-
Posts
702 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Reputation Activity
-
Medical Officer Bones reacted to Tony Pritchard in Thank you!
Dear Affinity Community
I bought Affinity 2.0 to produce a book. I learnt the software from scratch. When I came up against issues I found it useful to post on the forum. The book is now printed and due for distribution.
Thank you Affinity and the community.
Tony
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from HappyDoom in Change of interpolation type when scaling elements
I agree with @earl_grey. Affinity doesn't allow for sufficient control over layer sampling algorithm nor (anti-)aliasing control. These issues are the source for recurring issues and requests over the years since Affinity was first released.
As an example of how this may be implemented, compare with PhotoLine and Krita:
In PhotoLine the layer properties allow the user to easily control:
the anti-aliasing (on or off) the resampling algorithm when a layer is scaled (also used when layers are exported) pixel snapping ...for each individual layer(!). The resampling method is set for bitmap layers only (for obvious reasons).
And additional resampling algorithms are available that help retain crispness of scaled-down art (CatmulRom).
In Krita:
Again the resampling algorithm is easily controlled. And again transformation of the OP's example results in a straight transformed pixel row.
Simple and effective. It'd be great if the Affinity devs would afford Affinity users the same level of control over the resampling method.
That said, I am happy to see that we now have access to a Force Off anti-aliasing option for layers in Affinity. But that behaviour should be consistently implemented throughout other actions, such as transformation. When I transform pixels like the OP's example and stretch a column of pixels in Krita and PhotoLine, the result will be a simple repetition of those pixels when stretched horizontally. (In PhotoLine anti-aliasing is best turned off to prevent anti-aliased edges.)
But that doesn't happen in Affinity. It still adds strongly blurred anti-aliasing and results in that strange blurred result. That makes it almost impossible to use for scaling pixel art elements or even stretching bitmap-based GUI elements.
Which once more is a good example of "close, but no cigar".
I've checked tutorials online, and the vague blurred edges are apparent in images like the one here:
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/tutorials/create-a-head-turning-pixel-stretch-effect-in-the-budget-friendly-affinity-photo
Notice how the band of stretched pixels blurs toward the edges.
Unless I am missing something here? Does an option exist to avoid this unwanted behaviour in Affinity (Photo)?
-
Medical Officer Bones reacted to 2ddpainter in Vector Pattern Functionality
your welcome
I tried Blender's Geometry Nodes once and keep an eye on what's new with it.
Tried Blender's SVG export too but didn't pursue it any further.
If you want to learn more about Nodebox,
here's a guide to getting started.
https://www.nodebox.net/node/documentation/tutorial/getting-started
The Nodebox Forum is also a good place. Because many Threads
have a working Node Tree attached that you can download.
http://support.nodebox.net/discussions
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from 2ddpainter in Vector Pattern Functionality
@2ddpainter Thanks for that Nodebox suggestion! Quite interesting, and I intend to look into that tool soon.
Btw, Nodebox reminded me that it is also possible to generate repeating patterns in Blender with its Geometry nodes and export those to SVG. Possible. Not very practical, but possible
-
Medical Officer Bones reacted to 2ddpainter in Vector Pattern Functionality
I recreated the above pattern in Nodebox.
It is a bit unusual to create vector graphic patterns via Nodes
but you get flexibility in return
see video here
recreated Pattern.mp4 -
Medical Officer Bones reacted to 2ddpainter in Vector Pattern Functionality
On Mac you can take a look at "PatternNodes" ( ca 47 € )
A program specifically for creating vector patterns.
https://lostminds.com/patternodes3/
Nodebox 3 (PC/Mac, free) is also able to create vector patterns
(SVG import and SVG, PDF export).
https://www.nodebox.net/
There is also a online Version "Nodebox live" (free).
https://nodebox.live/
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from GRAFKOM in Vector Pattern Functionality
VectorStyler and PhotoLine also support vector patterns. It's not as if this is elusive functionality in vector editors, so I wonder what the hold-up is in Affinity's case. Odd.
