Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About matthiasbasler

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

372 profile views
  1. matthiasbasler

    Call for Camera Images

    Hi Mark, you are lucky because I currently have a lot of original images still lingering on my HDD. Among I found RAW+OOJ pairs for Canon EOS 650D Nikon D750 + 2 lenses Olympus XZ-2 Panasonic G81 (aka G80/G85) + 2 lenses I am uploding a selection of this zoo of models/lenses. Will take an hour or so with my slow upload speed ... I could even provide raw images from a Lytro Illum if you like... Matthias
  2. Hi Affinity/Serif team, I would just share my opinion about software development/release and how Serif fits into this: I am myself a software developer/supporter (for a professional GIS software) and of course user of multiple applications. During the last decade we have seen a shift in how companies and open source software copes with user demands, bug fixes, releases and support. For examples many companies now release far more often since tooling and automated tests ease the release process. But tooling aside, an important aspect is usually the attitude of the company's leaders or the people in charge for the backlog and the release pipeline. For me a software is ideal if ... it allows me to get the things done I need to do. (In other words it has all the must have features.) it allows me to get these things done easily (for example not needing five steps for a task that requires just one step in another software, or for example not needing to set the same settings over and over again) it is frustration free (usually meaning no crashes, no data loss, no artifacts in created images and not having major bugs in the functions I use) it is intuitive, meaning functions are where the user expects them and work as the user expects them (instead of the user having to read a manual first before being able to work with the software) and the software follows OS dependent usability best practices (for design, shortcuts, save as dialogs etc.) offers a useful help which is also available offline (plus optional video tutorials) I should add that all aspects are equally important to me. Often fixing a bug is worth more than adding the umpteenth filter. I have seen other companies like Lytro adding more and more (hardly needed) features to their software without being able to fix bugs (which made the software crash predictably) or without adding absolutely basic features everyone just expected to exist (like exported JPG having metadata!). And I have seen these companies abandon that software at the end - or me switching to another one. But there's more to it. Today it is best practice for a company to ... release multiple bug fix releases (or even minor feature releases) over the year instead of the one fixed-date release. not require the customers to purchase a new release just to get a non-working function fixed (by fixing bugs only for the next release) have a transparent, public means of feature/bug tracking (be it a public bug tracker or a forum) and listens to their customer's most pressing needs publish the list of new features and fixed bugs alike for every release It's not a shame to have bugs in the software, but imho it's a shame not to admit this. not ignore hundreds of users voting or giving feedback that a certain improvement or bug fix is very important by declaring the issue "won't fix", basically telling them "We have a different opinion and we don't care about your's." have active supporters in its forums, giving help and feedback for questions, reported bugs and feature suggestions alike, especially if users cannot help each other. not misuse the community as only alpha/beta testers. not release a not-yet-ready software out into the wild just because someone wants the software release in time for some software trade show or event. (I personally favour the idea of a fixed required release quality.) I am happy to see that Serif is on a good way concerning many of these aspects: The feedback process is transparent. There is active feedback on forum entries and bug reports by Affinity employees. There's public discussion with Serif about new features, bugs and workarounds There are public betas for those who want to do testing and stable releases for those who cannot afford loosing data or time in their job. There are multiple releases over the year to ensure users soon profit from bug fixes. There are useful help texts and easy-to-follow video tutorials for the beginners showing multiple functions in context. As such I can applaud Serif for many good decisions. There are other aspects I cannot really judge given I am rather new to the community. Things which imho need some improvement are: Affinity Photo 1.5.1 (Windows) was still too buggy for my liking. Within a few days of testing I found almost a dozen bugs from major (e.g. wrong RAW histogram, image artefacts) to minor (e.g. wrong translations). At least the software was rather stable on my PC. Of course I only checked a subset of its functions ... Although overall the German translation of Affinity Photo is good, I noted some translations which showed that the person doing the translation had no idea of the context in which the word or phrase is used. That's why I never warmed up with the idea of "outsourcing" translations to cheap translators who are not familiar with the software and do not know where in the UI their texts will appear. Last but not least let me compare my experience with Adobe Photoshop/Premiere Elements for above aspects: Their software is stable for me too. There are major usability glitches (like the entered output file name getting overridden by a default once an export setting is changed in Premiere E.). However other things work better, like Photoshop E. remembering the last RAW and export settings used for an image, so it's easy to do further adjustments later. The translation is partly horrible. (The help texts are generally fine, but some labels in the software clearly show the translators had no idea what the function or the slider really does.) There is a bug/feature forum but I did not receive any feedback (like at least "Thanks for reporting.") for any of the bugs or improvements I reported. Maybe I wasted my time ... There has not been a bug fix release for months, so all bugs still exist and likely will exist until the next major version ... and possibly longer if no official cares to read the bug reports or forward them to the dev team. Basically that's why I hope and believe Serif can do these things better, and if they do then I expect them to get a growing happy user base. Matthias.
  3. matthiasbasler

