NotMyFault

Hi, i don’t know what result you are trying to achieve with just 2 photos, and using f1.4 A focus merge normally tries to achieve the widest possible depth of field and sharpness from a large number of photos, each with only a small shift of focus, getting everything in focus (=sharp) between the first and last picture i would take at least 5-8 photos, using f 8.0 to achieve best sharpness and depth of field for the raw photos, and then focus merge. Typical use cases are macro shots where you get only razor-thin DoF from single photos even at f8 If you just want to merge 2 shots, and specific areas, manual merging with help of a mask layer gives you better control vs fully automatic focus merge. best, Timo

Coming back to the original question: can you directly edit the alpha channel? It is possible with a little help of an additional "pixel used as mask" layer - remeber mask can be seen as just another name for alpha channel. To use this method for alpha editing, just omit the fill layer, and maybe "merge visible" to get the final result as dedicated layer. The simple procedural text filter will automatically transform your greyscaler pixel layer into a alpha channel, and apply it to the underlying pixel layer (using its R, G,B value, but replacing the A value).

Now you will find a updated tutorial, a video tutorial, and updated presets which will simlify the workflow.

Hi Walt, will do after finishing my business work. It takes a lot of time to create and polish a tutorial. The other thread only touched an edge case, this method has a broader scope.

You might want to use a pixel layer as mask layer, but still be able to edit this layer and see the impact of your edits live. This is easily possible: Start with at least a background layer and a second pixel layer intended for masking add the live procedural text filter with this formula A=R, R=1, G=1, B=1 (or download preset "grey to alpha" below) Clip this live filter to the pixel layer to be used for masking Clip "pixel mask layer to be used for marking" to the background layer where you want to use it. The procedural text filter will become invisible in the layer stack, but still working. Modify the "pixel mask" layer with any pixel tool you like: brush, dodge and burn, sharpen, any adjustment or any filter At least give a "heart" or "thanks" to my post. Bonus material: If you have a mask you want to transform into a pixel layer, you can simply use the procedural text filter "alpha to gray" (see attached file). Video Tutorial: The recording did not capture the live procedural text filter. please use the settings from the picture below: Have fun alpha to gray.aftoolpresets grey to alpha.aftoolpresets

And here is the preset ready to import. use pixel layer as mask from NotMyFault.aftoolpresets

Do give some more hints: First, create a grayscale layer using the "channels" panel from you selection or mask. Rename this layer to "pixel mask" add the live procedural text filter with this formula A=(1-R) Clip this live filter to "pixel mask" Clip "pixel mask" layer to the layer where you want to use it. The procedural text filter will become invisible in the layer stack, but still working. Modify the "pixel mask" layer with any pixel tool you like Send all your spare money to me . At least give a "heart" or "thanks" to my post.

Now i will share a 1 million dollar secret sauce for free: You can use any pixel layer as mask, and use any tool like dogde, burn, adjustments, brushes on this mask, and see the masking effect in realtime. Just add a "procedural text" filter to the mask, and enter the simple formula A=(1-R). The, start to work on the mask (which is still a pixel layer). I use the R channel for simplicity as all RGB channels should be identical when the mask layer is grayscale. Have fun.

Hi Paul, a very simple way is to add a levels adjustment. Have a look at the histogram. While adjusting Then start with green channel, and adjust gamma to taste (1,2 ) continue with blue (0,86) and red (1,2) channel.

Well, normally the object is on a different layer beneath your circle. Depending on the type of your object, you can use the selection tool and select that layer in the layer panel.

In publisher it is a dedicated feature (linked files, not embedded) https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/tutorials/publisher/desktop/video/337294349/

One option is to embed files, and then replace the content of these files. It has been explained in one of the creative sessions (youtube video on Affinities channel).

