hifred

Just keeping up with Photoshop.
Hold down Alt key when dragging nodes to see clipping on image (as already exists in Levels). Show vertical and horizontal lines from selected node (or maybe just while moving) help align with axes. Show percentage X and Y values for selected node (and allow input this way). And...
Have an 'auto levels' button to stretch (and unstretch) the histogram to remove dead space at ends. Allow presets to be loaded here. [Edit additions]
When using picker and when moving mouse around image, show point on curve with moving node to reflect lightness of underlying pixels at mouse. Thanking ye kindly sirrah/modom!

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.

I initially thought the same, too. Text transmission of ideas is sometimes difficult.   
But despite difference in overall workflow, we're probably asking Serif for similar things. My hope is simply that they deliver a tool that's at least as capable and flexible as those in the Affinity suite of software. Despite my current use of Bridge CC 2019, I'm eager to move away from even that little bit of connection with Adobe. In my case, other than as a simple file browser, it does little else for me. And since I haven't updated to Photoshop CC, I can't use Adobe Camera Raw anyway.
As for Lightroom v6, this was the last standalone version offered by Adobe, but it will not recognize native raw files from newer cameras. I could convert to DNG and pull them in that way. I have nothing at all against DNG. But missing native RAW support would continue to be a bummer. Another reason I moved on to Capture One Pro, which is overall superior in a number of ways, albeit not so much as a DAM. 
All of that to say: I'm eager for Serif to deliver on their own DAM. But Adobe's 20+ years of history in this department shows just how tough it can be to deliver something polished. We may be in for a longggg wait for something with which most of us are happy.

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.

I just saw this: You likely want to say that ACR opens these RAWs in 4-5 seconds with Photoshop (as the host program for the RAW processor) not yet running, right? With PS already running, I would be surprised if you had to wait at all - ACR CS6 here opens dozens of images without any delay...
To be fair one really needs to say that there's currently a huge performance difference between Photoshop and Affinity Photo in RAW handling. Affinity Photo lets you wait for every single RAW file - even with the program already running. And obviously one should not even consider working on a dozen or more RAW files at once, as easily doable with Photoshop.
 
 

I just saw this: You likely want to say that ACR opens these RAWs in 4-5 seconds with Photoshop (as the host program for the RAW processor) not yet running, right? With PS already running, I would be surprised if you had to wait at all - ACR CS6 here opens dozens of images without any delay...
To be fair one really needs to say that there's currently a huge performance difference between Photoshop and Affinity Photo in RAW handling. Affinity Photo lets you wait for every single RAW file - even with the program already running. And obviously one should not even consider working on a dozen or more RAW files at once, as easily doable with Photoshop.
 
 

I just saw this: You likely want to say that ACR opens these RAWs in 4-5 seconds with Photoshop (as the host program for the RAW processor) not yet running, right? With PS already running, I would be surprised if you had to wait at all - ACR CS6 here opens dozens of images without any delay...
To be fair one really needs to say that there's currently a huge performance difference between Photoshop and Affinity Photo in RAW handling. Affinity Photo lets you wait for every single RAW file - even with the program already running. And obviously one should not even consider working on a dozen or more RAW files at once, as easily doable with Photoshop.
 
 

Affinity sliders also lack another awesome feature: Drag (way) beyond the bounds of the slider to reset the slider to either it's last used value (either last custom value or its default value). Super helpful when playing around yet some more - nah, that doesn't look better - no need to memorize previous settings then.
I love nifty little helpers like these, because they do not interfere with the workflow of anyone who doesn't use that feature.

When i press the "B" key ,I don`t know i will select which one !!!!
I just want to use the Paint Brush Tool .but always need press 2 times or 3 times B key..Too trouble.....
Could you let me  Use and the "Shift" Key Change these Tool or Change other Way ...???
Thank you..

I can understand if you would like to have 3D in Affinity Photo, but it "needs" it to compete with Photoshop? I really don't think so. There are other programs that handle 3D texturing and modelling a lot better than Photoshop (including the example given in your post), and the feature is honestly a typical example of feature bloat from Adobe's end (it is a very underdeveloped tool compared to other 3D programs). No serious 3D modeller nowadays is going to use mainly Photoshop to paint their models or create stuff like text with 3D effects on it simply because it lacks a lot of essential features to handle things like PBR (physically based rendering), among others.

If you want to use 3D in your work you can check out actual 3D programs like Maya, ZBrush, and a bunch of other alternatives that are specialized at handling 3D. Heck, I would strongly recommend picking up Blender, which is a free 3D program that is currently developing 2D animation tools in a 3D environment as a part of its latest beta build, which can greatly compliment any image editing program. If Affinity wants to get into the 3D business, they should honestly be focusing on getting better addon support by other 3D softwares like ZBrush by making it easier to export UV maps directly into AP like how it is with Photoshop for some final texture editing, and/or make a new brand of software focusing on 3D like Substance Painter.

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.
 

