Keith Reeder

You've answered your own question: are you seriously expecting to be as familiar and productive with Photo in a few hours as you are with PhotoShop after 25 years? Many of us have made the move with no problem whatsoever. It's just a matter of doing it and accepting that there's an unavoidable learning curve associated with getting to grips with a new programme.

Agreed, jmac - the arbitrary application of gimmicky filters is no substitute for quality or ability; nor does it make an otherwise banal image somehow "worthwhile". A pet peeve of mine, too.

Were you given any impression by Serif that this was even being considered?

Serif staff have already made several statements about the likelihood of a Linux port in this thread.

Yeah - big "if", isn't it?

Indeed. I even looked the thing up - putting more effort into it than the OP did - and still came up empty. And it's of note that the OP has "gone dark" since. Troll.

That's a completely unfounded and entirely speculative assumption based purely on your own experience, isn't it?

Thanks, guys - this is the quality I aspire to (the squirrel is a completely wild animal, incidentally - this is where fieldcraft comes in) and - as an aside - I wouldn't use Affinity Photo as my image processing software unless it was entirely capable of delivering on my aspirations. Which it certainly is..! :D This, 100%. I don't even try to protect my images. Yes, I've had images ripped off/presented as someone else's work - umpteen times - and it's just a crappy aspect of the internet you deal with either by accepting it as the price of entry, or by not posting images online. I suppose I'd feel different if this was my living, of course... I could make removing my name harder to remove by sticking it right across the subject matter, but I think it spoils the experience (I hate seeing it in other people's images), and it's still a far from foolproof method if an image thief is sufficiently motivated and reasonably able to use certain image editing tools.

Why is that? Looks entirely relevant to me in terms of confirming the intransigence, inflexibility and intolerance of the Linux/FOSS community to anything that isn't done exactly their way...

It's just the logical reaction to the pontifications of another Linux zealot. If you really want access to Affinity software - if that's your real priority - then the solution is simple: use a Windows or Mac machine. But noooo, this is really about winning your little OS bigotry battle rather than actually being able to use Photo or Designer, isn't it?

This tends to be what I go with - 1200 x 800 px in theory, but sometimes it rounds down to 799: I just put 1200 in the long side and lock the proportions. I set the Quality slider to whatever it needs to be at to give me a file of around 300kb. In quality terms it gets you something like this (although knowing how to take a decent picture in the first place; and knowing how to convert and process Raw files well, matter too): As MEB says, DPI is irrelevant for online viewing.

Well?

You might get some uptake if you explain what Avocode is and why Designer users should care.

I rely on the Topaz Detail plugin, so this is very useful to know. Thanks, Gizbo.

Errr, no: the fact that other programs might coincidentally play nice with a given piece of hardware is irrelevant. If several programs exhibit the same problem, the common denominator is the hardware. So no, not selective quoting, but analytical thinking.

Errr... Shouldn't you be asking Wacom?

Where did you read this? What does it say now?

No, "we" definitely do not "need" this,

Me too. Looks like the actual video hasn't got public view permissions...

Irfianview only opens the preview though - it doesn't have to deal with demosaicing the Raw file, applying preset curves, colour profiles, NR and other default adjustments that a Raw converter needs to go through before presenting the image for work.

Yep, that.

Yep, I much prefer sessions to the catalogue, in Capture One.

Agreed. In Lr, it is explicitly the recommendation that a single catalogue be used, and keywords applied.

Where are you seeing this? I see thumbnails for my CR2s anywhere in Photo that thumbnails are visible, on Win 8. Incidentally, the Canon codecs have never worked for me, which is why I posted that link. It works.

Fair enough, Ben - I appreciate the clarification.