Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About American

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

905 profile views
  1. Thank you. I'm not as fortunate as you to be familiar with the various terms you use in your response that I have not cited. But now, thanks to you, I'm familiar with terms that I wasn't fortunate enough to be familiar with before.
  2. @American I am posting to myself after having blocked the user who states he will not respect my wish to maintain a distance on this forum. This impunity might and almost certainly will end my posting here at all. If someone, anyone, were to ask me to steer clear of him or her on this forum or any place online, I would feel duty-bound by boilerplate Terms of Service to honor that person’s request. If the Affinity terms of service do not address situations such as these in a way that gives all forum members the right to be ignored by members to whom they have made that request public, then there is an aggression inimical to what we in the U.S. might call the right to “the peaceful enjoyment of their property,” i.e., their own Affinity accounts. Such stress makes it impossible to formulate questions regarding the correct and most efficient use of the software, and certainly on enjoying the creative processes of photo-editing. If I don’t receive a response from a forum moderator, I would like to thank people who have helped me with Affinity Photo since its release. I will have been bullied off the community “playground.” And that, I think, is unacceptable.
  3. Sir, I sincerely request that you don’t trouble yourself to read or respond to anything I post on the forums from this point onward. Thank you for your consideration. It is fine for you to go off-topic... sometimes far off-topic—but then for others not to do the same, much, much less frequently? And certainly when your responses solicit trust that such digressions are encouraged? No. I will henceforth steer clear of you, and then we can both be content. I am extremely serious in this request.
  4. @firstdefence Thank you. Yes, that was one of the filters they told me to use last year. That filter is just plain spooky. I don’t really recall what it did/does but will give it a try. I wish there was some site where you could submit old photographs and have them cleaned up. I also wish there was a site where you could submit photographs, at least two, of a person you believe to be the same person in both (or several) photos, and get them « tested. » Either kind of site almost certainly would make money.
  5. Mm-hmm. You should try doing that with nine Live Lighting Filters. It will turn you to drink.
  6. That’s okay. I wanted to be a George Washington. I walked around with a towel around my shoulders pretending to cross the Delaware and made my baby sister be Martha. For some reason I never quite figured out, Martha ignored me quite a lot. I learned early the burdens a great man has to bear. That was before Sister Gabriella found my National Geographic for Show and Tell had pictures of cavemen dressed, shall we say, as God made them. I was sent up to Sister Linus’ office, paddled, and parted from my scandal rag, with its pictures of beautiful rocks...
  7. I have a group photo of some soldiers from 1975, all with helmets on. Although I'm 99% sure this group photo includes the particular person whose photo I'm interested in but need to sharpen, the helmet (American Army) not only covers half of the face, its long shadow makes a definite identification impossible. Additionally, for a reason I don't understand, GIs in this group photo who wore glasses, which I thought made a guy ineligible for duty, were all wearing them. Glasses further blur a face and add to making a positive identification yet more impossible. Aside from unsharp masking and all the other filters I was told to use about a year ago on this forum in regard to black-and-white newspaper images (that I never quite got to work for me), are there any other tricks forum users can think of to render a "disguised" face less so? One final comment. Last year, I spent so much time asking for help repairing truly terrible "microfiche-bad" black-and-white newspaper photos. I never made any headway. One person took a sample photo I submitted and did masterful work editing it, but then refused to detail how they effected the edit, even after I posted basically begging. I felt ridiculed. A caveat in regard to editing other forum members' photos should be that any volunteer edit include the "recipe" for how the improvement is made. An example of such help this past autumn, when I asked for help turning yellow maple leaves red and was provided not only with images but a step by step description of each adjustment layer, was help I'll never forget. The user @Lagarto was so diligent. Thank you.
  8. Oh, Lord , I was just using Jesus as an example. Now the REAL "God-shot" is going to happen right on my head. I don't think we all are talking about the same things, but I will reread the thread and figure out what dropping pennies have to do with Jesus. (I swear I never put pennies in the poor box.
