to pinpoint this but you have a bug just like Exiftool long time ago - AP can't read and empties all EXIF data from pictures in folders named with local language specfic characters (like ŠĐŽĆČ ) when file is in pure ASCII named folder everything is OK

Another small GUI bugs: 1. Pixel layer with several filters - to select individual one with mouse two clicks are required - first one selects all of them and then second one on the required filter. 2. Double click when single filter is selected gives empty filter properties (mostly zeroes as paramteres)

Any adjustment layer or filter added to a pixel layer can't be removed via mouse right click menu - "Delete" is greyed but keyboard "Delete" works

As soon as you have epub2 export format I'm buying it

I'll support common plea - an epub2 export is a must for me, please work on it ASAP!

I'll support this. Please find a way to continue work on big focus stacking over several sessions. It impossible to check and edit 300 shots in a one go, we must be able to save work and continue later. I'm considering present Photo behavior of forgetting sources between sessions as a bug, and a long one as this is already reported here more then a year ago:

thanks - I asked because it was written in your sample photo "M-42 or no lens" so I thought maybe some vintage lens with nice picture

Hi, just tested your file - arround 2 minutes to export here and yes, I also didn't realise high-pass is a choking until this thread. High-pass is my favored sharpen filter, almost in every of my post processing so that's why I noticed general slowness in work path And I'm sure it was not like that before, but in what version can't pinpoint. btw what lens you used for a photo?

Of course, here you are: Wrapped.afphoto

For now couldn't point a problem - started beta with CTRL - reset everything, loaded my aphoto with 4 filters and tried to measure a time before calculated export size is shown as by included picture. Times were: - no filter activated - 2-3sec - first Defringe 7sec - second Defringe 21sec - Clarity 66sec - High Pass 370sec (over 6 minutes) after that tested production version 1.6.1.93 with full filters - arround 7 minutes and results are consistent between two PCS with different GPU and win versions

Since maybe 2-3 last versions export to jpg becomes more and more slowly. Now latest beta goes to something very, very slow, up to a 10 minutes to do a step. From a picture with a task manager you can see I'm not on an old, slow hardware (Win drive is SSD) but AP makes it crawl during an export. Also you can see only 4 filters used (pixel layer is a tone mapped HDR made from 3 exp. bracketed shots) First stage - calculating an export size lasts 8 minutes topping a 4 core CPU to 100% and after that actual export took another 10 minutes. During that PC is almost dead hardly responding to anything (but response to "Cancel" button of export dialog was OK) "96" was slow, "98" looks even slower - first impression with new beta. just to inform you, nothing dramatic as this is beta in the end

Another vote for hot pixel filter as I just stumbled on them. It was mentioned a year ago here: hope Serif stuff didn't gave up from it.

I always download these fine tutorials from Vimeo for an easier later usage. Usually in a 1080p resolution and have a question: why there are very often two files of the same resolution but different sizes?? (usually on higher resolutions 1080,2K) For example latest "Uplift Epic skies" in 1080p have two files: one 112,393Mb and other 103,971Mb Which one to use?

Just a few hours ago 1.5 crashed with well known and reported HDR merge (denoise, deghosting..., error 05 without log) Right now tested this latest (88) beta with the same photo set - a least several times faster merging, denoise and tone mapping - no crash!!! this subject requires more testing but so far - excellent! thanks to a whole team!