-
Medical Officer Bones reacted to su per in Vector Pattern Functionality
3) Vector Pattern Functionality
Similar to what is available in Inkscape and Illustrator, users should be able to create patterns within the software without having to export and then import the resource just to create the pattern. Demonstration starts at the 35-second mark in the video. Image 5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXG3yw3vgXI
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from Catshill in Image Vectorising and Trace
I mentioned it before on these forums: OpenToonz / Tahoma2D (simplified version of OpenToonz), while a 2d animation app, has a great bitmap to vector tool. The result can be converted and saved to SVG for use in Designer.
Open source and free. The only issue is the not-so-straightforward operation seeing it is an animation app, although the manual describes it well. Not suitable for all bitmap to vector conversions perhaps, but still applicable in many contexts.
https://tahoma2d.org/
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from KarlLegion in Change of interpolation type when scaling elements
I agree with @earl_grey. Affinity doesn't allow for sufficient control over layer sampling algorithm nor (anti-)aliasing control. These issues are the source for recurring issues and requests over the years since Affinity was first released.
As an example of how this may be implemented, compare with PhotoLine and Krita:
In PhotoLine the layer properties allow the user to easily control:
the anti-aliasing (on or off) the resampling algorithm when a layer is scaled (also used when layers are exported) pixel snapping ...for each individual layer(!). The resampling method is set for bitmap layers only (for obvious reasons).
And additional resampling algorithms are available that help retain crispness of scaled-down art (CatmulRom).
In Krita:
Again the resampling algorithm is easily controlled. And again transformation of the OP's example results in a straight transformed pixel row.
Simple and effective. It'd be great if the Affinity devs would afford Affinity users the same level of control over the resampling method.
That said, I am happy to see that we now have access to a Force Off anti-aliasing option for layers in Affinity. But that behaviour should be consistently implemented throughout other actions, such as transformation. When I transform pixels like the OP's example and stretch a column of pixels in Krita and PhotoLine, the result will be a simple repetition of those pixels when stretched horizontally. (In PhotoLine anti-aliasing is best turned off to prevent anti-aliased edges.)
But that doesn't happen in Affinity. It still adds strongly blurred anti-aliasing and results in that strange blurred result. That makes it almost impossible to use for scaling pixel art elements or even stretching bitmap-based GUI elements.
Which once more is a good example of "close, but no cigar".
I've checked tutorials online, and the vague blurred edges are apparent in images like the one here:
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/tutorials/create-a-head-turning-pixel-stretch-effect-in-the-budget-friendly-affinity-photo
Notice how the band of stretched pixels blurs toward the edges.
Unless I am missing something here? Does an option exist to avoid this unwanted behaviour in Affinity (Photo)?
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from garrettm30 in New Users
Is this your first time working with design software (such as Photoshop)? Do you have much experience with other software and computers in general?
Manuals of design apps can be quite technical, I agree, and part of the reason for that is that there is a vast chasm between traditional art technique(s) and the digital art process. For example, just the conversation about colour and how it behaves in the digital world vs the physical world is quite different.
An alternative is watching video tutorials that explain the basics of Affinity instead and are generally more project and hands-on based as well. In any case, software manuals are not great at introducing or teaching the software in question, but should be seen as more of a reference guide: how a specific tool and its options function, rather than how those tools relate to other tools within a practical project.
That said, do you have a specific question? A particular project that you intend to work on in Affinity? People here can assist with that.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from Alfred in New Users
Is this your first time working with design software (such as Photoshop)? Do you have much experience with other software and computers in general?
Manuals of design apps can be quite technical, I agree, and part of the reason for that is that there is a vast chasm between traditional art technique(s) and the digital art process. For example, just the conversation about colour and how it behaves in the digital world vs the physical world is quite different.
