Jump to content

swedishphotoguy

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About swedishphotoguy

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sweden
  1. Hi! How does the new Outlier stacking mode compare to what I suggested above? I have only had limited time trying it out, and not in relation to the material mentioned above.
  2. Sorry for posting again, but I would enjoy to hear some other opinions on this idea. Do you find it promising, or stupid, or irrelevant, or interesting, or what? Is there anything I should explain more? I am interested in hearing the thoughts of other users, because I myself think that it could be a useful addition to the attacking operations now possible. Best regards!
  3. Hi Lee D, And thank you very much for the feedback and information! I am looking forward too it! Best regards!
  4. I agree that catalogue should NOT be included in AP. There are many other apps that do that successfully, and AP should focus on what it does best! I hope AP development instead is focused on other features. :)
  5. Hi guys! I am really loving the panorama stitching feature of AP! But I am having troubles stitching spherical panoramas in AP. Does AP handle such panoramas? I have tried several projects, both panoramas shot with an 8mm lens, and those shot with 12-16 mm lenses, but have gotten none of them to work. I have been able to successfully stitch them in several other stitching softwares, though. But I would prefer to be able to use AP to stitch these panoramas. The same is true of some 360 degree panoramas that are not fully spherical, as well. Best regards!
  6. Dear Affinity Staff, Thank you so much for Affinity Photo for MacOS! The 1.5 update is absolutely amazing! I hereby request the addition of another stacking operator, namely a mode (or type) value stacking operator. This operator would choose the most common value for each pixel in a stack. (I hope that I am not hereby double posting such a request) Let me give a background: I am working with projects involving trying to remove moving subjects in city shots, for example a series of shots at a very crowded crossing in Tokyo. Even with 70 shots, median still gives a poor result. I am guessing that the fact that the crossing is almost black and white means that the median values will not always be one of the background pixels, but instead someones jacket, or what not, that is more middle grey in tone. Now I think that the possibility of having photos not choose mean or median, but the mode value (most common value), of each pixel, could be handy in such situations. Suppose that for a specific pixel in my stack, only 10% of the images would actually show the background, and that, moreover, it would be at an extreme value (either black or white). Then both mean and median would fall short, but a mode value would then probably still give the correct result, and remove the ghosts, since these would all be random values. Now, I guess there are some troubles here, of course, like the fact that most probably, the ”correct” background pixel value would be slightly different in each frame. But I guess that you guys could come up with some smart way of working around this, like allowing for an interval around the mode value to be distinguished from the other (incorrect) values, and then e.g. choose the mean value of of this range of values. Or something like that. I hope to see such an operator in a future update. Thank you again for a wonderful app, that just keeps getting better in a quick pace! Best wishes from Sweden!
×
×
  • Create New...

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.