Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

altae

Members
  • Posts

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by altae

  1. Looks like it has something to do with OpenCL hardware acceleration. As soon as I disable it the distortions are gone (when merging layers as well as when exporting). And it seems I'm not the only one who has been experiencing such issues with OpenCL: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/129141-random-squares-at-export/ Btw I changed the title as the issue is still present in the latest beta.
  2. I wanted to use the High Pass Live Filter to apply High Pass Sharpening to a photograph. Unfortunately there seems to be something wrong with this Live Filter as it introduces distortions when merged to a new layer or when exported. The attached screenshots as well as an exported image should clarify what I mean. There are no distortions introduced with the standard High Pass Filter.
  3. Because this means I have to use two different tools and as a result I get something that is way less convenient and intuitive than a simple overlay function for layer masks.
  4. Yes but that's not what I meant. What I mean is being able to draw the mask as a red overlay (at least that's how it works in other image editors) while the image layer still shines through. The refining feature is fine for corrections but it's not practical to draw a entire masks. The closest thing to what I would like to see is in fact the Quick Mask feature but sadly with this feature the mask cannot be altered once it has been drawn. Or rather it can be altered but not as a (red) overlay anymore.
  5. One more thing I've been missing for a long time: A decent preview mode for editing layer masks. Sort of like the quick mask where it's possible to show the mask as a red overlay. This is very helpful when you want to mask something and need to work exactly.
  6. Proper support for luminosity masks. Blend ranges are nice but no real replacement as they cannot be altered manually whereas with luminosity masks I can always correct a certain area and brush something in or out.
  7. Sorry, I thought that's the name of the pen. Apparently it's dependent on the tablet model. With my tablet switching to the eraser (and back to the previous tool) is the only thing that does not work, everything else is fine. I realized that the switch for high precision tablet input in the settings is gone, maybe it has something to do with this change. Well, it's a beta after all...
  8. Nope, my table is also concerned. In my case switching to the eraser by turning the stylus upside down does not work in the beta (it does work in the stable version). The rest of the functions work though (at least the ones I use).
  9. What tablet you've got? With my tablet (Wacom Intuos Pro Small, standard pen that came with it) it does not work. But as soon as I switch back to the stable version it works again as expected.
  10. In the latest Beta turning the Wacom pen upside down in order to switch to the eraser does not work anymore. In the stable version it still works as expected.
  11. Beg your pardon but it does indeed affect my workflow. Until now I always thought I could rely on the histogram because it reflects the actual distribution of the tonal values. Turns out under certain conditions I cannot rely on it because it obviously does not always reflect reality. To me this is a severe flaw which every time I merge adjustment layers to a new layer leaves me wondering whether my image has been altered or not. In my opinion this should not happen.
  12. I know that in order to get a reliable preview you need to zoom in to 100 %. But shouldn't the histogram be calculated based on the actual image meaning independently of the preview zoom level (or in other words always based on 100 % zoom level)? I think it's very misleading to see the histogram change when merging layers, it needlessly alarms/ confuses the user.
  13. Here you go, simply delete the top pixel layer called "vignette" and merge the remaining layers to a new layer. Ignore the inactive "gradient map layer" as it's only there to analyze the distribution of the tonal values, it's not part of the image.6D_IMG_7017_DxO_1.afphoto 6D_IMG_7017_DxO_1.afphoto
  14. Hm, after some more tests it seems that it's a preview issue. While zoomed in to 100 % the image does in fact not change anymore. Exports apparently are fine too. But why on earth does the histogram change when not zoomed in at 100 %? I can understand the inaccurate preview below 100 % but the histogram? That's very misleading. I redacted the initial post and the title accordingly.
  15. I realized that merging all visible layers sometimes alters the image preview as well as the histogram. Take a look at the attached screenshots. The first one is with the merged layer disabled, the second one with the merged layer enabled. Do you see how the merged pixel layer reduces the contrast in the image preview (it's also visible in the histogram)?
  16. While it would certainly be nice to have a dedicated feature it can in fact be done easily: Create a new pixel layer, fill it with neutral grey and choose overlay as blend mode. Dodge & burn on this layer using a brush in either white or black color. Then use the blend range of that layer to restrict the dodge & burn effect to areas with a certain luminosity. This procedure is completely non-destructive and you can always come back to it later if you want to tweak it further.
  17. Oh silly me, thank you for enlightening me Of course the thread can be closed.
  18. There is a difference between how the Inpainting Brush Tool works in the stable version and in the current beta (the new version has been in several betas by now, I cannot really tell when exactly it was introduced). In the beta version the brush kind of hangs on a thread and when it's moved the area where the Inpainting takes place is dragged behind the cursor. In the stable version on the other hand the tool works in a more conventional way meaning the painting area and the cursor are moved congruently. Is this difference intended (so far I've never seen anything concerning this matter in the change log), has the change simply not been implemented in the stable version yet or has this change been declined and the fact that it's still in the beta is simply an error?
  19. Sorry but a highlight radius of 30 is far too much in my opinion. For highlights I usually use a radius of 3 px. What's more I don't see a problem in the fact that you prefer the new implementation. No tool works for everybody in every situation.
  20. I don't think it's a good idea to call it 1.6 or legacy as it isn't actually outdated. I'd vote for something like simple (new version) and complex (old version). Or standard vs. advanced, or...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.