  9. Yes, precisely, and that effect takes other adjustments and holds them hostage. I wish my ability to articulate the process were more adept. But, for example, say you decide you want to add a "God shot" Live Lighting Filter. By "God shot," I mean High Noon placement overhead, with the intention of brightening whatever is dead-center on your image. The Live Lighting Filter will absolutely accomplish this--while tossing into shadow everything outside the periphery of the... radii? But what if one wanted only to (forgive me, Lord) bring an image of Jesus into blinding, even unnatural brightness by the use of the Live Lighting Filter, while maintaining the brightness levels you previously established in the image. I guarantee you, or myself, at least, that whatever part of the image remained on the periphery of the Live Lighting Filter would be thrown into shadow. It would not be left as it was. Colors in these margins would also be affected. So that (forgive me again, Lord) Jesus would look fine, cover-model perfect, but the rest of your image, with which you might have been perfectly satisfied, would be thrown into shadows predetermined by the Live Lighting Filter. That was why I asked if professional photographers use this Filter. There's something gimmicky about a whole set of presets built into a Filter, about which the non-genius-level Affinity user can do nothing, or at least can do nothing that will not consume vast amounts of time and effort.
  10. I hain't too proud to say I am ONE of them. I must disagree. Living in the West, we are all free to our opinions, but because I do a great deal of editing of nature photography, the bee in my bonnet is how drastically the ambient light becomes, for lack of a better word, mottled, so that all the other effects you mention are out of my control. This has been my experience. Keeping all this in mind... Ah, bless your heart. There was an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation (since you guys are talking about the Borg on other threads) called "The Nth Degree." Citing this is my simple American way of saying that the Live Lighting Filter requires "an unexplainable boost of confidence and a vast increase in knowledge," or the ability to juggle perhaps a dozen concepts at the same time while applying the Filter. Such is not the case with say a single Adjustment Layer; and I would imagine that a short book could be written on the Live Lighting Filter alone. But then, I don't have the mind of Reginald...
  11. @firstdefence and @v_kyr Thank you both. Yes, the PS tutorials have been of some use to me; and even PhotoPlus had rudimentary light ray effects. It just has been a creeping awareness that some Affinity (and PS) capabilities are less the subject of professionals’ online discussion (or not the subject at all).
  12. Absolutely. I'd be interested in knowing how many Affinity users who gained their experience (to whatever degree of competency) with either physical mice or laptop touchpads have abandoned them in favor of Ipads and stylus/pencils. I'd also be interested in knowing what drawbacks users of stylus/pencils encounter.
  13. I found the subject of the live lighting filter as the subject of a thread as recently as a week ago. @MEB said something on that thread that made my heart leap up because it is SOOO true: "Each lighting filter you add will dim the photo more." But then he(?) edited his post to say, "Actually you can control/null the "dimming" effect, setting the Ambient light slider to 100%." In my latest photo-editing opus, I had upwards of 9 Live Lighting Filters. The file size was so big, it blew my laptop's head gasket. I am sorry, but once you add a Live Lighting Filter, all, all, your other Adjustment Layers get thrown off. The Live Lighting Filter somehow hijacks the project and it does dim it. I would very much like to know why. It occurred to me that I have NEVER seen a video by anyone who identifies as a professional photographer extol the virtues of the Live Lighting Filter. Do professional photographers use this Filter? It gives you lots of chiaroscuro bang for your buck (as we say in certain parts of the realm), and I really like it. I eventually whittled the 9 Live Lighting Filters down to 3, but--I'm sorry--the Filter does darken the image. If the reason that professional photo editors seem not to use it is that it interferes with other Adjustments, I would really like to know. Thank you.
  14. @R C-R Yes, definitely, you're right. I was lax in using the terms. I have worked exclusively on laptops since buying my very first--or maybe downloading my very first PhotoPlus 6. While you describe the actions of a physical mouse (which of course *can* be connected to a laptop), I was thinking of a touchpad and left "button" (on Windows 7) (which, like Mrs. Micawber, I shall never desert). In any event, however, I would never, as in NOT EVER, have realized that to draw a line, ye cannae shove yer granny aff a-- hold down the left button OR drag. My new hero du jour, "G.P.," gets sincere thanks, because honestly, that Pen Tool is... whack.

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.