Subclavius

(1) the combination Ctrl+Shift+] and Ctrl+Shift+[ is assigned by default to Arrange>Move to Front/Back. I was unaware of this and assigned the combination to Document>Rotate 90 Clockwise/Anticlockwise. I have been using the combination quite happily until I discovered the the clash. The issue is that AP does not warn that this is a duplicate combination (2) I have been unable to assign any keyboard shortcuts using the arrow keys (up/down/left/right). The default keyboard shortcuts such as Ctrl+Alt+Shift+Left (Flip Horizontal) work ok in practice Any comments anyone?

You're welcome

I always run AP full screen so can't really answer your question but I would suspect that there's not much in it. However, I have noticed that the first time that AP loads a LUT it takes significantly longer than subsequent times. I guess that AP has to load up additional libraries from disk into memory

It does work though, albeit slowly! I imagine that the processing time is heavily dependent on the computing power available to you. Here are the statistics from my machine (windows 10 64 bit, AMD FX6350 (6 core), 16 GB RAM and AMD Radeon R7 200 series graphics card). I created a LUT from AP at maximum export detail level of 126x126x126 which gives a file of 51.5MB. It takes 12 seconds to load and process the file. AP will also use the graphics processor and any (and sometimes all!) available memory. If your machine is taking minutes to load it, then probably you're running into memory/processor (or just possibly graphics processor) limits. If your machine is 32 bits then you should consider upgrading. Good luck!

Hello mircokopf, I've tested LUTs both created within APhoto and externally, including one I created from scratch. As far as I can tell they work just fine and the filename doesn't seem to matter. You say that no files are showing up in the file explorer dialogue. What file extension are you using? According to the help, the following file types are allowed: I always use .cube. Can you provide any more details?

Dear Affinity Team, Thank you for the latest update, particularly the bug fix with masks in groups. Had previously to revert to 1.7.1 to continue. I agree with mapline in that all fixes, major or minor, are appreciated, please keep them coming! Nigel

Hello carl123, Thank you. That has fixed the problem. I'm glad someone understands this stuff! I'd like to leave this post open for the moment: perhaps a knowledgeable person from Serif would like to comment, on whether this is likely to be addressed or added to the stack of feature requests, or simply closed. Nigel

I want a macro to add 2 pixel layers at the top of a AF layer stack, fiddle with them and then group them together. When attempting to record the macro I can get everything done except that last bit (grouping) because APhoto does not permit selection of more than one layer at a time when recording a macro. I have seen work around methods but they don't work for me because the layer stack contains an arbitrary number of layers and I only want to group the top 2. Am raising this as a bug rather than a feature request as I find it annoying. At the moment I have to use the work around of an almost complete macro and do the grouping (and naming) by hand. Any help would be welcome. Nigel

Hello martinch and Old Bruce, If it's of interest, I posted this method in the tutorials section of the forum: It was tested on a 1.7.0 beta but it appears to work in current production 1.7.2. Any comments would be appreciated. Nigel

I very much second the idea of an import facility for legacy PagePlus files. I can understand the pressure to get AP out there but I can't help feeling that Serif has let down its legacy users of PagePlus here in not supplying it. I have seen it suggested that export -> import can be achieved by means of a pdf but I find that wholly inadequate. The elements of the page (e.g. a table) are lost as functional elements and only the 'picture' content appears. Short of a turnaround from Serif it means starting again from scratch. Nigel

Hello Walt, Thank you but I feel this misses the point. Yes, groups restrict the operation of layers to within that group so that only that group is affected. My point is that the b+w conversion layer fails to operate at all because it cannot 'see' the underlying background pixel layer without the presence of an unnecessary local pixel layer within the group. Nigel

AP 1.7.0.367/Windows 10 64 bit I think this is a bug but am not 100% sure - feel free to close if it's by design. It seems that a black and white conversion within in a group only has a local effect on pixel layers within that group. Have included 3 pics: a b+w conversion outside the group (works ok), b+w conversion within the group (no effect), and b+w combined with a local pixel layer (non-transparent) within the group (works ok). This may look like an odd thing to do but it arose as I was trying out 2 different b+w conversion options on the same pic. It seemed to make sense to use 2 groups rather make multiple copies of the original image. Any comments? By the way, thank you for all your hard work on releasing version 1.7. Nigel

I have posted an article on how to set up curves manually in the Tutorials forum: It uses a LUT and requires some manual editing to set up but it isn't rocket science. Nigel

Hello All, I'm posting this in response to the following thread: I was also searching for a method of inputting (x,y) number pairs into Affinity Photo to make a compensating curve for digitial negatives for alternative processes. It looks to be possible by using a 1D LUT (Look Up Table). The enormous advantage of a LUT is that the file (typically with .cube extension) is manually readable and editable. I've put some details and screenshots below as 'proof of concept' (it means I haven't tested it in practice!). Pic 1 shows the original image (test 2 bw [original]) - it is a greyscale image Pic 2 shows a typical alternative process curve made up with a curves adjustment but not yet applied (test 2 bw [typical alt process curve]) Pic 3 shows the above curve applied to the image (test 2 bw [alt process curve applied]) Pic 4 shows a 1D LUT created from the curve in pic 2 applied to the image (test 2 bw [alt process curve via LUT]). To generate the LUT data I printed the adjustment curve on paper and measured it! Notes on method: Note that this method ONLY works with the current beta version (1.7.0.293). I have tried it in the current production version but the LUT implementation is flawed and it does not work! There are minor differences in the histogram between pics 3 and 4, probably due to the sampled nature of the LUT with its linear segments (and also measurement accuracy!). The method utilises a 1D LUT - pretty much what they were designed for (although the idea was for video implementation). However 3D LUTs also exist and if you export an LUT from AP then it will generate one of these. Notes on LUTs: An LUT relies on having equally spaced points along the x-axis. This is a MUST. If you have made non-equally spaced density samples, it will not work or you will have to interpolate. An LUT can have arbitrarily many data points. In this example there are 78 so that the important information in the rapidly changing areas of the curve is captured although it means that the curve is over-specified in the linear segment. The format is self explanatory (see example). Comment lines begin with a # character. Here is the link to the Adobe LUT specification for those who want to delve further. There is no specification for the x-axis data points. They are assumed to be equally spaced. The numbers supplied are for the y-axis data points and there are 3 of them (in the given range 0.0 to 1.0) one each for RGB. It is important that the RGB numbers are identical otherwise you will get a coloured output. I have used 5 decimal places here but it's arbitrary. I've attached below the sample LUT that I made up - the numbers were created in an Excel spreadsheet. Feel free to adapt it. I would be interested in any comments. Nigel LUT test 2 bw.cube

Just one item for me: In the curves adjustment box add the ability to specify the points being added (x%, y%) to the curve just like blend options. This would be immensely helpful for creating digital negatives for alternative processe (e.g. platinum printing) Nigel