bt1138

"the specific error with failure to perform the bool op is down to edge case calculations as a result of possibly only one or two curves in the font glyphs. This will be rectified in 2.1." It's pretty amazing that there are people in the world who can figure stuff like this out. Thanks, @Ben

What it says, I assume it's due to using MSIX format. This is a standard behavior for programs for at least 20 years now. Any way to make it work? *edit: Yes, as some surmised, this is for a file being dragged onto a shortcut on the desktop

I just did the full upgrade for all 3 pieces. Yeah, it's probably not really a huge improvement. But there are improvements. At $33 per app, it's a totally fine transaction in terms of value for price. And yes, people do need to pay for this kind of thing occasionally, or you can complain when it all goes onto subscription and bitch about that. As far as abuse goes, the main software I use in my profession costs $4,000/year subscription and they change the file format every year, or rather lock out backwards compatibility and everyone bitches that they never improve it (in fact subscription seems to sprout at the moment that software stops evolving and people stop upgrading). -->Serif is nowhere near what abuse of software lockin really looks like.

This is all because the 2.0 products are Windows "MSIW" apps. Affinity is the first app that I actually use that is in this "New" format. It seems that a lot of / most other applications don't recognize the format of the new program type and it's shortcuts. It's probable that the other software will have to be updated to get them to work with these apps.

When you consider how little affinity charges in the first place, it's not out of line at all. Someone has to pay the salaries to keep it working and maybe add features now and then...

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.

Well, I finally did a side by side comparison, seems like no difference w/ 2.0.

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.

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.

Well. 😒 Of course, you all un-checked hardware acceleration, right?

That's the question. Will 2.0 render my raw files differently than 1.10? on windows.

That's it. That's right. Ubiquitous format.

How are you making the selection for your cutout? Can you post a sample file that shows the situation?

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?

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...

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

And there's nothing wrong with doing that (disable acceleration). I disabled that from the very first time it so obviously affected the program, and it's fine. Just fine. -->honestly, 90% of the comments here are "crashes / slow when I". and the suggestion is always "disable acceleration". Every time. Affinity should deactivate the hardware acceleration by default and then gently invite people to try it out and see if it works. And when it works a little more reliably make it the default.

Just curious about printing. Does anyone print anything anymore? Tutorials?

Perhaps it's not the layers per se. I have PSDs with lots of layers that load fine. I'd suspect it's the "effects" you mention, whatever they are... that look fine, which AP messes up... And now I know about Nomacs. Thx for that!

Something odd about that file. It's not a large file at all. Should open almost instantly. I can open a 120mb psd with many layers and objects almost instantly on my pc. But your file did take a long time, 5 minutes or so (I didn't really time it). It's not the software, it's the file. But once you open it and save it as an Affinity File, it behaves normally.

Just curious, after placement what then? Just rasterize the layer?