An alternative is watching video tutorials that explain the basics of Affinity instead and are generally more project and hands-on based as well. In any case, software manuals are not great at introducing or teaching the software in question, but should be seen as more of a reference guide: how a specific tool and its options function, rather than how those tools relate to other tools within a practical project.
That said, do you have a specific question? A particular project that you intend to work on in Affinity? People here can assist with that.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from MikeW in Data binding and Conditional formating
I am aware of a free and open source Scribus extension that is quite dynamic and would do everything (and more) that you @Tibo77 are looking for.
https://berteh.github.io/ScribusGenerator/
Scribus is also free and open source: https://www.scribus.net/
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from PaoloT in Quark comparative table
@MikeW I wrote that post in an angry mood, and reading it back it feels infantile in places. So I did edit the post and used a more neutral tone.
As for Viva Designer: Another one that I tried in my quest for an InDesign alternative. 🙂
I'll check out that comparison. At least VD has page thumbnails 😃. Interesting to see that Publisher does seem to have an impact on the smaller players in the DTP market (in that they feel that they need to publish biased comparison lists).
My ideal InDesign replacement would be something along the lines of Affinity Publisher with the paper cuts removed, IDML export, Asian language support, arbitrary numbered spreads, reflowable epub export, proper 1bit support, MD import, and structural document features similar to Framemaker.
Hey, not asking for much 🤑
PS I thought that Viva Designer's intro start up dialog is nicely presented and animated.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from MikeW in Quark comparative table
@MikeW I yield! I yield! 🙂
QuarkXPress brings out the worst out of me... sorry. There is bad blood between me and Quark with a number of horrible customer service experiences back between 2000 and 2005. Both when I worked at a print company as well as a freelancer. Got so bad that I switched to InDesign within a week. And I had a LOT of work done in QXP.
Thinking about these interactions still riles me up, so I do admit being predisposed against Quark. Apologies, and I will edit my earlier post about QuarkXPress.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from PaoloT in Quark comparative table
[edited to remove personal bias]
First impressions: the base GUI hasn't changed much.
no page preview thumbnails no layer preview thumbnails Layer panel uses tiny list entries. style sheet editor (text styles) entries still cannot be directly double-clicked to edit. The paragraph style editor is still the messy little affair that I remember. Previewing of changes in the style editor(s) is still not possible. Change a setting in the style editor. Let's say the paragraph justification. Nothing happens. Click OK. Close the dialog. The changes are applied. That could be improved a lot from a UX point of view. Guides still can't be organized using layers (this is also true in Publisher) New document (project) dialog is quite basic. No previews of what the document will look like. baseline settings, similar to InDesign, rather awkward to work with. Publisher takes the lead here in my opinion. Second impressions:
proper non-Western language support can export epub, FXL and flowing can export to html premium version can even export to Android and iOS apps more mature and comparable to InDesign. Publisher still cannot create spreads beyond 2 pages, which QXP and InDesign also have no issues with. import AND export to IDML. Pleasantly surprised by this. This is super-important to have: IDML has become an open standard. Affinity must add IDML export as well. These panels could use an update. No change after 2 decades of development, which I would have expected.
Overall impressions are that QuarkXPress is still the old QuarkXPress. Like InDesign it has a list of more mature features that I desperately would want Publisher to have, yet at the same time both InDesign and QXP remain backward in some regards compared to Publisher.
I do feel justified in my opinion that QXP's core GUI components (layer panel, style panel and dialogs, layer panel) are just screaming for an update.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from PaoloT in Quark comparative table
One entry is quite misleading: "Create QuarkXPress Project from PDF (Open PDF)". Remove the word "QuarkXPress" and the answer becomes "yes" for Publisher.
Publisher opens PDFs and convert those to native Publisher projects, but obviously doesn't support native QXP projects...
The wording here is intentionally misleading. And there are things missing that are unique to Publisher in this list as well, so...
