MikeFromMesa

A simple click on the History panel will take you back to the start state of the image so you don't have to worry about the adjustment layers.

Filter layers would be a big and helpful addition and I am very interested in what you will be doing. As for your questions:
 
1.) Which filters would you like to be available as non-destructive layers?
The Blur, Sharpen and Color groups. I currently use all of them and expect I would also use all of them as layers.
 
2.) Would you generally use them by applying them to the whole document (outside of any group), or clipped to a particular layer / group?
Both. Some would be used mostly clipped, others for the whole document.
 
3.) If they carried a rendering performance penalty, how would you react to that?
That would not bother me overly and I would probably try to determine when to use them based, at least partly, on what the impact was.
 
4.) Would you use them early in your workflow, or at the end? If you used them early, how likely would you be to tweak their settings later on?
As mentioned above, it would depend as it would depend upon the image I was adjusting at the time.
 
Everything I see on this forum about this product just makes me more and more interested in owning it. You guys are doing a great job.

Filter layers would be a big and helpful addition and I am very interested in what you will be doing. As for your questions:
 
1.) Which filters would you like to be available as non-destructive layers?
The Blur, Sharpen and Color groups. I currently use all of them and expect I would also use all of them as layers.
 
2.) Would you generally use them by applying them to the whole document (outside of any group), or clipped to a particular layer / group?
Both. Some would be used mostly clipped, others for the whole document.
 
3.) If they carried a rendering performance penalty, how would you react to that?
That would not bother me overly and I would probably try to determine when to use them based, at least partly, on what the impact was.
 
4.) Would you use them early in your workflow, or at the end? If you used them early, how likely would you be to tweak their settings later on?
As mentioned above, it would depend as it would depend upon the image I was adjusting at the time.
 
Everything I see on this forum about this product just makes me more and more interested in owning it. You guys are doing a great job.

Most of my processing is done in Dxo's Optics Pro and AP is my main external editor. In that mode the Inpainting Tool is the most used tool in the software. It has taken care of vignetting, sun glare, extra people in the image, ugly signs, reflective road markers and a ton of other stuff.
 
It is a wonderful tool.

I feel compelled to point out that there are bug reports that were submitted as long ago as Feb 10 that have neither been marked as accepted nor as closed. Are people who submitted bugs 3 weeks ago supposed to assume that their report is still "under consideration" when there have been 2 (and soon 3) new beta releases since then?
 
Perhaps the bug is no longer valid because it has been fixed. Perhaps it was invalid for some reason when submitted. Perhaps it is still valid, but not picked up. How do people who submit these reports know? I understand how much work is involved in what you are doing since I did the same stuff until I retired, but it would be helpful for people to have some idea if an area is going to be addressed.
 
One example may help. Someone (not me) submitted a bug about psd files and I, and others, picked up on that and added additional information concerning what is and what is not working. That seems like an important bug to me but there has not been any indication as to whether or not the report has been noted, accepted, rejected or is considered to be too low a priority to address at this point. As I said I know how much work this is, especially since you now have an entire world of users filing bug reports.
 
I mean this post in only the most friendly manner. In my view, all of you working on Affinity Photo are to be congratulated for the fine work you have done and I, personally, have been very happy with the present state of the beta. I don't want you, or anyone, to think that I am trying to disparage your work. The product thus far is wonderful, the UI is very well organized and I am using the beta as my primary editor, but when submitted bugs do not seem to get any response it is a bit discouraging.
 
Just my two cents (pence, pfennigs, centimes, kopeks, etc)

I played around with the inpaint brush and it is amazing! It really killed all the people which I didn't want in the image. Works really well and it is fun to use!

I feel compelled to point out that there are bug reports that were submitted as long ago as Feb 10 that have neither been marked as accepted nor as closed. Are people who submitted bugs 3 weeks ago supposed to assume that their report is still "under consideration" when there have been 2 (and soon 3) new beta releases since then?
 
Perhaps the bug is no longer valid because it has been fixed. Perhaps it was invalid for some reason when submitted. Perhaps it is still valid, but not picked up. How do people who submit these reports know? I understand how much work is involved in what you are doing since I did the same stuff until I retired, but it would be helpful for people to have some idea if an area is going to be addressed.
 
One example may help. Someone (not me) submitted a bug about psd files and I, and others, picked up on that and added additional information concerning what is and what is not working. That seems like an important bug to me but there has not been any indication as to whether or not the report has been noted, accepted, rejected or is considered to be too low a priority to address at this point. As I said I know how much work this is, especially since you now have an entire world of users filing bug reports.
 
I mean this post in only the most friendly manner. In my view, all of you working on Affinity Photo are to be congratulated for the fine work you have done and I, personally, have been very happy with the present state of the beta. I don't want you, or anyone, to think that I am trying to disparage your work. The product thus far is wonderful, the UI is very well organized and I am using the beta as my primary editor, but when submitted bugs do not seem to get any response it is a bit discouraging.
 
Just my two cents (pence, pfennigs, centimes, kopeks, etc)

I am not sure this is the correct place for this question. If this belongs in the general part of the forum please move it there.
 
The bugs forum contains 3 main threads - Postings, Accepted and Closed. Since many posted bugs that seem clearly to be bugs are not moved to either of the Accepted or Closed threads I was wondering if there should also be Cannot Reproduce, Rejected and Under Consideration threads. As it is, people who post bug reports which are not moved to either the Accepted or Closed threads have no idea why their reports do not seem to be accepted as valid bugs. I think it might be helpful for posters to know about the fate of their reports.
 
 

I am not sure this is the correct place for this question. If this belongs in the general part of the forum please move it there.
 
The bugs forum contains 3 main threads - Postings, Accepted and Closed. Since many posted bugs that seem clearly to be bugs are not moved to either of the Accepted or Closed threads I was wondering if there should also be Cannot Reproduce, Rejected and Under Consideration threads. As it is, people who post bug reports which are not moved to either the Accepted or Closed threads have no idea why their reports do not seem to be accepted as valid bugs. I think it might be helpful for posters to know about the fate of their reports.
 
 

Johalenn, Andy,
 
For what it is worth -
 
OnOne produces plugins that only work through the Photoshop Automation functionality, BUT they also have a free standing app that can be used through functionality that allows calling an external editor and, in fact, this is the way I use it from PhotoLine.
 
External editor functionality would allow AP to call the OnOne app and pass it the image in question. From the OnOne Suite you can then call any of the OnOne modules, do the work that needs to be done and then return the image. It is not a plugin per se, but it does pretty much the same thing and, as I mentioned, I use the OnOne Suite from PhotoLine just as though I was calling the plugin. If AP added the ability to call an external editor it would solve some problems associated with AP right away.
 
1) Topaz plugins could be called through the photoFXLab app for those having problems with the photoFXLab plugin or the normal Topaz plugins (that is me),
2) External apps that do HDR and panos could be called directly from AP thus allowing the AP developers more time to add their own internal functionality,
3) All of the OnOne functionality then becomes available to users of AP,
4) And other apps that might need to be called could be. 
 
Just a suggestion, but it seems to me like an easy way to quickly solve some current (and future) problems.

I understand this is Beta software and hence still in a QA phase. I don't expect it to work completely perfectly yet and I think you folks are very smart to have issued this Beta and asked for comments. 
 
But I wanted to drop a line and tell you all how impressed I am with what is available so far and to let you know that people like me are pleased, even though there are still a lot of bugs. I am really looking forward to the released product.
 
Great work so far.