Granddaddy

Several years of requests and complaints about tiny icons and minuscule fonts have not brought any fixes for the deficiencies in the Affinity user interface. The problem continues to worsen as users age and as more people work on high definition monitors. Of the several dozen programs I use, including photo editors that compete with APhoto, only the Affinity apps impose severe readability problems on its users. As you have found, using Settings/System/Display to scale the entire display is fraught with problems and not recommended. Settings/Ease of Access can by more helpful, but it will not change the size of icons, nor the size of text in the panels. Other text problems can be improved, however. For more information, including links to past discussions and partial solution, see my posts at https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/135052-tool-icon-size—need-to-enlarge/&do=findComment&comment=745313 https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/74923-changing-affinity-photo-user-interface-font-size-in-windows-10/&tab=comments#comment-430003 (I'm surprised no one else responded to your post for three days.)

Perhaps Affinity Revolution's tutorial about stealing color grading from one photo to use in another might prove useful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1h2z7iMfhM

Obviously it is the opinion of some that APhoto, APub, and ADesign are so similar in purpose and use that they cannot be separated into separate forums. Yet APhoto on Mac and APhoto on Windows are deemed so dissimilar that the first response to any question about APhoto is: Are you using Mac or Windows? The impassioned arguments in favor of maintaining a single forum for everything could best be handled by simply pointing newcomers to one of the many previous discussions of the topic rather than repeating everything all over again with ever more passionate intensity. Many other questions are handled that way. Pointers to the standard replies would make it much easier for newcomers to wade through the old controversy. When this topic pops up every so often I am reminded of the movie "Amadeus:" Perhaps you remember the scene where Mozart is defending his high opinion about his own work. Emperor Joseph II responds calmly to Mozart's passionate intensity: "You are passionate, Mozart, but you do not persuade..."

Users have been requesting fixes for the tiny icons and fonts for many years. Despite the user interface deficiencies, I bought APhoto about 3-1/2 years ago because I thought that Affinity's emphasis on non-destructive editing was the "right" model. After a time I memorized locations of the icons and rearranged them to my liking so their tiny size became less problematic. Obviously that depends on the state of your vision, quality of your monitor, and ambient room lighting. Affinity's competitors do not have these particular UI deficiencies, but they do suffer from other deficiencies. As a result, I use APhoto almost exclusively for my hobby work despite my aging eyes. Improvements in Windows 10 helped me overcome Affinity's tiny text. The tiny icons remain a problem. As my late mother often said, "What can you do? You just have to put up with it I guess." Obviously the majority of photo editing enthusiasts choose not to put up with Affinity's deficiencies and lacks. Most people have not heard of Affinity Photo. It often gets no mention in reviews of photo editors. Of course I disregard those reviews because I find reviewers have criteria and priorities different from mine. @ABHULtheELF, you may find some benefit reading the following discussions about icon size, text size, and types of scaling available in Windows. https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/125603-ui-scaling/ https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/123596-ui-font-and-icon-size-is-really-very-very-tooooooooooo-~~-small/ https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/116061-fon-size-in-the-gui/ https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/74923-changing-affinity-photo-user-interface-font-size-in-windows-10/ We have learned to expect that APhoto will remain pretty much as it is given that so many UI features and bugs (like the very annoying white outline that appears around photos at different zoom levels) have been left standing for several years through several "major updates." Perhaps as the workers at Serif age into trifocals and/or cataracts they will see the benefits of making the UI more usable. Perhaps they will even make it consistent as regards indications for what buttons and tabs are selected or not selected.

Affinity Photo should do what you want. The learning curve is steep if you have not done photo editing before. It's among the most complex things anyone ever does on a computer, so don't be easily discouraged. Obviously Affinity Photo's competitors will also do the job. They might even be easier to use at first glance. Some even have automated features (that I've found don't work satisfactorily despite advertising hype). However, if you strive to be a serious craftsman then Affinity Photo's emphasis on non-destructive editing is an enormous help in this kind of work. You can repair physical damage on the photo without making physical changes to the pixels of the scan. If you make an error, nothing is lost except time and nothing is ruined. See my simple example at https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/77763-recovering-memories-gifting-friends/ If you have not done much scanning, read Wayne Fulton's classic work "A Few Scanning Tips" https://www.scantips.com including this page about old photos https://www.scantips.com/restore.html I also use VueScan for scanning photos as it gives more control than the software that came with my scanner. It includes some photo restoration functions that are best applied during scanning rather than later in an editor. If you are not satisfied with your scans, then you might give it a try. https://www.hamrick.com Again, the learning curve can be steep. Restoration is a combination of technical and artistic skills informed by experience.