    RAW Histogram

    This is the one major issue that prevents me from purchasing Affinity Photo at its current state as I'm not going to process raw files with what I consider false histogram feedback. I'll watch this topic to see when it is time to do another test and likely the purchase.
  4. matthiasbasler

    Black dot artefacts in stitched HDR panorama

    Hi Chris, I uploaded the five RAW files to the dropbox. Just to recap what I did: I batch processed them to 32 bit EXR files (with no macro), then I imported the EXR files to the "New panorama" widget cropped and declared the panorama finished with Inpainting turned on. (I just realized these EXR files are HUGE, so I'm not going to upload them.)
  5. > Is this the same files from your other thread? If I am not mistaken it was the same panorama with which I later experienced the black dot artefacts - for which I created another post. Five HDR files from the D750 (6000x4000 pixels each), converted to EXR with AP. Matthias.
  6. Hi harrym, I have now processed the images with Adobe CameraRaw (somewhat compensating the differing exposures), and then saved them to JPGs, which I stitched using the "good old" PanoramaFactory. The point is that AP - if it worked as intended - could give me a seamless HDR panorama workflow where I can stitch HDR images and tone-map the whole panorama later - instead of restricting myself to 8 bit input. If I cannot achieve this, then there is no point at all in using Affinity Photo for panoramas for me, because as a pure JPG stitching software it is comfortable but not accurate enough for my liking. In PanoramaFactory for example the user has much conrol over the stitching regions and can set control points for small-scale deformations in order to avoid ghosting (objects appearing twice, for example as a result of handheld shots or moving vegetation). And I always strive for a perfect panorama with no artefacts, even if it takes more time. Matthias.
  7. Hi Affinity team, I shot a panorama of four RAW files making up for one panorama. All of them are deliberately underexposed to preserve the sky details -and they have somewhat different exposure time because some of them are shot against the rising sun.. Shouldn't be a big deal to compensate this - they are ISO 200 RAW files after all. When I import them with the "New panorama" wizard, AP wants to create 2 panoramas of two images each, obviously not recognizing the four belong together. (All images do overlap significantly.) Anything I can do to convince AP to create one panorama from all four? ... apart from possibly tone mapping them separately (thus correcting for the different exposure) and trying to stitch the resulting JPGs, which is rather cumbersome. Matthias.
  8. matthiasbasler

    Panorama, why not in RAW?

    Hi Peter, hi all, I believe I have just done with AP what you intended to do - create a panorama of RAW files and not have it automatically tone mapped to 8 or 16 bit, so you retain the full dynamic range. Here is the thread: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/39898-hdr-imagespanoramas-from-single-raw-files/ In short, process the RAW files to 32 bit EXR first, then stitch these and finally (optionally) apply the tone mapping to taste. Matthias.
  9. Hi Affinity team, I created a 32 bit panorama out of 5 EXR files (64MP in total). Stitching worked reasonably well and the preview showed no problems. Then I rotated the panorama slightly, cropped the area to export and exited the panorama Persona with the option enabled to fill missing parts of the panorama (using "Inpainting"). Well, first of all, it didn't really fill the two missing corners the way shown in the tutorial video - it just filled them black. But more, on the left hand side of the panorama there appeared a somewhat regular pattern of black dots artefacts. Here a detail view: First I thought it might just be a display error but the dots also appeared in the final JPG panorama image. Please find a larger crop of its top left corner attached. This is reproducible. I just spend another half an hour to process the panorama again, and again it ends up in the Photo Persona with black dots on the left hand side. :( Affinity Photo Trial (Win) Matthias.
  10. Hi Affinity team. I had loaded a large HDR panorama (5 x 24MP) into the Tone mapping persona. This took a very long time (>5 min.) but eventually the panorama was loaded and shown. I did some edits, created a gradual overlay and adjusted that. When I then moved the vibrance slider to the right (on the base layer I believe) I got following error with AP subsequently shutting down: Unlike suggested in the message there was no crash report shown when I started the program the next time so I don't know if I can provide any more information. AP Trial (Win) on a Core i5-2537M Quadcore notebook with 8GB RAM, WIn7 (64 bit) Next time I loaded the panorama and went to vibrance slider right away there was no crash. -> Maybe coincidence. Matthias.
  11. Hi Affinity team, just a small bug in the Tone mapping persona on v. Trial (Win): If (after importing a HDR image and switching to the Tone mapping persona) you set the brightness to, lets say, 25, then undo this (Ctrl+Z or via the protocol bar) and then redo the step, the slider will show "-25" (instead of 25), although the image appears correct. Affinity will always negate the selected brightness value after undo/redo. Seems this is the only affected slider. It doesn't do this in the Develop persona either. Matthias.
  12. matthiasbasler