Interesting though that QXP is seemingly starting to feel the effect of Affinity Publisher in the marketplace. They must be taking it seriously enough to include Publisher in this comparison table.
On the other hand, the most glaring missing features in Publisher do stand out.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from Graymatter in Why I'm not buying Affinity Photo 2...
I agree that the export (to web) is in a sad state in Affinity.
Although I do have to also wonder why you still use Photoshop's ancient deprecated SFW ?
no webp export no avif export no fully transparent 8 bit indexed PNG export (and even the new export option in Photoshop was "improved" to no longer allow this for the most obscure reason) severely outdated compression algorithms for both jpg and png lackluster limited down-sampling algorithms ...and other issues.
Of course, no-one should be using GIF for static images anymore (nor for web animations, if it can be helped) for obvious reasons.
Nonetheless, export in Affinity is in serious need of an update.
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from GRAFKOM in [Affinity Photo] Why i gave up from Affinity Photo v2 after trial and came back to Photoshop [long post]
Pretty much agree with almost everything. And 99% has been discussed before.
Just to note here that Photoshop's curves aren't perfect either. Photoshop restricts moves to the current image mode only (Affinity Photo and PhotoLine are two examples of image editors that do not enforce this and allow users to work in LAB mode even when the image mode is RGB, for example). This is one reason why I left Photoshop many years ago. Photoshop is incredibly restrictive in regard to image mode and adjustments. But yeah: Affinity's curve adjustment dialog and functionality is rather half-baked.
And Photoshop's TINY curve window has become almost unusable on larger highdef screens for myself. PhotoLine and Gimp allow the curve window to be scaled as large as the user requires without limitations. This is actually a much requested GUI improvement that still isn't implemented even after years and years of PS users complaining.
But yeah, I hear you. My own experience with Affinity Photo: excellent first impressions, yet when digging a little deeper it's a case of "death by a million paper cuts".
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from iuli in [Affinity Photo] Why i gave up from Affinity Photo v2 after trial and came back to Photoshop [long post]
Pretty much agree with almost everything. And 99% has been discussed before.
Just to note here that Photoshop's curves aren't perfect either. Photoshop restricts moves to the current image mode only (Affinity Photo and PhotoLine are two examples of image editors that do not enforce this and allow users to work in LAB mode even when the image mode is RGB, for example). This is one reason why I left Photoshop many years ago. Photoshop is incredibly restrictive in regard to image mode and adjustments. But yeah: Affinity's curve adjustment dialog and functionality is rather half-baked.
And Photoshop's TINY curve window has become almost unusable on larger highdef screens for myself. PhotoLine and Gimp allow the curve window to be scaled as large as the user requires without limitations. This is actually a much requested GUI improvement that still isn't implemented even after years and years of PS users complaining.
But yeah, I hear you. My own experience with Affinity Photo: excellent first impressions, yet when digging a little deeper it's a case of "death by a million paper cuts".
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from Agrafka in [Affinity Photo] Why i gave up from Affinity Photo v2 after trial and came back to Photoshop [long post]
Pretty much agree with almost everything. And 99% has been discussed before.
Just to note here that Photoshop's curves aren't perfect either. Photoshop restricts moves to the current image mode only (Affinity Photo and PhotoLine are two examples of image editors that do not enforce this and allow users to work in LAB mode even when the image mode is RGB, for example). This is one reason why I left Photoshop many years ago. Photoshop is incredibly restrictive in regard to image mode and adjustments. But yeah: Affinity's curve adjustment dialog and functionality is rather half-baked.
And Photoshop's TINY curve window has become almost unusable on larger highdef screens for myself. PhotoLine and Gimp allow the curve window to be scaled as large as the user requires without limitations. This is actually a much requested GUI improvement that still isn't implemented even after years and years of PS users complaining.
But yeah, I hear you. My own experience with Affinity Photo: excellent first impressions, yet when digging a little deeper it's a case of "death by a million paper cuts".
