Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Everything posted by hifred

  1. If you don't like that but are a Cloud Subsciber you can use Photoshop + ACR for RAW processing. It's exactly the same engine as in Lightroom and works without a catalogue.
  2. The video linked by the thread opener shows basically everything which makes editing with a tablet a far superior experience in Photoshop: Really well functioning brush controls, but also far better scrubby Zoom and Pan. Superficially looking one might say that this all functions similarly in Affinity - but it's really the details which make all the difference. I described the Zoom and Pan issue with a Pen (also valid for Mouse based input) here.
  3. If you don't mind others to get more specific ;o) Have a look here. For the sake of clarity I should add that the second issue I raise in the linked post disappeared after unchecking 'experimental precision input' or similar (not on my desk right now). The hover click issue is still open.
  4. Adobe uses it's pdf-Notes in Photoshop (which also appear in pdfs exported from Photoshop). I utilize that feature a lot, e.g. with E-commerce images I process (to collect preliminary product data along with the stack of images). It would be very helpful if Serif hooked up a similar feature + there's a variety of 3rd party pdf editors which read and write such comments.
  5. There's no way one can make a good deal, when automated processing makes images worse than they were before :o) I don't want to offend you and your work but I usually find this the case (talking of showcase images of dedicated retouching programs/plugins).
  6. Yup. There's likely no software genre on earth whose marketing works worse for me. It's exactly inverse – I always prefer the unprocessed version of their samples. I'd pay for not having to use their products.
  7. That's really kind of funny... This thread brought to my attention that Serif already uses a system to toggle between two tools – generally a super helpful feature – I even opened a feature request for this. Serif just happened to implement that tool-toggle a way that it either gets terribly in the way or doesn't get discovered at all. I dare calling the current implementation plain wrong – it doesn't do anything good and can not even get turned off – it really should get fixed asap. What I am used to from quite a variety of programs (including Photoshop) is that one may temporarily call another tool by pressing and holding down a letter key. That way one may lay down a couple of brush-strokes while actually drawing a path: Press (and release) P to call the path tool and click to lay down anchor points. In order to access to the brush tool one would press (and hold!) the letter B. As soon as you let go the B-key one reverts to the Pen tool exactly in the position where one had left off – one may continue laying down points in that path. The greatest advantage of this implementation is that it can not get called by accident. There's simply no other reason to press and keep holding a (Non Modifier-Key) right now = it can not get in the way. The second great advantage is that this sort of toogle is broadly known and expected behaviour. Hooking this up should not conflict with anything, as you don't use this event yet (normal keys held down).
  8. I'm in the same position as at OP - I'd love to switch over but there's so much one would lose. Yes, using arrow keys while cropping is super helpful. The Photoshop crop tool controls also look better - they don't appear like a simple vector rectangle slapped onto the image. And at least on Windows the missing hardware acceleration in Aphoto totally spoils the performance of the tool. In PS there's no way to make the crop tool stutter.
  9. Background saving really doesn't exist?* That's painful. *I didn't notice as I so far didn't save anything I did with APhoto.
  10. Sounds as if DxO was a great choice for your needs! But one can also get the impression that you here can do to your RAWs pretty much everything you need and only quite rarely in comparison need to edit images in a layer based fashion. Is that impression correct? I think the more regularly one needs RAW development as well as compositing the more desirable it gets to have a suite of applications by the same vendor, which play perfectly together: in the same way as is highly advantagous to use Photoshop for the source graphics when regularly creating Layouts with Indesign. In my situation leaving the Adobe Suite towards Affinities current RAW develop-workspace would be a terrible step backwards. But using two separate programs for RAWs and Layer based editing was unacceptable too.
  11. Thanks for voting :o) This part I don't understand. Most people would expect a DAM to be a separate piece of software. Some would be content with just a competent media management tool, others would wish RAW development to take place in this environment, for possible later compositing inside Affinity Photo. Do you think a RAW Editor which matches your expectations would be too complex a task for Serif?
  12. No, I wanted to say that those who stick to Photoshop have the same RAW processing engine at disposal as Lightroom users. I don't use Lightroom as its database and Import before you Browse scheme feels too strict for my needs.
  13. While what you say is correct I don't understand why you quoted me here :o) I described my Photoshop-centric RAW workflow which comes along without Lightroom. For culling / browsing I use Bridge, which offers very broad file support. My CS6 version even supports viewing 3D models (got removed in CC).
  14. I can't, but I usually don't edit third party RAW data :o). Converting to dng first was an option, I guess. I think one needs to applaud Adobe for offering a lot of possible combinations for RAW editing. Photoshop with ACR and Bridge let you either work with a central database or with the usual file system and sidecars. Then there's the strictly catalog based program Lightroom if you prefer this approach – and obviously you can also integrate third party RAW editing plugins or dedicated standalone programs into both Photoshop and Lightroom based workflows.
