lepr
-
Posts
5,522 -
Joined
Posts posted by lepr
-
-
1 hour ago, TomM1 said:
lessen the need to expand the adjustment layer in the layers panel,
to turn it on and off.
When a mask-nested Mask/Adjustment thumbnail is visible in an unexpanded row of the Layers panel, simply shift-click the thumbnail to toggle visibility of the Mask/Adjustment without needing to expand the row first.
However, that functionality is broken for mask-nested Filters and the built-in mask of a Fill/Adjustment/Filter.
-
You have the Extended Dynamic Range option enabled in the 32-bit Preview panel when the brightest part of the sky looks orange rather than yellow.
That option is enabling the display of R, G or B values that are greater than the range that can be encoded in a JPEG export or a screenshot, which are standard dynamic range formats.
In the case of your HDR sky, all G and B values are not greater than 1.0 (equivalent to 255 in an integer 8 bits per channel image), and so they get exported intact to a standard dynamic range image. Some R values also are not greater than 1.0, and these get exported intact to a SDR image. However many R values are greater than 1.0 and get clipped when exported to a SDR image, hence the diminished redness (a shift from orange to yellow) of the brightest part of the sky in the JPEG export and screenshot
Disable the Extended Dynamic Range option in the 32-bit Preview panel to display only the standard dynamic range that is exportable in a JPEG (or a screenshot).
- NotMyFault and barninga
-
2
-
In case a reader is unaware:
- clip-nesting occurs when an object is dropped on the name area of an object in Layers panel
- mask-nesting occurs when an object is dropped on the thumbnail of an object in Layers panel, and a mask-nested row in the panel has a darker than normal background (or at least it does in the dark UI)
Edit: also, mask-nesting is the type of nesting that the Assistant can be set to perform automatically, based on selection, when a mask/filter/adjustment is added to the document.
-
2 minutes ago, N.P.M. said:
Easy and already said.
First one is merging a pixel layer.
Second one is not merging because it is an image layer.No, both are involving Pixel objects.
First is merging because the adjustment or filter is mask-nested in the Pixel object.
Second is not merging because the filter or adjustment is clip-nested nested in the Pixel object.
I already explained this how many times in this thread?
-
19 minutes ago, srg said:
I tried with a few files and sometimes is merges and sometimes no, in identical situations.
As far as I know, there are only two necessary conditions for the merge to work:
- the parent is a Pixel object
- the adjustment/filter is mask-nested (not clip-nested) in the parent
-
5 minutes ago, Paul259 said:
On the main menu, I used the select - invert pixel selection.
That performs the same action as pressing Shift+Cmd+I, and the same action as is in the Channels panel.
Anyway, although the missing ants is an annoying display problem, it doesn't affect the actual selection.
-
Just now, NotMyFault said:
As far as i know, you cant actively invert the selection in channels panel. Only channels can be inverted in channels panel.
No, Pixel Selection also can be inverted in Channels panel. There is a little button to do that at right hand side of the Pixel Selection row in Channels panel.
2 minutes ago, NotMyFault said:You can selection invert by keyboard shortcut cmd-I, menu or context menu.
No, the shortcut is Shift+cmd+I.
-
-
7 hours ago, Gobo said:
Seems like they should be the same size or close to it. Any ideas?
Do the exported JPEGs have the same quantity of pixels?
-
-
20 minutes ago, srg said:
I have done the very same thing with version 1 for years. How is that possible?
Like you, I use a Mac, and version 1 and 2 are both as I described.
-
Your adjustments are clip-nested.
A clip-nested adjustment/filter cannot be merged into the parent Pixel object.
A mask-nested adjustment/filter can be merged into the parent Pixel object.
-
16 minutes ago, BLVCKFEINT said:
i'm having issues getting an exact selection refinement output to a mask. the refinement window shows exactly what i want, with clean edges and no artifacts anywhere. however, when i have it create a mask out of the refinement, i can still see little green artifacts along the edge of the model.
The preview shows what you'll get if you choose New Layer With Mask for the output, instead of just Mask.
-
1 minute ago, NotMyFault said:
But here lies the issue / bug. If you have only 1px filled in a pixel layer, and activate the move tool, affinity shows a bounding box of 1px, and size of 1px. Affinity reduces the observable part of every pixel layer to non-transparent pixels, in every aspect:
- transform panel
- copy / paste, or copy / new from clipboard
So the canvas size becomes de-touched, and only the bounding box stays “touchable”.
If you now move the 1px to a different position inside the canvas, it becomes totally unclear where the invisible “ghost” canvas is positioned. In Some situations Affinity automatically crops them off, in others like my example it wont.
As you want to keep your workflow non-destructive, you normally never rasterize&trim, especially when having stretched a layer.
Yes, I understood that the way the software works is creating a problem for you.