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from Krustysimplex in [Affinity Photo] Why i gave up from Affinity Photo v2 after trial and came back to Photoshop [long post]
Pretty much agree with almost everything. And 99% has been discussed before.
Just to note here that Photoshop's curves aren't perfect either. Photoshop restricts moves to the current image mode only (Affinity Photo and PhotoLine are two examples of image editors that do not enforce this and allow users to work in LAB mode even when the image mode is RGB, for example). This is one reason why I left Photoshop many years ago. Photoshop is incredibly restrictive in regard to image mode and adjustments. But yeah: Affinity's curve adjustment dialog and functionality is rather half-baked.
And Photoshop's TINY curve window has become almost unusable on larger highdef screens for myself. PhotoLine and Gimp allow the curve window to be scaled as large as the user requires without limitations. This is actually a much requested GUI improvement that still isn't implemented even after years and years of PS users complaining.
But yeah, I hear you. My own experience with Affinity Photo: excellent first impressions, yet when digging a little deeper it's a case of "death by a million paper cuts".
-
Medical Officer Bones got a reaction from lepr in [Affinity Photo] Why i gave up from Affinity Photo v2 after trial and came back to Photoshop [long post]
Pretty much agree with almost everything. And 99% has been discussed before.
Just to note here that Photoshop's curves aren't perfect either. Photoshop restricts moves to the current image mode only (Affinity Photo and PhotoLine are two examples of image editors that do not enforce this and allow users to work in LAB mode even when the image mode is RGB, for example). This is one reason why I left Photoshop many years ago. Photoshop is incredibly restrictive in regard to image mode and adjustments. But yeah: Affinity's curve adjustment dialog and functionality is rather half-baked.
And Photoshop's TINY curve window has become almost unusable on larger highdef screens for myself. PhotoLine and Gimp allow the curve window to be scaled as large as the user requires without limitations. This is actually a much requested GUI improvement that still isn't implemented even after years and years of PS users complaining.
But yeah, I hear you. My own experience with Affinity Photo: excellent first impressions, yet when digging a little deeper it's a case of "death by a million paper cuts".
-
Medical Officer Bones reacted to Agrafka in [Affinity Photo] Why i gave up from Affinity Photo v2 after trial and came back to Photoshop [long post]
Hi.
I'm not here to just complain. I hope that some things will (finally) be improved or implemented - Affinity Photo deserves it! AP is a very promising piece of software, but on the other hand, I don't understand all this mythology and propaganda introduced to me (in internet) as an alternative to Photoshop (PS).
Thanks Serif/Canva for 6month trial - i needed a week to say NO. And im not happy with that.
These are my first impressions after trying out Affinity Photo v2 (PC, Windows 11) and these are not encouraging at all. Im aware i didnt even scratch the surface - this list would be propably much, much longer.
[crucial] means that lack of given functionality disqualifies this software for me (please take also into account that english is not my native language).
1. [crucial] I would say curves are statistically the most often used tools in this type of software – in Affinity Photo, this tool is one big disappointment.
a) Well known droppers (white/gray/black) don’t even exist (used for example for fast white balancing). Even amateur “despised” Gimp seems to offer these (in levels), but you can't find them in AP (neither in curves nor in levels). It's also implemented in photopea.com (WWW semi-clone of PS). And no, black/white droppers are not equivalent to sliders, as commented later in this post: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/182478-white-black-and-grey-point-pickers/
b) “picker” don’t work as supposed for me. When clicked on image, it should mark point on curve – not only when I click AND drag. I want to see this point dynamically moving on the curve when I'm dragging mouse over the image (just like in PS). It's so helpful!
c) Big drawback. it seems there is no way to mark point on curves by clicking image and in the same time mark points on curves separately in all RGB channels. In Photoshop, it's done by clicking with CTRL+SHIFT – all RGB curves have then their own mark. It's very, very useful, and often used by me to adjust colors. Its must-have for me.
