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.

bt1138

Members
  • Posts

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

379 profile views
  1. I don't care about the icons, I'll get used to them, but the lowered contrast (use of gray instead of white text in dialog boxes, removing colors from icons, below for example) is really silly bad, not good. Makes it harder, slower to use. Look at the join or order icons, the gray ones look so mushy. "Miter" value box in 2.0 is better though, so bonus points for that.
  2. Well, I finally did a side by side comparison, seems like no difference w/ 2.0.
  3. Don't fix what ain't broken. Here are some icons, 2.0 left 1.10 right. 1.10 is a lot more legible. In fact a lot of the interface looks to use light grey instead of white. This is not an improvement, it's going backwards. I will say, adding the "miter" label @ join in 2.0 is good. More of that please. But really, the light grey text & icons are bad, bad bad. Hard to read, those text bits are very small on a hi-res monitor.
  4. And yes, V2.0 is very sluggish. Loads files into the raw engine very slowly. I'm not using a watch, but it feels like it takes 2.0 4x longer to load a 24mp nikon NEF than 1.10.
  5. Well. 😒 Of course, you all un-checked hardware acceleration, right?
  6. That's the question. Will 2.0 render my raw files differently than 1.10? on windows.
  7. How are you making the selection for your cutout? Can you post a sample file that shows the situation?
  8. Affinity should add "Disable OpenCL Acceleration" as a standard menu command. Except it should be disabled by default, and the Menu command should be "Enable OpenCL Acceleration" -->But then what would we talk about on the Windows Bugs Forum?
  9. Could you elaborate on "the file will grow until the application decides to "compress" it"? What / why is happening here? When will APhoto decide to make my file smaller. When I first started using APhoto, I thought the files sizes were a little large, and then moved on, life is short, etc. Now, I'm wondering about it again...
  10. I was going to send you a sample file, but I'm having trouble getting it to repeat. It's not the first time I've had this happen though. As soon as I can see the pattern of where the behavior comes from, I'll send you a sample...
  11. If I paint on that original layer, the color palette stays grayscale even thought the file is now RGB. If I add a new pixel layer and paint on that layer, full colors are available.
  12. When I convert a b/w image to color, the main pixel layer seems to be stuck in grayscale mode. New pixel layers are color and work as expected, but not the original layer. Is this normal, and is there a way to make the gray pixel layer behave like a color layer? -->Windows version, with latest updates, patches, etc.
  13. For me, I can't submit a crash report. It doesn't crash, it just runs r e a l l y s l o w . But it never occurred to me that the crash reports were an active part of the bug-fixing effort. So I'm a little more sympathetic to the choice to enable, but perhaps Affinity could be a little more up-front with the whole thing, that you're being used as a test bed. I know, it's hard to do that. A lot of people don't react well to such notions, even if I'm happy to help.
  14. No, not at all. I think I was commenting on the overall nature of photo imaging. I used to develop and print my own stuff starting in the 1970's and I've been an avid photographer ever since, so I've got a long time horizon and I've owned many cameras 35, 6x4.5, 6x7 and then the digicams, and I have used many pieces of software over the years. Some years ago, when digital imaging was starting to mature, there were many discussions about printing and papers and inks and now it just feels like most people just post them or email text them, while printing actual prints is becoming a niche activity. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I was just wondering out loud about it. I suppose that actually wanting to print something in a quality way might mark you as a "fine art" sort of photographer in some sense, much as having your own dark room and doing your own printing did back in the day. Which is not a bad thing at all.
×
×
  • 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.