Puck

Hi Meb, Xcode 10 or not, you should make sure that the "additional software" like the NIK filters, which has already been bought at a high price by many, is still compatible. I don't know anything about programming, but I think the rewriting of the program happens because of more future functions. We all appreciate that - but obviously, many experienced AFP users are not as satisfied with 1.7 as you would like it to be. You have to take that into account. Instead of creating only a - required - bugfix of AFP 1.6.7, rewriting the software is a risky step. Some filters have been rewritten so that they are no longer useful in my case (e.G. Denoise, Clarity) - but I'm not the only one complaining about that. Best regards, Puck (still a fan!)

Regards, Puck

That works very well for me in Publisher beta 227. What it looks like in designer (beta), I can't say, because I'm not beta-testing the designer. But it does NOT work in Designer 1.6.1. Regards, Puck (iMac 2017, 16 GB RAM, Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 1536 MB, MacOS 10.14.3)

Chris, I would be happy about an upload-link. Regards, Puck

Hi there, the difference in the appearance of the files seems to occur with certain life filters, because this effect does not appear with every .afphoto file. (Beta 109) Regards, Puck (iMac 2017, 16 GB RAM, Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 1536 MB, MacOS 10.14.3)

Too early: Here's another example of an image created with AP 1.6.7, opened in AP 1.7.0.108 beta (Metal on or off doesn't matter!) I'm talking about .afphoto files, of course. For example, if I compare jpgs, they look the same in both versions. Regards, Puck (iMac 2017, 16 GB RAM, Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 1536 MB, MacOS 10.14.3)

That are good arguments. I think it makes a lot of sense to keep the old filter (the algorithm is obviously still present in 1.7). Good suggestions have already been made here, the developers should take them to heart.

It is, indeed. Works fine with Metal off Regards, Puck

Very good objection and reply! Regards, Puck

Thumbs up!

Hi, It's a pretty good idea! Regards, Puck

Look here The german text says: Rasterize (first one) is destructive, it simultaneously cuts the layer to canvas size if necessary. It "crops" the layer if you like! Rasterize (second one) converts an image, text, shape.... or a group.... into a PIXEL layer WITHOUT cutting it to size. Simply test both with objects that are scaled BIGGER than the desktop. The best way is to zoom in small so that the blue selection border is visible. The last one converts a mask from the current layer - just try it with a text or a shape.... Regards, Puck BTW: "Rasterise to Mask" dosen't work for me

I agree 100%. Regards, Puck

I'm with you! I'd also like to have both versions of this filter available. I also like to use the previous filter with this smooth way of blurring. No other filter achieves this. Regards, Puck

Hallo Polygonius, das war mir bereits bekannt Aber vielen Dank für deine Erklärungen bezüglich Raster und Rasterise ... das wusste ich in der Tat nicht. Ich werde alles mal ausprobieren Grüße, Puck

Hi, It might be of interest that this also happens to me in Affinity Photo 1.6.7. Regards, Puck

Hi there, I can't see the difference between the two methods (see screenshots). In addition, the three points behind the menu entry usually mean that you can still adjust something (Mac), this is not the case here. -- And what is "Rasterise To Mask" for? Regards, Puck PS. In general I'm very satisfied with the new Affinity Photo!

I've tried it this way, but unfortunately it doesn't work for me. Regards, Puck

In general Beta 221 runs really well. I am very satisfied Regards, Puck

Again, thanks so much! That helped me a lot Cheers, Puck

Whoa! Quite a hidden feature Thanks so much! Cheers, Puck

Thank you very much, it works! If I had thought about it, I might have found it myself! Sometimes I am unfortunately impatient. Cheers, Puck PS. Couldn't find "(with the new option Edit Detached)"

Hi folks, the automatic page number begins usually with 1. How can I start the automatic page number with e.g. 5 for book production? Thanks for help Cheers, Puck

Hi Meb, thank you very much :D Cheers Puck