c) In my case, moving black/white sliders has large annoying slider delay if I'm doing it fast enough.
d) Input/output X, Y fields from 0 to 1 ? (through 999). What the heck is that? In normal software, it's 0-254. How can I now input proper values from RGB data during adjusting RGB colors? It's useless for me.
e) lack of little things like resizing curve window, set grid size, effect visibility, auto… but I could live with that.
f) From what I see, it seems like GREY histogram (which I prefer) still don’t work properly after years (I compared AP histogram in my picture with others software), and this bug is not repaired? Correct me if I'm wrong. https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/115614-issue-with-curves-adjustment-histogram-master/
2. [crucial] No overlay mask. I was shocked when I realized that such fundamental functionality just don’t exist in "professional" AP. Found this topic (5 years - look at date):
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/39891-how-to-show-red-overlay-when-masking/
Serif... you develop this software since 2015 and no mask overlay?
BTW. “Refine Mask” as overlay is no option at all. First, it takes clicks to set up sliders, and then – at every brush paint you have to wait a few seconds for “refine selections” pop-up info and its action. It's a nightmare and totally unusable, comparing to classical overlay mask. Refine mask Is useless for this particular task.
3. [crucial] Inability to use tools other than “brush” on masks. You want for example use many manual techniques to refine mask like burn/dodge. use levels. You can't. Serif allows you use only brush tool? My worst fears were confirmed by:
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/18929-why-does-dodge-and-burn-tools-dont-work-on-masks/
I agree 100% with this guy " Im image processing professional for more than 20 years. And I can assure you that dodging and burning a mask is A MUST for all professionals"
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/60607-dodgeburn-mask-please/ (this "please" comes from 2018....)
4. [important] No collapsible panels in UI. This should be standard. In Affinity Photo I'm constantly forced to move, close or reopen windows/panels due to lack of space. After some time of work, this drives me to crazy. Foldable panels are a must-have in my workflow. It's implemented in PS and also in photopea.com made by one person. In my opinion, it should be the first thing Serif should change if they plan to redesign user interface.
5. [important] Making mask vs clipping is CATASTROPHE. This is a very poorly designed “monster” and I was sick when I needed to use this in AP. How bad it is show comments under YT like here: "Clipping vs Masking Layers (Affinity Photo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fiCvurH0is)
6. [important] Unacceptable long updates on modern PC for masks/image previews (to 15 seconds). I'm for example editing simple mask and changes are not reflected on mask previews for 10-15 seconds!?? I have no words how this is frustrating because I have habit to wait for visual "confirmation". But maybe its on PC only (didnt try Mac).
7. [important] Gradient Map Adjustment. I use it a lot, and how bad it is here! I have hundreds of gradients in folders. How can i access, see and manage them from THIS? Switching to inconvenient adjustments preset window? Comparing Gradient Map UI to Photoshop (which is not ideal also) is like comparing heaven to earth. Gradient map is another example "abandoned" not finished feature like curves mentioned earlier. It just exists on paper, but with no practical functionality for me – it's „professionally” simplified to the ground.
8. [important] Adjustment window itself. Another catastrophe. You cant collapse by one click all expanded presets. Presets previews are large, no option to change it ( imagine you have thousands of them). Chaos and mess. No option to order presets in folders (only LUT have this programmed – why?) and subfolders. By such „little things” i feel i’m fighting with this software instead working with this.
9. [important] Samplers. When placed in AP, they are not numbered on picture at all! How it come ? Its annoying using 4 non numbered samplers, not mention more, and they are tiny and not well visible. I again checked out of curiosity Gimp – it of course also have numbered – because its obvious they should be!
10. [important] "Hue Range" very important function implemented in v2, but it seems again - like they stopped in half way - version from PS is just better, much more intuitive and flexible (droplets/previews/localized cluster). Color wheel is not such precise as sliders. I dont like it.