  15. There hardly can be a person who dislikes rental schemes for content authoring software more than I do. I still can not believe that it's legal to cut access to intellectual propery and artwork after letting a software contract run out. That being said – I like the functionality of Photoshop a lot. Hence I continue using CS6 until Affinity Photo (or another program) is good enough for my needs to switch over. I think it's still valid to say that everyone who has access to Photoshop (any legacy version released after 2004) or any version of CC (including the cheaper Photography version) at the same time has access to RAW editing (even without Lightroom on disk). I always embed the RAW files into the psd as Smart Objects – this way you can go return to ACR at any time. The RAW integration feels totally seamless.
  16. Well, I consider this bit only of academic value. If you own Photoshop you as a matter of fact have access to these components and they indeed integrate seamlessly. I never touch Lightroom but I still can deal with hundreds or thousands of RAWs efficently – with Photoshop.
  17. And here's my consistent take on it: This Photoshop comparison totally doesn't fly. Photoshop in terms of RAW handling is just as powerful as Lightroom (uses the same engine) and lets you work with whole folders of RAWs in parallel. Photoshop together with ACR and Bridge offers an awesome DAM + RAW Editor experience for those who prefer managing their assets without a database.
  18. The Affinity range for Windows at this point isn't particularly performance-optimized yet - it thus far doesn't use GPU acceleration at all. Even on strong hardware with many CPU cores you will therefore see lags in operations which make the viewpoint redraw frequently. I7 6850K, GTX 1070, 32 GB RAM
  19. You can simply duplicate any document view and drag it onto a second screen.
  20. That is worse than the protected tool cycling (via Shift) as used in Photoshop's Brush tool. We all can only memorize a final number of hotkeys and there's just a a very limited number of easy to reach letters when having to press even multiple hotkeys with them. The proposed scheme is wasteful. It is more intelligent to use tool cycling for families of tools in function-rich software. For those tools however, which don't immediately (with the first stroke) make obvious what they do one needs a safety mechanism - which in this case, known by many people could be Shift. Serif would avoid a lot of support requests by hooking this up in a way that avoids painting with the wrong brush type in a mask.
  21. Oh Dear, what have I started... Any sort of plastic has to get cleaned before re-use. That part is not particularly complicated. There's millions of smaller size oil containers (> car engine oil) in household waste every year, as well as containers for all sorts of chemicals. With all respect for country specific handling of affairs: That's utter nonsense. Here in Germany (we separated plastics a lot earlier than a lot of countries and have a lot of colourful bins in the backyard too) pretty much all of the carefully user separated plastic gets burned. Creating something meaningful from thermoplastic plastic waste would require a separation to a degree which can neither be accomplished by end users nor by machines. A lot of plastics are compound materials (think Sneakers) and even products which are from the same base materials are made unique by additives, colours and and softeners. There's no way to make quality products from grounded plastic blends. The best possible outcome are ugly as f*** terrace planks and fence posts. That all being said: Lossless recycling generally was possible: If one established standards on packaging materials and avoided needless material blends. Last post in this thread. Let's move on to disagreeing on Affinity Photo :o)
  22. @R C-R you missed my point. I said that there's generally no systems in place to deal with thermoplastic plastics which do deserve the label recycling. Not for thin films, not for considerably larger chunks like domestic oil tanks or old plastic windows. All these materials could get re-used, but it simply doesn't happen. They all get burned.
  23. I understood that, but I personally had gladly payed double parcel cost to avoid Amazon. Let's rather call it 'we separate everything we can'. Realistically the best that happens with household plastic waste is burning it - and making a bit of electricity out of it. There's no place on earth where they make new food packages from collected and molten old ones - although the material is suitable for doing so. One may be content with burning or not, but it sure is not a measure one should call recycling. We're getting far OT though - I just got tempted by the statement that plastic foil materials aren't recyclable - which is wrong.
  24. I don't know about the reputation of cling film in the country where you live. But it's usually made from polyetylen or polypropylen – both are thermoplastic materials and carry the potential for proper re-use... For as long however, as the humanity does nothing better to these valuable resources than burning them (or letting them end up in oceans) it's likely better to avoid them, yes.
  25. Sorry – couldn' t resist: Actually all these shrink wrap foils are thermoplastic plastics. These, when collected separately are very nicely recyclable – in the way glass is. The problem is rather, that recycling is of no economic interest... I personally disliked that Serif uses Amazon for shipping these books, with no option to avoid this ugly kraken.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. 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.