Hi Andrew, welcome to this forum. not the support department, just another mortal user of affinity and this forum, but i hope this might help: I don’t think this is sharpening. My assumption is there are differences in the jpeg quality settings when exporting. The lossy compression can lead to loss of details, and can introduce hard edges or mosaic artefacts. Can you try to export both files with a lossless format like TIFF or jpeg compression disabled (quality set to 100) ? To compare the result just place place both files into one single affinity document as separate layers. Then set the blend mode of the upper layer to ‚difference‘. it will be completely black where pixels are identical, and all differences are much easier to detect. and please always set the zoom to 100% when comparing, otherwise the rendering could show misleading results which will differ from the files content. here is an example for the method:

As a native German too, i would second Uwe's request. Bündel is mostly outdated language and used today only in very specific situations (alte Bücher, Maßnahmenbündel, Mathematikbücher). "Paket" is the modern term and much more approptiate for the context in Affinity. Especially as Affinity tries to use it in the context of downloading which is the online equivalent to (physical) shipping of goods, packet ("Paket") make more sense.

Hi Mic, Just set the blend mode of the merged layer to „difference“. If the resulting pictures is not perfectly black, you found an issue. Check the histogram, too If your zoom level is different from 100%, some phantom display issues could occur, which vanished if zooming to 100%. Regards, Timo

Hi, assuming you already using a mask, or copied a selection so you have a pixel layer with alpha where the edges show alpha below 1. a first step would be a levels asjustment on alpha channel. play with gamma, black and white level to check if this helps. Curves on alpha channel as next option. My favorite for advanced users is procedural text filter. Unfortunately, it is based on pure RGB and lacks functions to convert to HSL or directly use hue/saturation/luminance. With help of Wikipedia, you will find the formulas allowing to convert on you own. I hope this helps. Regards, Timo

Hi Olly, Maybe a different technique can be better suited, using two curve layers : Create two curve layers, one for dodge, one for burn. clip both curves layers to the pixel layer you want to tackle. Set the curves accordingly to globally get a maximum effect. Then invert both curves layers (from white to black), so the effect will vanish. Then use a suitable white brush, set opacity to about 10%, to paint in the effect locally where you want it. There are excellent video tutorials available explaining this in more details. Just search for videos, "affinity photo dodge burn curves" with you favorite search engine. Regards, Timo

Hi, one simply way is to use the rectangle tool (blue rectangle on the left) to draw a rectangle to the place of your choice. Then set fill to "none" and increase stroke size as needed. Select frame color to taste. Regards, Timo

@JenV: great cheat sheet👍 As another way to achieve these channel mixing, i would suggest to use the "procedural text" filter - possibly as live filter. You could achive the same functions (e.g. selecting only red channel) much simpler (without macros), and if you use 0..1 parameters, you could freely adjust and preview the share of every channel live. copy background 3 times, set blend mode to screen attach procedural text filter to each copy, set color as wanted attach mask (white), paint black to delete Bonus: if you add a forth variable to the alpha channel, you can gradually blend every channel globally. Regards, Timo

I have a recording from old beta, unfortunately with a picture I cannot share in public You would need to adjust the filter parameters a and/or b to see the effect Cannot reproduce any more in new beta 1.9.0.211 Issue can be closed.

+1

Welcome @chrissi to this forum. You can find lots of tutorials in this forum: And this specific video might provide an answer to your question: Selecting sampled colours (New: 24/10/2020) What do you plan after selecting this poles? Do you want to copy them, or to inpaint the area to remove the poles? Based on your intention, you might need to tune the selection, e.g. grow/schrink selection, feather selection, smooth selection.

Unfortunately, Instagram does not allow to upload from any desktop OS, only SmartPhones can upload. There are special Apps like "Windowed" (for Windows 10) which allow to circumvent this restriction. @af1: I would suggest to download the pic from Google into the photo library locally on the smart phone first. And then upload from you local photo library. I had some issue trying to (directly) access cloud storage for document upload, too. Do you use iOS, Android or something else?

Hi, I have no insight into the book printing business in UK. As an alternative to you may use any service which delivers photo books (laser print or real photos), or print services specializing in students / university which are used to low quantities.