    Chroma Sub-sampling

    +1 Not a "must have" feature for me, but being someone with just an SSD I do care about image file size and found a 4:2:2 subsampling to be a good compromise for most photos - especially for very large panoramas where this option can easily save >5MB of disk space per image. Matthias.
  13. Hi Affinity team. During the last days I tested the Windows version of Affinity Photo 1.5.1 and checked out those parts most important to me: RAW processing, HDR/Tone mapping and stitching Panoramas. (The video tutorials are great for newbies concerning your software.) I am happy to see all these features under a common hood and working reasonably well (although there are issues like the wrong histogram displayed in Develop persona which will refrain me from using Photo as default RAW software for now.) What I want to achieve: For years now I'm accustomed to create HDR images from a single RAW file instead a series of JPG or RAW files. The benefit is that there are no problems with motion (and thus ghosting) in the image, and no softness as a potential side-effect of the automatic alignment of handheld shots. Today's DSLR cameras create RAW images which can easily compensate 3 EV steps. (Depending on sensor size and ISO, the downside can be higher noise in dark areas, but that's acceptable for me.) My conventional approach is to develop 3-5 differently exposed JPG images (usually with different noise reduction settings) and then creating the HDR from these. This approach is very cumbersome with Affinity Photo, which does not even remember the RAW conversion settings I last used by default. Once a RAW file is developed, the Develop persona is closed and I have to start over for the next exposure. (In contrast to a dedicated raw converter like Canon's DPP or Nikon's NX-D where this is a no-brainer and easily done.) But maybe Affinity has a better approach? What if you could develop the raw file and apply a tone mapping without JPGs inbetween? Lets see, Photo Persona works in 32 bit, and RAW files can be developed to 32 bit HDR. Sounds promising. 1. I import the RAW file, disable applying the tone curve and leave the exposure-related settings untouched. 2. Then I put the developed 32 bit image into the Tone mapping persona -> Voilá, a developed HDR image. And what if I have a panorama of single RAW images which needs HDR processing? 1. You can start a "New batch job", select the RAW files to process and choose EXR as output format. 2. Then you can continue creating the panorama with "New panorama" and select the EXR files as shown in the HDR panorama video tutorial. 3. After the panorama has been stitched, it can be tone mapped in the Tone Mapping persona. Cool - this is a real time saver and more flexible regarding adjustments compared to my previous workflows which would mean first tone mapping every HDR image and then stitching the (hopefully equally exposed) JPGs together. Matthias.
  14. matthiasbasler

    Busy Indicator

    +1 I have just tried to stitch a panorama of 24MP raw images (just as in the Panorama video tutorial). For example when I clicked "Crop to opaque" in order to crop the pan the application would seem not to do anything. When I clicked some other button Windows would then complain the application is "not responding". Then suddenly after several seconds the crop frame was actually set and I could continue. This is just one example of why a busy indicator is important not only for the user but also for the OS to know the application is not frozen but working. Matthias.
  15. matthiasbasler

    Wrong 'translation'

    Hi affinity team, just want to report a wrong German translation of the word "translation" in the "New HDR merge" dialog. I don't think you mean translating the image to a different language here, but rather you mean "verschieben" in the sense of "shift". Found in Affinity Photo Trial. Matthias.