NotMyFault

BTW i cant‘g get this function working (3 objects selected), or i mis-interpret it: First, the sentence end with „:“, but nothin follows. Is the an image missing? Second, no matter what key object i choose, when i click center horizontally, all 3 objects are re-positioned to something like the center of all 3 layers, but not to the center of the selected key shape. In other words, no matter what key object has been chosen, the result of alignment is identical. You can align in relation to a key object, designated by tapping on an object to align to with the modifier pressed on the Command Controller (the key object is identified with a strong blue outline):

Thanks for your reply. It would be great if the help gets updated to include the information how to finish the operation, and what activities will trigger apply or cancel. https://affinity.help/photo2ipad/en-US.lproj/pages/LayerOperations/align.html

setup your document to use pixel / px as units, and show 3 or more decimal digits. After pasting the layer, check and correct the layer position. Use the move tool and transform panel to check the pixel position of the pasted layer. It is probably fractional like 0.5. Enter integer numbers for y position (removing nonzero digits after the decimal point), this should solve the issue.

Basically, you need to start with an image of highes resolution. Then add one with lower resolution as bottom layer. Resize canvas e.g. by factor 2 or 4 stretch the bottom image with transform panel so it matches the the smaller high-res image. add more high-res images you may need to add perspective filters if images were taken from different positions.

Or use the channels panel, and deactivate editing of alpha channel. Don’t forget to re-activate again when finished.

Yes, in CMYK there is still about 10% saturation left after desaturating. after googling around a bit on stackoverflow etc everybody says blend mode and adjustments are not suitable form CMYK because of the subtractive color model. It seems nobody made a tutorial what works in CMYK and works doesn’t work. The basic advise (i fully agree with) is to do all editing in RGB (or GREY or LAB), and only flatten / export finally to CMYK. You can use normal / paththrough blend modes, and single-channel adjustments, but the rest is „creative art“ and not predictable.

Shouldn't be too complicated. Can you upload some example images?

Apple Photo restricts the resolution and formats, mostly downgrades them when using drag and drop to other apps, or any of the "open in" functions. This is a Apple thing. To get full resolution on original formats, you may need to use "export" first. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/photos/pht6e157c5f/mac

You are correct, these functions are missing on iPad. I've added this feature discrepancy to the (unofficial) list

Hi, some screenshots showing what you did would help. Uploading the actual file (saved with history) would be help more.

It is best practice to use a standard (device independent) color profile for documents. I would do a one-time conversion from the scanner profile to a generic wide-gamut profile. Stay with 16 bit depth as long as possible (e.g. until exporting to 8-bit jpg). The benefits of this approach: you don't need to embed color profiles, which can save several KB to MB per image. All modern browser on all current OS (Windows 10/11, Android, iOS, iPadOS, MacOS) are capable to correctly render these files, respecting the color profile Using e.g display DCI-P3 is now the least common denominator across almost all devices, achieving far more gamut vs. sRGB.

If spend quite some time to find a good scanner for old film slides, after my trusty Epson 3270 failed after about 20 years. The bad news all scanners currently available below 5.000€ are crap. Development was abandoned 15 years ago for scanner technology. Current available models provide far worse results than some high end models from 1995-2005.. If you want high-quality, the better option is to digitise with a camera. For ease of use, a Nikon D850 plus film slide adapter plus macro lens is ultimatum (try to rent them for some weeks). I spend some weeks to digitise using my Canon 80D plus EF-S60 plus a 35€ light dish, which gives excellent results but the workflow is horrible time consuming (no method to transport slides automatically). The results using a camera instead of scanner are just stunning. Photos from 1960 to 1975 are better in colors and details are most digital images taken today.

@thomaso the main point to understand is: how parent and child layers interact which each other, on colors and alpha This includes: what child layers "can see" from layers below (their input) does data color channels and/or alpha channels get used for blending, depending on position (their output) does a child layer impact the parent's shape area (edge, non-zero alpha pixels)? where does blend range of layers show their impact (what is meant with source and destination blend range) Unfortunately, the names which were chosen for "clipping" and "masking" positions of child layers are kind of misleading. As lepr pointed out, the sequence of operations matters, e.g. when adjustment layers are executed, specifically the mask of those layers. And when it comes to adjustments / filters affecting alpha, there are unfixed bugs in all 3 apps. Add strokes, layer fx, blend ranges, live mask filters and it becomes very complex immediately. Never the less, in theory everything is well defined (simple math). Using groups and the very unfortunate blend mode passthrough implementation of Affinity can drive you insane in seconds. If you want to continue digging deeper, try to focus on one case at a time. And stay in RGB model. CMYK introduced another layer of complexity (and some old bugs in affinity apps wrt color management). We can discuss CMYK related topics, but it makes more sense to discuss this for specific cases where the case is fully understood for RGB documents.

