Keith Reeder

Some more idea of your computer specs would be helpful too - do they meet the minimum requirements for AP?

Windows 8.1 for me.

Well, plugins either deliver functionality unavailable natively to the software; or they simplify the process of getting a desired end result; or they simply do something better than the host programme can do it. For example: it's certainly true that the Topaz Detail plugin is much better for sharpening my bird pictures than the built-in sharpening tools in Affinity Photo (I would have big problems if the Detail plugin didn't work - although I like the Focus slider in Nik's Sharpener Pro 3 tool as well); and Topaz DeNoise is better at dealing with high ISO noise than Photo's noise reduction (although this is very good itself). The Nik collection provides a unique way of selectively processing images, by use of Control Points - that's a big deal for some users - and some of the tools in the collection certainly make it easier to achieve results: sometimes results you would not even think of trying, using the native tools in Photo: if I made a habit of black and white, I'm sure I'd use Nik's Silver Efex Pro 2 all the time. So in summary, plugins can make life - and getting the pictures you want - easier.

Yep - 1.50.45 here too.

Hmmm... Viveza works here - so its not obvious what's to be "fixed".

Sure thing - I'd like that myself - but Bob has mentioned his install not being connected to the net, which would presumably be necessary in order for Photo to know of any version slippage?

I think Bob wants an online reference for the current latest version - in case his version has "slipped". Sounds like a good idea.

And yet for many of us, Photo is already a replacement for PhotoShop. Again: your personal opinion does not necessarily reflect that of every other user.

Luckily for Affinity, it doesn't sink or swim on your personal opinion...

But it's not the "wrong" thing, Gary: popular usage changes, and anyone who needs to worry about the difference between DPI and PPI knows the difference and should be able to act accordingly. Frankly, this is change for change's sake - it's a pedantic nicety rather than a Real World problem.

Edit > Preferences > PhotoShop Plugins, to install them, Gary. Then (on an active image): Filters > Plugins.

File import/ingestion is not an option in AP, Tim. https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/5389-import-photos/ .

Presumably this explanation will apply equally to Photo: https://www.quora.com/What-does-rasterizing-a-layer-do-in-Photoshop Not sure that performance improvement is a very persuasive argument, but in Photo at least, it seems that Rasterisation is also the broad equivalent of flattening all layers, and it takes fewer computer resources to work on a single layer than on multiple layers.

Lightroom and PhotoShop are no more "cloud based" than is Affinity Photo. And again - this is off topic and irrelevant: your personal "issues" with Adobe are of no significance here. Pointless, needless Adobe-bashing is a recipe for a thread disintegrating into a flame-fest, and nobody needs to know (or cares about) your personal motivations for using Capture One and Affinity Photo. This forum exists for discussion of Affinity products, not for you to exercise your anti Adobe agenda...

No, it really doesn't, Marj. Not even a tiny bit. This post says everything that needs to be said about the Real World implications of this "problem": https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/25774-its-ppi-not-dpi/?p=123411

You're not seriously suggesting that Affinity considers the common use of DPI a selling point, are you? That people (in the round, not just the occasional edge-case posting on this thread) will refuse to buy software because what you deem to be a "correct" term has not been used? Because I don't believe for a second that a decision has been made to use the term "DPI" so that Affinity sells more software, which is what you're implying - sorry, it's a frankly preposterous notion.

But entirely irrelevant to the question being asked...

Honestly, we're used to it... Only one person has, though... I've never seen a single time - and I shudder to think how many pieces of software I've bought over the years - where that has been the case. It simply does not happen

Hi MEB, good to know, and I'd respectfully suggest that this is one place where sticky settings are a priority, being directly and specifically related to image quality of output.

And nothing about that arrangement will make for a better or more efficient user experience than would be provided by using the software on its native platform(s) - so what's the point except tedious OS zealotry? Not Affinity's job. You haven't provided a single good reason for Affinity to do this - your personal dislike of certain operating systems isn't a reason.

Yep - but it needed to be ruled out that we weren't talking at cross purposes about where the error was actually appearing.

That's in Designer, not Photo.

Not seeing it either in the release build - behaves as expected here.

Gotcha, Paul - thanks for the clarification. John, it takes about ten seconds to open my 7D Mk II files too - and about 8 seconds to convert to a tiff for post processing: but that's still faster than Optics Pro 10 (which I don't use any more, but is a useful reference point for "slow"), and we put up with the sluggishness of Optics Pro for years. But yeah, AP needs to be faster: Capture One opens and saves a file in a tiny fraction of the time we're talking about here, to use it as a reference point for "quick".

Hmmm... Still just thinking this through - I'm still getting to grips with AP myself, but is it possible that it's applying an sRGB profile when the image is opened in the software? I admit this doesn't perfectly explain what you're seeing - Windows Photo Viewer isn't colour managed, so I think I'd expect it to show something closer to the AP view than the Capture One view - but nothing else obvious springs to mind. Gianmarco, which camera?