NotMyFault
-
Posts
6,823 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by NotMyFault
-
-
@lepr With a trick you can avoid inpainting, and create a fully non-destructive version.the issue when using a mask and the inverted mask: it does not add to 100%, and creates a gap whenever you have semi-transparent areas.
you can heal this with help of a levels adjustment, to boost alpha back to 100%.
-
47 minutes ago, Steve Ballard said:
I assume you no longer to see a wider screen capture.
Case closed 😀
47 minutes ago, Steve Ballard said:"Current and below" was set, although I had not selected it, seems that is the default setting.
To my knowledge and testing, it is off by default in all versions (which I dislike as I prefer to and always work non-destructively, by adding a pixel layer for inpainting)
-
Did you activate „current and below“?
we would need a full screen capture showing the settings in use. -
10 hours ago, Torstein said:
I don't know if this is unavoidable, user error or a bug...
It is missing „automagically“ for such tasks.
Newer IPhones have depth detection and deliver a height map. This can be used for Computational blur. Some competing apps try to create AI based depth map Formant image.
-
If you already have a mask for the motive, why not duplicate it and invert for use as background mask? You may record the process as macro to do all automatically (just need background, mask layer)
-
-
7 hours ago, DM1 said:
We’ll blow me down! I’m convinced!
What about HSL adjustment? Am I missing something there too? On Desktop you can click to select colour spot on image. I try with pencil but adjustment always closes?
No, despite even the context help text says „Click or drag to set hue“ and shift/alt modifyer to add/subtract
-
9 hours ago, R C-R said:
In the default Vector View Mode at any zoom level there is no antialiasing regardless of how the coverage map is set. Of course, if I change the View Mode to Pixel or Retina Pixel it does change the amount of onscreen antialiasing there is, but like I said there no indication the OP is using either of them from the screenshot in the first post.
From the help topic:
You have totally misinterpreted the correct help text.
9 hours ago, R C-R said:Drawn objects are displayed as vectors by default. This means that, regardless of the current zoom level, objects (and applied effects) are always presented with smooth vector edges and transitions.
This does not mention anti-aliasing, and „smooth edges“ actually means that anti-aliasing is used!
but Anti-aliasing always (in vector mode) happens on edges in pixel-size screen resolution, no matter what zoom level you use.
You will never be able to spot this by eye on high DPI displays.
To see the effect of anti-aliasing on vector mode, you have 2 options:
- take a screenshot (baking in the screen resolution), and inspect the screenshot zoomed in
- take a good macro lens, and inspect the edges in extreme zoom factor on an external display attached to the camera. (I have done this to specifically see RGB diodes / subpixels)
-
1 minute ago, walt.farrell said:
Did you mean RGB/16 for the second one?
Yes, now corrected. Thank you
-
Bei Deinem Ausgangsbild wird Affinity die Kanten kaum automatisch erkennen. Für eine perfekte Maske besser die Freihandauswahl nehmen.
Noch genauer wird es mit dem Zeichenstift. Damit erzeigt man eine geschlossene Kurve, die anstatt einer Maske benutzt werden kann.
-
Um Kanten in einer Maske zu verbessern, empfehle ich folgendes:
- Die maskierungsebene in den Solo-Modus Isolationsmodus versetzen (Ebenenoptionen)
- einen runden Pinsel von ca. 8-16 px Breite auswählen. Größe nach Bedarf anpassen, notfalls auf 2px reduzieren.
- Farbe schwarz oder weis
- Härte 85%
- Nun mit dem Stift an der Kante entlang versäubern, sofern dort unerwünschte Übergänge sind.
Mit etwas Übung geht das schnell und schafft perfekte Kanten.
-
Hallo und willkommen im Forum. Du kannst gerne auf Deutsch schreiben.
Ich habe noch nicht ganz verstanden, was Du möchtest: Ein Objekt mit "harter" Kante maskieren?
Dann besser nicht "Verfeinern"Drücken, denn das macht immer mehr oder weniger breite unscharfe Kanten, egal was Du dort einstellst.
sondern die Auswahl mit dem Auswahl-Pinsel durchführen und dann direkt eine neue Maske erzeugen (diese übernimmt die Auswahl).
Du kannst aber (beim Auswahl-Pinsel) "Weiche Kanten" aktivieren, das sorgt für einen schöneren Übergang, sonst wird es brutal pixelig an den Kanten.
-
Hi,
can you upload an example image? And try to switch the language in affinity to "English", so we are able to exactly see what adjustments you are doing (in screenshots).
5 hours ago, storrya said:When adding a black and white layer
Do you mean black and white adjustment layer?
