Kronpano

Thanks for that!!! I had a play with polar but didn't come up with that formula. Doesn't really seem intuitive but hey - it works. Still a shame that the cartesian calculations seem to be out by a pixel - if I do floor(x/1.2) - which I would expect to increase my image to 120% I end up with an extra pixel. Should have done x/1.1999 all along In a way the 1.1999 in your solution is also just solving a problem that shouldn't be there - some internal rounding errors?? Thanks for all the help - now I can use Affinity photo a bit more for my intended purpose - post-processing panoramas.

Yes, that does the same mine does - but I have to call your add-10% macro in mine since I have been unable to fix the extra pixel problem. Thank you for all the help. P.S.: Any hint on how to solve the extra pixel problem??

OK, so I can use a macro in a macro I used you add10% macro and did the rest in this ExtendPanorama macro and it works fine - only ran a couple of tests. Still would like to know how to solve the 1 or 2 extra pixel problem. ExtendPanorama.afmacro

The second part - once the canvas has the correct size of EXACTLY 120% (not a pixel more or less) is just x+w/1.2 and x-w/1.2 for duplicated layers and merging them down. But to get the exact 120% confounds me.

@carl123 - would you be happy to share the equation you have used to calculate and centre 10% extended canvas? I have tried clamp, round, floor in my equation but I ended up with 12001 - still one pixel too wide

OK, I think I am giving up Just thought I had it - using distort -> affine Extend the canvas to really wide (like 20000x100) and then use distort -> affine with 120% and clip the canvas again Should result in a 10000 scaled to 120% should be 12000 pixels wide NOOOOO it is 12002 pixels wide - internal rounding problem I would guess but that that is out of my control and again - probably size dependent. Same happens with all my equations - they are all 2 pixels to wide - grrrr

Yes, left and right side. The whole idea is to overcome Affinity photos inability to treat 360 panoramas properly. A 360 panorama is usually a file with a 2:1 ratio - 360 degrees around and 180 degrees up/down - so a full sphere. The problem are the right and left "edges" of the file. When looking at a panorama (example here on kuula ) the right and left side need to fit together seamlessly otherwise there will be a vertical line visible in the panorama. General changes in brightness, colours... don't affect that BUT local changes (like clarity, local contrast, tonemapping) cause a problem because if I apply them to the original image the edges have no neighbour - so the left edge will be treated differently from the right edge and when I put them together there is a visible seam. This can be prevented by by extending the original image (basically give each edge neighbours) - this is possible because the 360 panorama can just be wrapped around so it will fit seamlessly. My macro I provided in the post at the top does just that - BUT it is size dependent. Now I had a go with the macro @carl123 posted yesterday and I am not sure it helps. Yes - it adds 10% to each side - so that problem is solved BUT once I have done that (manually or in a macro) I have "lost" my original width of the panorama and don't know how far to shift the image to extend the right/side because the width w is now the extended width. Let me explain my macro Assume a 10000x5000px panorama Extend the canvas by 20% centred - this will result in a 12000x5000 canvas with the original panorama in the middle and 10% transparent on each side Duplicate that layer and shift it to the right by 10000px - this will seamlessly fill the right hand side 10% extension Duplicate the layer and shift it to the left by 10000px - the same for the left hand side 10% extension Merge them all down and you are done You will end up with a 12000x5000px document which has no seams in itself Apply any local adjustment and the "original" edges will be treated the same because they have the "proper" neighbours Once you are done with the adjustments you can just resize the canvas back (centred) to 10000x5000px and you will have again a 360 panorama with no seams. This is what Affinity photo should probably do in the first place since it claims to be 360 aware so all of that is only to get around the limitations the program shouldn't have in the first place. I have raised that problem about 18 month ago and after a long silence it was confirmed here that it will NOT be solved. A solution provided by @James Ritson relies on as far as I can see on resizing the pixels (squashing and expanding like equation x/0.9 and x/(1/0.9) ) which will deteriorate the image quality since the final expansion is not working on the original pixels but the squashed ones. So please give us either a % resize that can be used in macros or even better - a macro scripting language (like Mathmap for GIMP) so you can work with variables and stuff and not just one line equations which can't be saved and edited properly. Not sure it makes sense to anybody who is not working with panoramas but I hope my explanation makes sense. Cheers.

Grrr - will try again tomorrow Having problems centring the expanded pixels Still hoping I will get there

OK, thanks for that. I see - I did pretty much the same BUT I didn't think of using a "dummy" layer, then resizing the canvas, clipping it and throw away the dummy. So close and yet so far. Thanks again. Will try to incorporate it into my macro. If I can't get there are you happy to share the equation??

Agree!!

At the moment it is AFAIK impossible to write image size independent macros if you want to use "resize canvas/document" because these operations work on pixels. Problem: Affinity photo should be 360 aware but it isn't really - local adjustment filters and tonemapping leave visible seams. Workaround: One easy way to get around that is to increase the canvas width by 20% (<- this is the problem), use equations to fill the right and left border, make the adjustment and resize the width of the canvas back to the original size - shrink width by 16.66% (<-again a problem) At them moment this can't really be done independent of the image size because a size increase/decrease will be calculated to pixels - so there will be a fixed pixel number in the macro Solutions: The easiest solution would be if Affinity Photo would support resize by percent properly - by that I mean also in macros support expressions in input fields also in macros -> if you put "*1.2" in an input field this expression will also be used in the macro support variables in macros - reading image size into variables which can be used in later operations To give an example - I have written a macro which increases a 360 panorama by 10% on each side and fills the properly BUT it will only work properly with a 10000 x 5000 px panorama (my main publishing size). Would be really good for Affinity photo if the macro capabilities got better - it can really speed up a workflow and make repetitive tasks a lot easier but for that it needs to be possible to do pretty much everything independent of the image size and in a way - that's where percentages come in really handy. 10kBy5kPlus10%eachSide.afmacro

I am using Affinity photo trial to do some post-processing on stitched panoramas. To get rid of the occasional stich fault I am using the clone or healing brush quite a bit. To use them - because of the perspective you need to quite often rotate the brush which works well for positive numbers but if you need to rotate a brush slightly in the other direction you need to enter 358 or 359 - a negative number like -1 or -2 is not accepted. It would be very helpful if that could be introduced at some point - it would make work with the clone and healing brush easier. Cheers.