I was only explaining what was happening under the covers, and was not trying to say that the knowledge would solve the problem.
-
On 12/21/2022 at 3:13 PM, NotMyFault said:
resulting DPI is not visible for pixel layers, only image layers show this
The context toolbar for Move Tool displays the PPI of Pixel objects (and Image objects and placed documents).
-
On 12/21/2022 at 3:13 PM, NotMyFault said:
Those fully transparent superfluous extra pixels outside the visible canvas should not be filled at all.
The key to understanding the results:
- When an object is rasterised, the created Pixel object covers the entire canvas (or greater when any of the object lies outside the canvas), but its pixels have alpha of zero where the source object did not exist or was fully transparent.
- The bounding rectangle of a selected Pixel object is only as large as required to contain all of the pixels with alpha greater than zero, and so the real extent of a Pixel object can be greater than the user interface leads us to believe.
Using your example:
Step 3. rasterising the 1 px vector rectangle actually created a Pixel object as big as the canvas, 512 x 512 px, but with only one 1 pixel having alpha greater than zero.
Step 4. scaling the Pixel object by 100 so that its 1 visible pixel covered 100 x 100 document pixels actually scaled the entire Pixel object to cover 51,200 x 51,200 document pixels.
Step 6. filling the alpha of the Pixel object, made all of its pixels have alpha greater than zero, and so its bounding rectangle became the full extent of the Pixel object.
-
5 hours ago, MxHeppa said:
and similar with CMYK
-
5 hours ago, MxHeppa said:
Is possible combine three black white images way one is L and others are A,B.
Yes. One way is to use the Channels panel to transfer the lightness of each monochrome image to the respective L, A and B channels of a new Pixel object.
- Place the three monochrome images into a LAB document and use Rasterise command to convert them to Pixel objects.
- Name the Pixel objects "L", "A" and "B" (without the double quotes).
- Run the attached macro which will generate a composite Pixel object named "LAB".
-
4 hours ago, DarkClown said:
As it says - this snapping mode refers to the handles of the rays - not the point where you grab the curve.
I know what it says and does and doesn't do. I was responding to a specific comment by @prophet, and even quoted the comment to make that clear.
-
2 hours ago, prophet said:
making the rays themselves follow snapping protocols.
-
Yes, it is a new feature in the v2 apps.
Note that it should be named "Allow Selection to Consider Nested Items" since it makes clip-nested objects be directly selectable, in addition to group-nested objects.
The button only appears in the context toolbar of the Move Tool, and only when something is already selected.
In my opinion, the button should be in the main toolbar since we might want to toggle that selectability when using any tool that can select objects, and we shouldn't need to already have a selection in order to access the button.
-
1 hour ago, meridian360 said:
Last point, and I think this is a bug. Selecting the Same. I tried that with Same Stroke weight > Equal. -- But even with the target layer the only one selected and Edit all Layers turned OFF, ADv2 still selected objects in a Hidden and Locked layer! Any ideas on that?
Good point, although it's likely to be something that hasn't been implemented yet, rather than a bug. Exactly the same problematic lack of control over the candidates for 'select same' has been pointed out by other users. Hopefully, there will be improvement sooner rather than later.
-
11 hours ago, lacerto said:
What is strange is that the results are clearly dependent on the font that is used. The font in this test file was Arial. The differences between Windows and macOS might be dependent already on different versions of Arial these OSs have (the Windows version is much more complex and has e.g. OpenType fractions). Just using Arial Bold instead of Regular gives different results and gives similar or identical results on Windows (v2), compared to macOS:
You certainly could be right about results differing because of the difference between font versions on Windows versus macOS, rather than differences in the Affinity code on each platform.
11 hours ago, lacerto said:d) On macOS v2, when text objects have been converted to curves and merged on mac:
- There are still issues with divide simple when operating with text objects. Divide compound works fine.
There is no "Divide (Compound)" command. I guess you are talking about alt/opt-clicking the Divide button in the toolbar, similar to alt/opt-clicking the Add/Subtract/Intersect/Xor buttons to create a Compound.
Alt/opt-clicking Divide does not produce a Compound. The alt/opt key is a modifier for Divide when one or more unfilled curves are in the collection of operands. The key is used when you want the fragments of unfilled curves to be kept, otherwise they are discarded.
When filled text is an operand in a Boolean operation, the text is first wrongly converted to unfilled curves instead of filled curves (a persistent bug for several years now), and then the Boolean operation proceeds. Hence, the difference you were getting by doing a simple Divide with filled text versus an alt/opt-Divide with filled text. You were effectively dividing with unfilled curves when dividing with filled text.
-
Add an adjustment layer in expanded position.
in Feedback for the Affinity V2 Suite of Products
Posted
Same here, but being an option for three is much better than no option at all.