Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.

dmstraker

Members
  • Posts

    816
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dmstraker

  1. "Save failed because ownership of the file could not be verified." Plus the delightful "The document must now be closed" (with no chance of saving). Boom. Fortunately when I reopened it, it recovered where I was. Got me going for a moment there, chaps.
  2. Well done and thank you to everyone at Serif for a momentous 2022. Please do have a splendid Christmas and New Year break, and try not to think about work too often (difficult, I know). As we say in Wales, Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda (Merry Christmas and Happy New Year).
  3. Looks like it's Windows-specific. Attached is what I saw after loading the Luminosity mask OK.afphoto file to 2.0.3. Thanks for checking on Mac.
  4. Can't remember if I submitted these (also not found on search here, and beta database unavailable): As in attached and starting with gradient layer, black to white along x-axis. Add Luminosity Range Mask and adjust nodes as shown. When curve hits top or bottom edge of adjustment square, the effect is sudden, unexpected and presumably incorrect. Also when blur is increase, an edge effect around the periphery of the image is seen, much as would be found using a Gaussian Blur. It looks like a 'Preserve Alpha' checkbox is needed.
  5. So I did a quick video for folks who might be confused (as I was).
  6. No, but that doesn't stop it being a usability defect, as per notes above.
  7. One last note, and perhaps something that Serif can address. In the Gradient colour panel, when you reduce opacity, the colour as displayed decreases to grey. But if the colour is still being used (as it is) in creating the gradient, then perhaps the colour should remain, hence giving some indication that you are going to still get the colour within the gradient. Image attached.
  8. Understood and accepted. There's also the psychology of perception to consider. Looking at the red-with-zero-alpha node in the gradient panel or on screen, it appears to be transparent node. Yes, showing it as 'red with zero alpha' could be tricky. But cognition is often based on simple visual cues more than an examination of further panel data. And so (as with me), it is easy to assume that what is seen is all there is. This is what, in my development/QA/HF days we would have designated a 'usability defect'. There is clear logic in why it is what it is, but nevertheless it is experienced as a confusing difficulty. What the solution is here, I don't know. Nor is it a hill on which I plan to expire. I'll leave it to the good people in Serif to figure what to do about it.
  9. This makes sense. And yet by setting the opacity to zero, you can also argue that the gradient is from black to no colour. Hmm.
  10. Draw a rectangle shape. Draw a gradient, black to red, across it. Gradient colour, select red end and reduce opacity to zero. You can still see red in the gradient, even though the red opacity is zero. Fix is to change red node to black (or whatever the other node colour is.
  11. Being able to increment values with the mouse wheel in number boxes (often next to sliders) is wonderful, and the use of Ctrl and Shift for smaller and larger change is brilliant! However, only the left Ctrl works for the small increment function. The right Ctrl does nothing. This may seem like small beer, and for right-handed people who hold the mouse in their right hand, using the left Ctrl is natural. However, for left handed people this necessitates an awkward, cross-body stretch to perform this maneuvre. Many of the increasing number of creative people who use Affinity are lefties, which adds further to the priority of implementing what seems likely to be a trivial fix. Thank you.
  12. I added a layer states panel, then a couple of states, then a smart state. Scrolled down to change something, eg Layer Name. Clicking on the checkbox results in an immediate scroll of panel back to top. I have to re-scroll down to see that the checkbox is indeed checked, and that I can enter values.
  13. There's been something of a gap since the last update was issued. To me, this suggests either that Serif are in financial difficulty (hope not!!) or are gearing up for the release of Version 2.0 (very much hope so!). I bought Affinity Photo in 2017 and have happily received updates since then, while trying to do my part in supporting the product through 800+ videos in the InAffinity YouTube channel. It does seem time for a whole-version update, though what new features might appear I can only guess. For me, it's already the best photo editing software out there. Whatever, thanks and good luck to you smart Serif folks!
  14. It would be neat to have a Wiki for Affinity products. Start it off using current Help system, then let users extend it. As with Wikipedia, encourage a community of experts to sustain it
  15. Don't know if it is the right place, but I posted a note about money as below. It seems an important topic, so I've dropped a link in here, if that's ok.
  16. Using the Blur Brush, the preview under the cursor is the checkerboard when Transparent Background and white otherwise. Should this not show the proposed blur?
  17. Dear Serif I first bought Affinity Photo as version 1.5 in 2017. I can't remember how much money I gave you, but it didn't seem much. I'd been using Photoshop (hereinafter called 'the former product') but then Adobe introduced a taxation system (ach, ptui!) so I started looking around and found you. James Ritson's 200-odd videos got me to a new level and I was off to the races. It's probably a common story. Since then, you've made all kinds of improvements to the product, often through listening to the requests of bods like me wittering on in the (very fine) forum. As a keen photographer and old techie, APh is now a permanent partner in my artistic endeavours. But I'm worried. I want and need you folks to both survive and thrive. I started my InAffinity channel on YouTube as much to spread the word as to learn and build a beer fund. Other good people have done likewise. But I don't know if this is enough. During expansion, when Serif products are finding new customers, market penetration pricing can work to keep you going. However, a time comes when you may need to rethink your price policy. I'm not suggesting going to an Adobe model, nor the Luminar smoke and mirrors. In fact I'm not suggesting any magic formula, because magic is an illusion that can get you into trouble. But I am asking and hoping that you have a financing strategy that your customers will buy and which keeps you at the leading edge for the forseeable future and beyond. And I, for one, would be ok with paying a bit more. Yours sincerely Dave
  18. Just a note: I went to stokpic.com and a friendly little popup-looking thing offered to do a free virus scan for me. How nice. How worrisome. I clicked away.
  19. Shame about the Unsplash removal, but I totally understand why. It makes you wonder if Pexels and Pixabay might do the same. There's also a possibility for M&A in the photo sharing world. A thought. Unsplash wants donations of photos from photographers (as do Pexels and Pixabay). What if there was a way for Affinity users to easily submit images to them? If their API could handle it, then good. But if not, perhaps even a link would help. Or maybe Serif could even pre-emptively build value (including for Affinity users) with some half-way interface. This could be a significant lever in negotiations. Regarding this, I notice through my InAffinity channel that many of my users are older. Like me, there's a pattern of folks retiring and getting deeper into photography (just look at the demographic of the average photographic club). This might indicate a greater average willingness to freely share images and less need to make money, as these are retirees who have made their mark and hav sufficient pension at least to indulge in camera kit. This would be a splendid source for the photo sharing sites, and making it seamlessly easier to contribute would be of great value to them.
  20. The Bilateral blur has a bug whereby when the tolerance is set to zero, the whole image disappears (becomes transparent). This looks something like a divide-by-zero issue. This bug has now been transferred to 1.10 Frequency Separation in the Bilateral tolerance slider. Also, using straight Bilateral blur lets me knock out fine detail such as jpg artefacts, while the Bilateral in the Frequency Separation seems much weaker in this.
  21. Small celebration. I've just passed the 700th video in my InAffinity YouTube channel. There's also a web-based index, including videos sorted by time and category, plus free resources. I'd also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Serif and all of its people, including devs, QA, and everyone else. You folks have created an amazing product that has freed many of us from the Adobe taxation system and indeed that stands on its own as an excellent photo editing and graphics system. Having worked in software development, quality, marketing and other areas, I have some inkling of the effort and sheer dedication that it takes. Thank you and well done.
  22. See also other report I've recently added -- also still happening in latest beta.
  23. Note: I tried it with latest beta 1.10.0.1127 and it's still happening.
  24. I tried it with 1.10.0.1127 and it's still happening.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.