Jump to content

>|<

Members
  • Content count

    1,994
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About >|<

  • Rank
    Dedicated User

Recent Profile Visitors

2,066 profile views
  1. You can hide the banding by working in 16 bits per channel and adding dither. Here is your project file converted to 16 bpc and with a dither layer added to the stack: gba with dither 16 bpc.afdesign And an 8 bpc PNG exported from it: gba with dither 16 bpc, exported to 8 bpc.png
  2. I hear what you're saying about not wanting to edit a mask, but that's the solution to your problem until Affinity re-engineers its restrictive channels functionality. Copy the pixel layer's alpha to a mask, make the pixel layer opaque, paint in the mask as if it was a greyscale pixel layer, and then optionally merge the mask back into the pixel layer's alpha. If that's of interest to you, I can provide more detailed instructions.
  3. Affinity apps definitely use lossless compression to store Pixel Layers and Pixel Masks.
  4. Yes Use a centre-aligned stroke: select the text object and give it a centre-aligned stroke to make it look as bold as required adjust tracking or kerning as required press cmd-enter to convert the text to a group of stroked shapes representing the letters select the shapes (not the group object itself) and click the Boolean add button in the toolbar to combine them into one stroked shape representing the text do Layer > Expand Stroke to convert the stroked shape to two unstroked shapes representing the fill and stroke of the text select the shapes and click the Boolean add button in the toolbar to combine them into one unstroked shape that looks like the bold text.
  5. Try the AP 1.7 beta. It fixes an old problem involving linear profiles embedded in integer format files, so there may also be a fix for the misbehaviour you are seeing with your floating point format files.
  6. AP 1.7 beta fixes the problem: a linear profile that's in an integer 8 bpc or 16 bpc image file is now used and the image looks correct, as it does in Preview, Photoshop and various other apps. It's true that a linear profile is not advisable for an integer format image, especially an 8 bpc one, but when that is the case, AP 1.7 beta does as other apps do and displays the image correctly instead of the earlier AP behaviour of discarding/ignoring the linear profile and replacing it with the app's default non-linear profile for integer formats which will cause a too dark look.
  7. You are correct. The blurring happens when the pixels are translated in X or Y by a non-integer number of pixels. For example, 20% of 256 px is 51.2 px and that will cause blurring, and repeatedly applying 20% will progressively increase the blur. Prevent blurring by using a percentage that equates to an integer number of pixels. For example, 25% or 50% of 256 px is safe.
  8. I know, but the salient point I made was that the scaling factor doesn't need to be a power of 2.
  9. Yes, that's the way to do it until more tools are added to Affinity. Note that you can enter an incrementing expression in a numerical field. For example, if the width field contains "100 px" then replacing that with "+=20" will produce "120 px".
  10. Affinity "power duplicate" (cmd+j) has no option to scale in an arithmetic progression.
  11. You'll get a perfect result from Nearest Neighbour resampling when multiplying the size by any integer, not just powers of two.
  12. >|<

    Pixel Layer and Color (Bug)

    I agree, but someone at Serif has/had other ideas.
  13. You already know that you want a height of 1080, so just specify 1080 (instead of doing mental arithmetic and then entering an arithmetic expression):
  14. Yes, a pixel selection in Affinityspeak.
×