Thank you for sharing this epic story. Most users are just too impatient to wait for an App to finish. i see some room for improvement in methodology: the raw images contain some blue spots (lens flare). Suggest to preprocess the raw files (develop to tiff/16), and inpaint those areas. Otherwise, they will irritate the stitching algorithms better don’t use pixel shift. You scene contains clouds, water, and ships on the water. Those moving objects will become unnest blurry, and again irritate the stitching process. the image overall looks blurry. Again, pre-process the images an apply a mild sharpening (excluding sky and water) when shooting in nature in cloudy days, lightness can change dramatically between shots. Try to capture the image in shortest possible time, without rushing. Try to start the process when either no clouds covering the scene, or a big cloud stays until you have taken all images.

Hi, how are blend modes difference and subtract defined for CMYK documents? create new cmyk document add a colourful image add HSL adjustment, set situation to 0 merge visible deactivate or delete HSL adjustments. now play with blend mode of top (desaturated) layer. I get full black (meaning exactly 0 values) for blend mode difference and subtract. this is unexpected for me. Anyone able to explain?

Next example: use HSL adjustment, set saturation to 0, do desaturate an image. Use info panel with 3 color pickers (RGB, HSL, CMYK) to inspect the result. The image still contains pixels with up to 10% saturation. The RGB values do not match. HSL in CMYK seems to "equalise" all CMY values, and let K untouched. This works in RGB, but not so good in CMYK.

another example: if you have a cmyk document, and want to visually invert it (getting similar result to invert adjustment in RGB document): add curves adjustment set mode to RGB use master channel invert start node and end node to get a falling line This gives almost the same result as an image inverted in RGB, and then converted (as rasterised layer) to CMYK. Similar, you can switch the curves adjustment to all color modes and inspect the results by inverting the curve. Only RGB and GREY will give what a normal user expects, CMYK and LAB will produce unexpected results. Again, these are correct by math, but unexpected and the reason why using most adjustments does not make sense in CMYK

I can’t follow what exactly you are doing, but i think you have an adjustment on alpha only (invert alpha, or create nonzero alpha), nested to a vector shape. This triggers an old but still unfixed (in V1 and V2.2) bug: Nested to a vector shape, the rendering gets erratic outside the shapes area, and normally will create black areas of random sizes (depending on zoom level). RPReplay_Final1695542121.mov

Hi Thomaso, we had similar discussions a year before, e.g. Adjustments targeting all color channels (using the master channel in curves, or the invert adjustment) will lead to simply wrong results. Do a simple test: Create new RGB document use a colorful photo (e.g. rainbow), id needs to show all shades of colors and saturation (not only fully saturated plus grey). add invert adjustment duplicate invert adjustment: the image looks as the original now convert to CMYK color space, and deactivate on of the inverts The inverted image looks different between RGB and CMYK The reason behind this is simple math. Inversion just inverts every available channel. As long as you have an image where K is all zero, the results visually match between RGB and CMYK. But when the CMYK version contains nonzero K, the visual results are unexpected. It would be technically possible to provide a „cmyk invert“ which does what a unexperienced user wants. This is what i mean tha adjustments are not sanely defined. They do simple math, extended to the K Chanel, but the subtractive nature plus „K redundancy“ will provide visually different results in CMYK vs RGB, and the results are useless in most cases.

Create new document add star shape, give it fill and stroke add blur or distortion filter as child layer (which impacts alpha channel, too), e.g. ripple, and set strength now use fill tool to create a gradient on alpha on the filter layer. observed: inherent mask gets ignored expected: inherent mask is used for layer blending, filter output should be masked accordingly

Workaround: another neutral adjustment, e.g. curves without modifying sliders, and let it activated.

To be more precise: any stroke outside the filled area gets lost, independent from top/bottom.

Hi, create new document add star shape, give it fill color and stroke. Set stroke to bottom. add distortion filter, nested to shape(both clipping / masking position will do) deactivate filter: the stroke of parent disappears. Expected: any inactive filter should have no impact at all to parent. stroke lost ripple with inherent mask.afphoto RPReplay_Final1695506253.mp4

I would scale down (a copy of) the images by factory 1/16 and measure the time. I didn't measure specifically sticking performance, but most operations are linear to pixel count as best case. This can give you a good estimate how long it will take for higher resolution images. And you need to stay well away from you RAM limit. If the file needs more RAM than available, this can slow down everything by factor 1.000 or more. us task manager (Windows) or Activity Monitor (MacOS) to inspect RAM utilisation. You can create a batch job to scale down to automate that job.

same with stroke "behind"