5 hours ago, storrya said:then adjusting the brightness of the tones in the ‘colours’ via the properties box,
Adjusting brightness will alter the color values. In case of an RBG/8 image, you will always get some banding and rounding.
5 hours ago, storrya said:has anyone noticed that for some colours, grain (or noise) is added to the image as a result
When you brighten up dark areas, the colors will become unnatural. Dark colors have only very few bit to encode lightness values, and even small adjustments will cause strong changes, amplifying noise. Try this with RGB/8 document
- take a good image, and reduce brightness by 1/8.
- Merge visible
- Increase brightness *8
- the image quality will be visibly reduced from original.
If you do the same with RGB/16, the difference will be unnoticeable.
-
1 hour ago, augustya said:
have put you on an ignore list but still this forum let's you comment on my threads.
@Dan C This guy is a repeated offender !!
If this thread goes down that road, I’m out after this final post.
if you want to ignore someone, go ahead - silent. No need to publicly attack anybody.
There is a „report“ button on every post if you think it is against the guidelines.
- PaulEC, Dan C and walt.farrell
-
2
-
1
-
-
This has been reported before. Would be a surprise if Affinity says anything else than „works as designed“.
On 10/11/2023 at 1:56 AM, debraspicher said:On one hand, this probably means that the individual layers are resampled using the method we chose in the File>Export window? This is good because we need this level of control.
Exactly this happens.
On 10/11/2023 at 1:56 AM, debraspicher said:The downside?: It creates artifacting that can be seen around the edges of a layer that has transparency (so heal brush work and so on...) when using the sharpest option from what I can tell is Lanc Non-Separable for downsizing...
Yes again. The older reported was simply downscaling at export (no matter what resample method) to get artifacts.
-
The position of „create“ and „cancel“ changed on some platforms. I often click the wrong one based on „muscle memory“.
-
-
-
Maybe a trick.
for every layer, create a rectangle of canvas size (no fill) and nest the graphics as child.
you can then use export persona, create slices from layers. Exported files have canvas size.
-
-
V2 allows to rasterize and trim multiple layers at once which reduces the effort for the case of the OP.
There is still no solution for your case.
-
If you really want to check if exports differ in a relevant way from the content of a document, this needs a different approach.
- Screenshots are usable for comparison only if you take them from the same app, using the same rendering settings (e.g. view mode and document color format).
- the best way to check export quality of Affinity apps is to export them in 2 formats, one that stores bitmap images in all relevant aspects like uncompressed, sporting alpha channel, and having full bit depth of document, and color profile. Depending on circumstances, PNG or TIFF are best suited. Those exports will contain every single pixel of your document in full color and bit depth.
- choose the other format like jpeg, jpegxl, wich you suspect to be flawed, and export again.
- now create a new stack of both documents. Put the tiff/png on bottom, and the other on top.
- set blend mode of top to difference. You m any add a levels adjustment on top with white level set to 10% to boost values by factor 10.
- now you can spot any difference with info panel. Use channel panel to inspect individual channels, including alpha.
- Exports need to have identical pixel size.
- for jpeg, you will easily spot compression artifacts like 8 bit colors (banding), 8x8 mosaic, etc
-
Hi,
i don’t think it makes much sense to compare screenshots of an Image in RGB/16 or RGB/32 format with export to jpeg (always RGB/8).
The image rendered in Affinity while the App is open cannot show exactly how the exported image will look for various technical reasons:
- color depths can vary, and be smaller in export
- color gamut can be clipped due to limitations of export file format
- Zoom level other than 100% leads to perceived sharpness or blurriness
- RGB/32 with unbound color values cannot be 1:1 exported to certain file formats (RGB/16 and below)
There are additional limitations of Affinity, partially bugs, but this do not play a role in your examples:
- Affinity unable to render 16 bit color depth in canvas (but it will correctly export), leading to banding
- Mipmap rendering will cause severe rendering artifacts for any zoom level except 100%
- white lines may appear at the edge of documents
- bitmap exports with size rescaling may look different due to resampling of layers
- Forced dithering of gradients at export
Color of image changes while zooming / exporting the image in Affinity 2.2.0
in Affinity on Desktop Questions (macOS and Windows)
Posted · Edited by NotMyFault
Wrong assumption
Hi Peter,
it seems you are using Windows.Unfortunately many Windows Apps do not support color profiles, and simply assume sRGB, leading to wrong rendering.
You need to check colors with an capable app like web browser, or Affinity.
https://affinityspotlight.com/article/display-colour-management-in-the-affinity-apps/