Sure that you don't mix up thing here? A simple 8bit per channel colour  image with Alpha-channel sometimes gets referred to as a 32 bit image (4 times 8 bit). Without stored transparency values that tga is a 24 bit image (3 times 8 for RGB). 

A HDR image (which far more often gets referred to as a 32 bit image) has these 32 bit in each individual colour channel (resulting in a total value of 96). TGA does only support 8 bit colour depth per channel – the naming in the Explorer Details dialog is not exactly a happy choice.

What may turn out even more irritating is that a hdr image shows up with just 24 bit depth – although this image stores millions of colour values your 32 bit tga can not deal with. Maybe someone can explain this – I believe the correct value had to be 96 here.

Sure that you don't mix up thing here? A simple 8bit per channel colour  image with Alpha-channel sometimes gets referred to as a 32 bit image (4 times 8 bit). Without stored transparency values that tga is a 24 bit image (3 times 8 for RGB). 

A HDR image (which far more often gets referred to as a 32 bit image) has these 32 bit in each individual colour channel (resulting in a total value of 96). TGA does only support 8 bit colour depth per channel – the naming in the Explorer Details dialog is not exactly a happy choice.

What may turn out even more irritating is that a hdr image shows up with just 24 bit depth – although this image stores millions of colour values your 32 bit tga can not deal with. Maybe someone can explain this – I believe the correct value had to be 96 here.

I can confirm that the file isn't crazy complex and that it takes minutes to switch over to Tonemapping. I canceled out at some point.
The app gets very slow all all over, it clearly can't handle the file.
I tested the shared file in the most recent Beta. The thread-title is an accurate description.
 
Win10 | i7 6850k | GTX1070 | 32GB RAM

That's should not be a reason to make modern machines unresponsive. Here's a folder view with a few of my Photoshop files, none of them is slow or makes PS unresponsive. There's really no need to defend bad performance, it doesn't help anybody and surely not Serif.

That was no defend, I know quite well of these problems and do encounter those too, especially on the Win platform here. Thus I personally use the tools mostly on OSX here, since on Win I can't very well. The software even often has performance problems with small files and if you throw big ones in there, well... Also using .Net managed code for certain tasks might not be the best for performance here.

I just don't see value in having this (new from clipboard) a separate command. Many of your users totally expect to get offered creation of a new file from clipboard bitmaps and won't even look for an alternative implementation. Such is not only a source of error but also of avoidable support requests.
Breaking something into a command of its own only makes sense if one can't reach a particular goal with a single command. That does not apply here: Ctrl/CMD + N should do just fine.

I believe the fault #1 is actually on Serifs side here and that it will remain a needless trap for likely anyone new to this program. There's implementations of encapsulated, non-rasterized layers in programs such as Photoshop which don't pull your leg. One can select portions and mask Smart Objects and copy stuff out of them - the only thing one cannot do is edit the pixels on that very layer directly.

There's no known fixes unfortunately. Affinity Photo in the current state of development is no suitable tool to edit series of RAWs. Maybe leave your opinion here.

I notice that some but not all settings allow for double click to reset there values. I find it odd that this is not consistent across the board. Working audio software for over twenty years Cmd/Ctrl left click is considered a standard for the most part I would say. It is a very easy way to streamline the editing process. I would love to see this. 

I think it was me, here.

Serif obviously can deal with this as they like - but there's numerous commercial software products with public Bug/Feature-Trackers.
I agree with mondze that that one as a user often has no idea whether a bug report or feature-request has even been read by staff.
 

My point is that it is not transparent whether errors are acknowledged or processed.
The code should be serif property and not visible also patches themselves only the status of a report.

The moment Serif decides to add subscriptions, you can expect that your theoretical and profane lust for giving the "middle finger to Adobe" has failed.
Why giving the "middle finger to Adobe" is considered as a solution is beyond my brain capacity.
Instead of writing such ugly stuff, it would be more fruitful for everyone to wish Adobe the best, to let them realize in the shift of the user-base that perpetual licences can give them those disgruntled users back. 
Perpetual licensing is what brought me to the Affinity product line, its imo one of the biggest selling points and it would be unwise to ditch that.

True, it looks clunky, but at least it is functional and is very understandable. Affinity Photo's layer stack doesn't really look much better, though. And is not as readable. Compare the layer stack below, and I think that's pretty clunky looking as well as completely unreadable. I have no idea what is going on in that list. I certainly hope v1.7 will introduce a thumbnail size setting.
But you are correct that adding all layer parameters in the layer stack creates its own set of issues. So what do we go for? Form over function, or function over form? Or a good balance between the two? Myself I would prefer these things to be optional in a layer stack preference tab. It really depends on the complexity of the project.
Perhaps a bit more like Krita's layer stack (the newest beta release has a seamless thumbnail size slider) where the user is able to quickly hover over layers and an overlay is displayed (see the right screenshot)? It almost looks like a hybrid between Affinity Photo and PhotoLine.
Designing a good looking and easy to use/understand layer stack is quite a user experience design task. Perhaps a completely new and novel approach is required.