NotMyFault

when using a mask, and reducing the opacity of the mask, this will always recude the opacity of the underlying layers, instead of increasing. This behaivior does not make any sense to me. Masks are used to filter out unwanted parts. When you reduce the mask's opacity, you want to (temporary) reveil the hidden parts again. You can disable a mask only completely, but in many cases you want to reduce only the power of the mask by e.g. 50%, meaning black pixels in the mask should act like 50% gray when the mask's opacity is set to 50%. In the moment, i found only a complex workaround: adding a curves adjustment to the mask, select the "alpha" channel, and lift the left node from 0 to e.g. 50%. This requires several mouse clicks, and works only if the mask is not nested, because Photo does not allow to add layers to masks when a mask are already nested. To summarize: If i set the opacity of a mask layer to 50%, this should show an effect equivalent to an alpha channel curve layer to the mask, where the lower left node is set to 100% minus opacity. The attached file shows the results of Affinity Photo when setting the opacity of the mask, or the underlying layer to 100% or 50%, and the simulated result i would expect. To be honest, the reults are really confusing to me. Same results with AP 1.7 and 1.8 beta. mask opacity bug 2020.afphoto

You can see the issue with this file. (de-)activate the curves adjustment to see the difefrence. Tested on iPad (2017) and iPad pro (2018) mask opacity bug.afphoto

When using masks with opacity, in combination with an adjustment layer (which supports alpha, e.g. curves) to the mask, the opacity does not affect the mask, but the layers below the mask. Trying the same on the PC version (1.7.3.487) gives correct results: adjustments affects the mask.

Afphoto file used do demonstrate issue It seems the opacity of the mask is wrongfully applied to the layers beneath when a filter is added to the mask mask opacity bug.afphoto

Hi there, observing strange behavior when combined masks, transparency for the mask, and additional live adjustments or filters to the masks. Every adjustments/ filters which support alpha is affected, e.g levels, curves, gaussian blur, minimum blur. 1. if you use a mask layer, you can use the opacity to reduce the masking effect, e.g. to see what will be masked out. opacity 100 shows only pixels with white mask, and no pixel with black mask. opacity 50 shows pixel with white mask, and 50% transparent pixel with black mask. 2. when you add an adjustment or filter to the mask, even with all parameters at zero, the result changes: now all pixel with white mask will be shown 50% transparent, and pixels with black mask will vanish. 3. Is this a bug or a feature? FullSizeRender.mov

@Daniel: Tank you for those suggestions. I’m already aware of several workarounds, please do not post more of them. These are non-precise and hamper the workflow . In my view this is a AP bug and should be fixed. Whenever I applied crop with e.g. 3:2, AP should respect this ratio and automatically calculate even pixel counts during export with locked ratio. Other applications behave like this, AP should do, too.

@Danielcz: This might work in theory. My expectation to AP is that the software does the math for me Really don’t want to do that manually

I can confirm this issue in 1.7.2.

The issue occurs when using crop (and not later when exporting): When selecting 3:2 crop an using the mouse to reach 4500 for x, AP shows 3001 for y, see screenshot attached. I tried to achieve 3000 for y, seems to be impossible. Either 2999 or 3001, but never 3000

Hi Ron, cropping was the single and only adjustment. Definitely no trimming. I saved the file with full history, you can check yorself. You should note that during development, some assistant are active (see below), and lens correnction will apply for example. I don't know if assistent is saved with image files, or local to every installation. And intentionally, i did a crop with uneven size (size after crop no multiple of 8). If you crop directly to the exact size of planned export, you will be ok most of the time. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to sightly round down the crop size to reach "even" dimensions, besides dragging the mouse -- wich is non-precise and near to impossible to reach e.g. exactly 2000 with mouse (no option to enter exact pixels during crop AFTER selecting 3:2 crop mode).

Hi Chris, below you can find a sample file. AP file created directly from a raw .CR2, developed straight as it is, and applied a crop with 3:2 (6:4) aspect ratio. When you export and enter 2000, you get 2999 instead of 3000 for the other axis. _MG_1882.afphoto

Hi Chris B, any update regwrding this issue? For me. there are two related problems: 1. CR2 picture dimensions shows by apps seem to differ always between Affinity Photo and all other tools (Canon, Windows 10 Explorer by up to 24 pixels in case of 6000x4000 raw file) 2. AP is off when exporting CR2 files by a few pixels, even if the files have been explicitely cropped to e.g. 3x2 ratio before.

Dear Lucja, sorry to hear that. It did work for the tiff you provided. It may not work for your original aphoto file. You May use „merge visible“ as preparation step. Can you provide the original, or at least describe how you created the logo? Timo

You may try this method: - choose Flood selection tool (W) - reduce "tolerance" to 0 (mouse) - select white background (click any white pixel) - grow / shwink selection by 1 pixel (CTRL-B) - delete slected area (DEL) - fill selected area with white again Hope that does the job. Regards Timo

Hi Chris, no decimals found (ORG was background before renaming). Please note that AP always shows different dimensions compared to Canon DPP or Windows Explorer / file properties AP 6024,0x4020,0 (EXIF while opening CR2, before any crop) CANON DPP 6000*4000 Windows Explorer: