Tony77
-
Posts
78 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Tony77
-
-
Yes, however, when I close the program they disappear ... and only the macros that I recorded are my personal ones
-
Hello They are .afmacros files
-
Greetings
I downloaded and imported free macros from an Affinity astrophotography user but the macros disappear after affinity photo is closed.
What can I do?
-
9 hours ago, NathanC said:
Hi @Tony77,
I've raised this internally with one of our product experts who have advised on the below:
This should in theory work. We account for meridian flip, the alignment is based on the star detail so as long as the framing is similar it should align.
Hi NathanC
thank you for the support
-
Hello
yes I have seen this video and in one section it talks about what I am looking for but it clearly says that the second set must be aligned by hand, but its second set is completely shot upside down and out of alignment.
My second set of shooting is a few degrees moved due to repositioning, I wanted to know if the software can make up for that small difference by making a single stack with two "slightly" misaligned sets.
-
Anyone who has any information for me?
-
Hi guys
I have a manual winding mechanical type astro-tracker that takes up only 1 hour of integration, to do more hours of integration you need to reload the timer and manually return to the position it assumes after one hour of integration and so on for the following hours. .
Obviously the position will not be precise so I have a set of type 50 photos aligned and others and 50 slightly shifted due to the timer reload time and subsequent rotation of 15 ° back to find the position after 1 hour.
My question is does the program manage to do all an alignment if I load a set of 50 photos from the first shot and 50 from the second?
-
3 hours ago, kirkt said:
Something that is odd in AP that should not occur when converting your image from an RGB color space to Lab is a noticeable shift in the shadow tones. The video to which Greyfox links above (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IjI6eT_VvU) also shows this phenomenon and the author of the video incorrectly states that the contrast and color change when converting to Lab because of its larger gamut compared to sRGB - the color should not change at all if the conversion is done properly, that is the whole idea of converting from one color space to another, preservation of color appearance.
As far as sharpening goes, it is not clear when working on a Lab document if sharpening is applied to all three channels, as one would expect, or some variation of them. Presumably the default method should be sharpening all channels equally, L, a and b. If you want to sharpen L only and not disturb the color data in a and b, then you can do that too, but my guess is that AP does not simply sharpen L only by default. In other words, it is unclear what the utility of sharpening in Lab is without further understanding how AP performs the sharpening. Conversion to Lab prior to sharpening does give you access to L, a and b channels, not only for masking the sharpening, but for choosing to sharpen only the L channel.
EDIT - I just opened an image in Lab in AP. I used a Live Filter layer USM to add a lot of sharpening. L, a and b were all sharpened, as expected. I then made this sharpened result a pixel layer and used Apply Image to apply just its L channel to the original image, to add sharpened L to the original color. This gives you more control over contrast and color than RGB sharpening, typically, but the type of image and the sharpening you are trying to apply may make the differences obvious or hardly noticeable - maybe the technique is not worth the trouble for some images, whereas for others it may make a huge difference.
As far as using an inverted L mask to modulate the sharpening, if that's where you want to the sharpness to be (shadows and dark midtones) then that is an easy way to do it. One problem is that, with digital photos, you are targeting the areas of the image where the most noise is hiding with most of your sharpening. You probably do not want to sharpen noise.
It is troubling though that the image color and contrast shifts noticeably when converting to and from Lab - this should not happen and may, ultimately, explain what you are noticing in your images.
Kirk
Thanks Kirk you were very clear I usually prefer to use this LAB method to not have halos around the edges .... but you have a tip on sharpness I gladly accept it.
-
3 hours ago, kirkt said:
I downloaded your aphoto file and looked at the three layers in it. The histogram shows a difference between the original image and the first variation of it - namely that the red channel gets shifted slightly toward the shadow end of the histogram. The third image (presumably the conversion of the Lab image back to AdobeRGB) is identical in the histogram to the second image, as expected. Visually, all three images (layers in the document) look identical on my calibrated and profiled EIZO Color Edge display; however, if you boost the shadows significantly, you can see that the upper half of the background gradient is shifting color between the original image and the converted ones. This may simply be the effect of quantization errors when doing the conversion, even if one converts the 8bit image to a 16bit image before the conversions to Lab. Here, the errors are occurring in very dark, gradient tones, where there is little information to begin with and the entire upper half of the image background reads somewhere between 0 and 2 in the L channel. You may want to dither the gradient in the background of your image before the conversion and see if it helps smooth the conversion.
It sounds like the sharpening you are attempting to do is supposed to target shadow tones - that is, you use an inverted L channel as your sharpening mask (and targeting the shadows in the image in your aphoto file makes no sense, as there is nothing to sharpen except noise). As such, if there are any changes to the image resulting from the operation and the subsequent return back to RGB, they would happen in the darker tones; however, the changes would likely be minimal in real life and, while they appear on the histogram, they are not visible on a display device that can render the file accurately until you crank up the shadows. In this particular case, you may simply be seeing errors because of the nature of the very dark tones and little separation between them (especially prevalent in your CG render, instead of a photograph) - your display may also be struggling to display the very dark shadows, amplifying the effect.
kirk
Hi kirk
yes I understood that it could be something similar to your explanation (among other things very precise and professional)
I apply a lab sharpness by selecting the brightness channel of the lab color space and then I invert the level .... but this last operation leaves me some doubts honestly ... as I saw it on a video tutorial where they apply the sharpness through the lab method.
As suggested by another user above ... also you recommend to select the brightness channel and avoid inverting it ??.
I had never noticed the sharpening mask but in fact it looks like it should be reversed
I attach how the mask looks on my rendering
-
31 minutes ago, John Rostron said:
Again, all I see is dark grey on black. Are there supposed to be colours?
John
I have attached those three photos because the problem occurs to me with images with dark colors
However on my monitor the difference is evident
-
18 minutes ago, Greyfox said:
The video tutorial that I based my LAB sharpening on is by Chris P Williams. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IjI6eT_VvU
It is the same as I saw .... but there are others that apply the lab sharpness only to the pixels of the brightness channel of the lab color space ... and then re-convert to rgb 16
-
20 minutes ago, Greyfox said:
I don't understand the "loading a pixel selection into the brightness channel, and then inverting it". Are you missing a step where you have first made a selection?
The method I been using for LAB sharpening is just:
Converting from original color format to Lab 16
Use unsharp mask filter
conversion from Lab16 back to original color formatHi .... I saw some videos where they loaded the pixels of the brightness channel and then reversed the level .... honestly I also had some doubts but I have seen more than one
But now I have seen one that I had never seen and in fact they do not make that passage
-
Hello
I redid the test with larger files On the monitor I see that the final file of the reconversion has colors that turn to light blue in the shadows .... this is the problem that I notice if I apply a lab sharpening and then re-convert the colors to 16 or 8 bit RGB
I redid the test with larger files
-
Hi to explain better I am attaching the tests I did .... I do not know why it happens but in the end when I want to apply the unsharp mask Lab the final image has a different color in the shadows.
The first image is an Adobe rgb 1998 RGB / 8 Jpeg, the second is the same converted to lab and the last is the conversion to RGB / 8 ... as you can see the output colors are different.
Does anyone know how to avoid this inconvenience ... otherwise I would have to use a normal unsharp mask without converting the colors to Lab and then converting them back to rgb 8
-
Thanks for the reply
I use lab sharpening because it "seems" to work better in the brightness areas of the image .... it says it looks like from what I could see .... but yesterday I noticed that in the re-conversion to adobe rgb some areas have a color different ... especially in the shadows.
-
Hello, I was applying the lab method for sharpening to an image, here are the stepsI took
Converting from adobe rgb / 8 to Lab 16
Select brightness channel -> load pixel selection
Invert selection
unsharp mask radius 0.5 factor 1
deselect
reset channels
conversion from Lab16 to adobe rbg / 8
I have been using this method for a long time but only tonight I noticed that once I did these steps when I return to rbg / 8 the colors are completely different
I attach an affinity file with the three outputs
Abobe rgb8 initial
Lab conversion 16
Convert back to Adobe RGB / 8
I didn't apply sharpening on purpose to show that the colors are different even without other changes
Turning on and off the levels you can clearly see that the lab level and the level of the re-conversion in adobe rgb8 are identical ... practically in the shadows above all the colors are different
Can anyone tell me why this happens?
-
6 hours ago, Lee D said:
Can you expand on your workflow and the adjustments you make in Affinity before saving the file? Is Save History with Document enabled on the File menu, this can increase the overall filesize as can any snapshots.
No I have not enabled the saving of the history .... I export the panorama in Tiff 16 bit and then I carry out the processing in affinity .... the problem is that from a file of 800 mb of a panorama of 130 mpxl or similar then I becomes 2 gb.
-
Hi I have a problem with Affinity Photo .... I tried to create a gigapixel format of 12 TIFF images of 16 mpx each.
Joining them together comes out a file of 133 mpx and 890 mb .... when I save it in Affinity photo to modify it it reaches 3 gbyte and the program crashes and I have to wait several seconds for it to work again.
Obviously I tried to merge 12 Jpegs and the file is much smaller and workable but it has only 8 bits .... I used TIFF to be able to work in 16 bits.
I am aware that the starting file in TIFF (Jpeg is much smaller) is big but how could I do in this case? .... what kind of workflow do you use in these situations? -
-
22 minutes ago, Alfred said:
No, one commercial licence = one user: if you are the licensee, you can install and use the software for personal or commercial purposes on any PC that you own or control. Other people can (with your permission!) use the software for personal projects on one of your PCs, but for commercial use they would need additional licences.
Ok as I understand I can also install it on three PCs ... the important thing is that they are used only by me for commercial purposes .... do I understand correctly?
-
15 hours ago, walt.farrell said:
You can install each program that you've licensed on as many Windows PCs as you personally own or control, as long as no one but you uses them for commercial purposes.
So practically only one license can be used for commercial purposes .... if this license is inserted on other PCs always in my possession .... they can be used but not for commercial purposes.
Basically a commercial license = 1 pc
Even if "I knew" that usually a program can be installed both on a fixed and on a notebook and be both valid for commercial purposes .... obviously installed on other PCs it is no longer valid commercially .... this usually it happens with the other software that I use -
Hello,
I should change workstations soon because my pc is having problems with the motherboard,
On the PC that is having problems I installed all the Affinity suite (Photo, Designer and Publisher) regularly purchased.
I would like to know how I can deactivate the licenses from this PC and activate them on the new one.
I also wanted to know if the 3 licenses can be installed not only on a fixed PC but also on a laptop ... or should other licenses be purchased?
Regards -
Hello,
having a monitor and k1200 board that support them..i wanted to know if the affinity photo can be used with 10 bits. -
I mean the automatic panels of other photo editing programs .... panels that create masks from brightness levels and then through a slider you change the mask to expand the editing area .... example the videos on the Tk panel that seems to me do this.
I understand that there is no such automatic panel but I wanted to know how to do the same thing in a less automatic but effective way anyway
I hope I have been clear now
Macros disappear after affinity photo is closed
in Pre-V2 Archive of Affinity on Desktop Questions (macOS and Windows)
Posted
Now it works .... I don't know what happened but I installed the program again and now they remain in the library ... I don't know why but it works now