kaffeeundsalz

What @αℓƒяє∂ describes is technically correct, but I'd like to add that some people would consider it pointless to buy a Mac and then use it with Windows. While it's totally okay to do this with software that you need on occasion and that you can't replace with an equivalent Mac alternative (which is what Boot Camp was made for), I'd say that using macOS as your primary operating system is an integral part of the overall Mac experience. It all depends on your very own use case, but on a Mac, I'd prefer the Mac version.

Will you please stop telling me how I'm supposed to do my creative work?

Hi everyone, in the Affinity Designer for iPad introduction video, there's a nice 3D text illustration that can be seen at 0:36. https://youtu.be/dirJy4suAbs?t=36s Can anyone point me to a reference about how this was created? It doesn't necessarily have to be a tutorial about this exact illustration. Any hint on how it's done would help. Cheers kaffeeundsalz

Don't give up too fast on the overexposed areas though. It's quite remarkable what the Shadow/Highlights filter can achieve when you play around with the settings a bit: As you can see, the highlights treatment also makes some JPEG compression artifacts quite noticeable, but maybe your original image has a better quality than the uploaded (and maybe additionally compressed by the forum software?) version. Bonus tip: Just in case you happen to have this as a RAW file, it would probably be even less of a problem since you could recover the highlights with actual sensor data in the Development Persona.

Hi @- S -, it's interesting for me to see how different our experiences are in this regard. I started using gaming mice for productive work many years ago and the Logitech MX518 is in fact the one that I've used for the longest time by far. I even grabbed a second one from remaining stock long after Logitech had discontinued it just so I could put it aside for when my first unit would break. I occasionally tried out newer mice in retail stores, but I was so familiar with the MX518's design that there were times when I thought I could never use any other model again, ever. After my second unit had its days and there wasn't any change to get another one, I bought a Logitech G403 Prodigy, and getting used to it really wasn't as painful as I originally suspected. What this tells us is that the choice for a computer mouse is probably an extremely personal one and it all depends on what works for you and what doesn't. In this context, I'd also like to cast my vote for Razer devices. You're right: Forcing the user into the cloud just for configuring a mouse is a terrible design choice. That being said, I'm currently with a Razer Mamba Tournament Edition and have only good things to say about it. Very well crafted, precise, highly configurable and just the perfect weight, size and shape for my hand. After the initial configuration, I've permanently put the Synapse software into offline mode so it won't annoy me any further.

And don't forget that all three apps will have a shared file format, so it'll remain possible to open the same Affinity document with Designer, Photo and Publisher. It would be very confusing if what's a canvas in designer would suddenly be called something else in Publisher, wouldn't it? As for terminology: Adobe InDesign uses the name "pasteboard" for the area outside of the active page area. I like the idea, but it's certainly a matter of taste.

I still feel greatly entertained. Gotta get some more popcorn though.

Maybe Serif should just give that guy a copy of their source code. Sounds like ready-to-run Linux versions of both Photo and Designer would just be a few easy compiling minutes away then! I literally can't wait!

Sure. Just go to Swatches and from the dropdown menu in the upper right corner of the panel, create a new palette. You basically have two options here: either choose "Add Document Palette", which will attach your color swatches to the currently active document. If you then open that document in your other Affinity app, the swatches will open with it. Or, for an even more global approach, choose "Add System Palette". This will allow you to create a system-wide set of swatches that are permanently accessible from both Affinity Photo and Designer. And since system palettes are also not document-based, you'll have them available in any file you create or open.

Just because something can be considered doesn't mean it's necessary. You might trick less experienced people to believe they have to know all of this stuff to master a simple white balance adjustment.

@owenr Certainly I did! I saw it, but you said "It is far from a perfect fix for this photo", so I thought you could provide one. I was just curious what the result would look like. But if you say you'd never be satisfied, I can understand that. Never mind then.

@R C-R, I think our opinions are closer to each other than you think, but it's amazing how you don't seem to understand what I'm saying over and over again. Maybe it's because I'm not a native speaker? If so, my apologies for not being able to express myself clear enough. But maybe it's because you always quote just some of my lines, so I wonder if you actually read my entire post. Right. Unless you think that the uncorrected original example of this thread has proper white balance. But I already said this. In most cases, yes. It depends on the look you want to achieve. But I already said this. In a way, all of them are (except for the unedited original image because that one has a clearly visible orange shift). It depends on the reference point you pick for white balancing. But I already said this. That might be because the images need further editing. Why don't you go and edit that image so that you're satisfied with the result and post it here? True. But "neutral color" is clearly defined in image editing. In RGB, it's when all three parameters R, G and B have the same value. In HSL/HSV, it's when S is 0. That's what you're white balancing against. Does it correctly reproduce colors of real world lightning? No. Is the perception of real world lightning subjective? Yes. Are there cases when neutral color values are not desirable at all in an image? Yes. But I already said this.

I didn't say that it has nothing to do with perception. I said that the degree of detail of your scientific approach is completely unnecessary to get to an image that is properly white-balanced. That's because, to stick with my example, if you remember an object to be white, you can make it appear white in the photo, too. Whether it actually has a different color from a physical or perceptional or divine perspective is totally insignificant because you already are where you want to be with your image. Or, in other words: White balance is surprisingly not about finding some universal truth about how we are all expected to perceive color. That would be the same as starting a discussion about the essence of being with someone who just asked for your ID.

@R C-R, you're getting way too theoretical here. Nothing you say about perception and brains and whatever has anything to do with what people actually intend to achieve with a white balance tool. What they want is to remove a color cast from an image because color casts look ugly (most of the time, they do). There are well-defined workflows to get there. None of these rely on your overly-scientific considerations. In fact, how can any perception of color be objective since we're talking about perception? If that's what you want to discuss, you're entirely missing the point.

I know. But when you only use the graypoint picker, you get the same or at least a similar result. That would only be the case if color was the only reference you have, e.g. in an abstract painting or so. If you have a landscape or a room or whatever scenery, you can tell from the objects that you're seeing what could be a good reference for a neutral color, even more so when you shot the image yourself and definitely know that, for example, some furniture on the photo is actually white in reality. Of course, this won't give you the appearance under the original lightning conditions because the light itself could have a color cast, but I think I already mentioned this and it's not what you're usually after when using the white balance tool (and if so, you'd have to rely on your eyes even more).