11. [important !!!!!!!!!!] Affinity Photo gives me NO visible clue if „blendif” (blend options) were used on layer. I don't know if on given layer blendif effect was used. What i did is check layer one by one. Good luck when you return to old project with 50+ layers. Something like that shouldn't happens in this class of software.
Minor - its when Serif wants to make my life difficult and punish me
[minor] No FILL adjustment layer. I would also say its one of the most used type of adj. layer by me, but it doesnt exist in AP. Even if you click here and there (from menu) you get it, but I can not easily change fill color by 2x click on Fill (damn!).
[minor] no fast „desaturate” option https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/123401-simple-quick-desaturate-layer-function/.
[minor] no auto-align layers option (this is NOT align images - stack option from File menu)
[minor] im not able to drag and drop layers/images from one opened file to another. It also should be standard functionality. I use it quite often in Photoshop because its fast and convenient. Yes, yes i can ctrl+c/ctrl+v but what if i use tablet and keyboard is aside.
[minor] "Fill Opacity" why the heck its hidden under blend options ? I use it A LOT with 8 specials. In Photoshop its visible near opacity so its easy accesible and you see from the first glance that it was touched.
[minor] I often use blend options (who not). In my case, most often its linear light. Why every time i have to scroll down to get to it? All modes should be visible at first glance. If someone own microscopic 14” monitor then scroll bar should be automatically activated.
[minor] No „reload image” which i also often use (damn!)
Mentioned also in: forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/34876-how-do-you-reload-an-image-in-affinity-photo/
"I can't figure out how to do something so basic as reloading an image Comment is from… 2017.
[minor] I cant temporarly disable mask when layer is expanded. Its irritating because you need to do more clicks.
[minor] I cant resize layer thumbnails more than small/medium/large in options menu. „Large” is small actually - why is that?
[minor]Serif applied strange concept of „always” square layers icons (i dont like it) which is confusing especially when most of your images are rectangle and their previews are additionaly squized to this square (are smaller than they could be). „Very large” thumbnail size is very neded!
[minor] Color picker tool is crosshair instead to be eyedropper which is much more visible. I found i often had troubles to localize this crosshair on image in many situations. In PS i see immediately where it is.
[minor] visibility of layer (eyeball) is in AP on right side. Believe me or not but this is annoying. I quite often enable and disable layers or groups – its fundamental functionality i/we use. I want this "eye" to be as close to me as it can. Instead of this, they placed visibility icon on right side with tiny! small white icon. On left side they cluttered this space with weak distinguishable „image/pixel” icons. Is this software made by photographers for photographers? I dont think so. Serif should compare how comfortable, clear and nice it is made in Photoshop.
[minor] when you open file in AP its tab file name takes whole width of workspace. What is worse, when you open more files i have problem to recognize which tab is active!
What else drives me away from this software (for now)
- very, very slow progress of Affinity Photo. They started impressively but stopped. I've looked through all the updates since version 1.0 and its not optimistic, even more - it looks dramatic. For example It took them 6 years? to realize neccessity of background/foreground colors icons under main bar (left) tools (v2)… Can you imagine that?
- developers are not interested what community have to say. Bugs, improvements, suggestions are not addressed (my impression when looked at forum)
- bugs which a few times crashed my AP. When PS crashed to me? I don’t remember...
- Generally I have impression that, many tools they made (like curves, gradient map etc) are in most simple/cheap version and they dont improve/refine them later on, just abandoned them.
- UI matters. Its not big deal, but I don’t like AP windows/panel style where buttons are not “visible” buttons but just text blended into background. Its confusing. Even when you hover by mouse “text button” it don’t react, nothing happens (no highlights). Such UI don’t look “professional” its looks more like made by beginner designer in college in hurry.
- i dont even want to mention other functionalites which just crush Affinity Photo like Develop Persona vs Adobe Camera Raw.
-
Medical Officer Bones reacted to dominik in Why I'm not buying Affinity Photo 2...
I did learn quite a bit from your writing. Thank You.
d.