My decades-old Ektachrome slides have this kind of color loss because the cyan dye fades. I've always corrected the worst of it using the scanner software's settings for color fading, correction, and restoration along with other tools in the scanner software. It may be easier using the scanner software than trying to use a photo editor after scanning. For a fuller understanding of faded slides, you may want to read Wayne Fulton's "A Few Scanning Tips" starting with https://www.scantips.com/color.html

See also the hundreds of tutorial videos done by InAffinity indexed at https://changingminds.org/disciplines/photography/affinity_photo/inaffinity_video_index.htm https://changingminds.org/disciplines/photography/affinity_photo/categories/ap_categories_alphabetic.htm and at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOnLUmyPHr2rayOHVHWsHVw/playlists

I had not heard the term "cinemagraph" before reading it here. So I looked it up. Turns out these partially animated stills are common in web advertising, so I guess I've seen them. Advertising doesn't really register on me very much. Cinemagraphs are seamless, continuously looping videos that use masks to isolate the portions of the image that will be animated from the portions that remain still. For others new to the term, here are a couple of sites explaining and demonstrating cinemagraphs: https://blog.flixel.com/what-is-a-cinemagraph-how-do-they-work/ https://www.tripwiremagazine.com/cinemagraphs/ (40 examples) The company that shall not be named has brief instructions for making cinemagraphs at https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/video/discover/how-to-make-a-cinemagraph.html For just $20 on sale at this moment, you can buy software dedicated to making cinemagraphs at https://www.ashampoo.com/en/usd/lpa/partner6001?x-source=bingus&x-mid=bing&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=sem&utm_campaign=sem_bing&coupon=545-N7P-XHB&editionId=29878 or for $39 at this link https://www.ashampoo.com/en/usd/lpa/partner6001 Interesting how that works. The file names on the downloads are different but the file sizes are the same. There are plenty of software products to try as indicated by the brief reviews at https://fixthephoto.com/best-cinemagraph-software.html Anyway, as a software junky I'm almost disappointed I cannot think of a reason I myself might want to make a cinemagraph, but they surely are very neat.

We often see it mentioned that footnotes and endnotes are hard and that APub is a "new" product and that algorithms must be invented, as if footnotes and endnotes have never been done before (except by Serif in its abandoned PagePlus product). I have been writing long documents on computers for nearly 40 years. Every product I've ever used, from GML/Script on an IBM mainframe in the early 80s, to the shareware PC-Write under DOS in the mid-80s, to WordPerfect in the late 80s, to Word for Windows beginning in the 90s, has included footnotes and endnotes. Even the free Libre Office does footnotes and endnotes. Surely the algorithms for doing footnotes and endnotes are by now very well-developed and widely known, not something that needs to be reinvented by a company that previously implemented footnotes and endnotes in products introduced nearly 30 years ago.

I didn't know that either after three years of using APhoto. I wonder how many people do know it. Thanks to @walt.farrellmore of us know it now. And thank you both for this delightful exchange that illustrates something I told my colleagues and students for decades: 1.) Broadcast your ignorance whenever you want information. Sure, there might be some who make fun of your knowledge gap or who berate you for asking for a feature they themselves don't need. Pay them no mind. You are performing a public service. Always there will be a knowledgeable and patient person who will enlighten you and all the others who read your post. 2.) Even the most experienced expert can learn tips and tricks from even an inexperienced person who happens to use the software differently for different purposes. Which is one of the reasons beta testing ought to be formally organized to include testing by a broad range of people and not just depend hopefully on those interested enough to try the beta version but who might have very narrow interests.

The icons are fixed in size. If you are using Windows 10 version 1809 or above, you can increase the size of some of the text in the APhoto UI without changing the scale of everything on the screen (which is undesirable). For instance, tool tips attached to the icons can be made larger. That's a big help until you memorize the positions of the tools and don't have to depend so much on icons. (Of course, tools can be moved anywhere on that panel, as well as being added or removed.) See my posts at https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/125603-ui-scaling/&do=findComment&comment=689223 https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/74923-changing-affinity-photo-user-interface-font-size-in-windows-10/&tab=comments#comment-430003

@Chris26 I hope you know about Affinity Revolution's comprehensive courses, in addition to all the free tutorials they have on YouTube. Affinity Revolution frequently offers deep discounts on their courses. All materials and videos can be downloaded and kept for permanent use. As an example, they just announced a bundle price for the three courses in their retouching series, all of which I had previously purchased at something like half price. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cGH5LJiQ7E https://courses.affinityrevolution.com/p/retouching-101-301 Affinity Revolution has been an enthusiastic supporter of Affinity products. They deserve our support in return. Serif should be developing relationships with people like this to spread far and wide the power of Affinity products. https://courses.affinityrevolution.com https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6xPJ4dx82vSjysPUyjlCsw

Comparing Serif to Adobe is like comparing David to Goliath. David's sling proved more powerful than Goliath's arms and armor. The forum thread from May-June 2019 is relevant to this discussion. See it at https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/86147-how-big-is-the-affinity-team/ In that thread there are links to Serif on Google Maps and a few screen shots of their headquarters. You can view Adobe's San Jose headquarters on Google Maps streetview at https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3299571,-121.8944997,3a,75y,14.01h,105.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s07oZzcPwOJ1w8M8TaLBUqQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 We know what kinds of cars the Serif team drives. Adobe employees hide their cars underground. And, of course, Adobe has many other offices in many countries. https://www.adobe.com/about-adobe/contact/offices.html

To paraphrase Seinfeld: You know how to log the issue. You just don't know how to fix the issue. And that's really the most important part of logging the issue. The fixing of the issue. Anybody can just log an issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaAeUQrVw4c So after many years of users reporting this issue, nothing at all has been done to cause APhoto to display an image correctly on the monitor. Instead, APhoto randomly inserts a white line border around some sides of an image or along some parts of some sides of an image. Of course we have learned to work around the issue. But Serif's inability to fix the issue makes me wonder what else APhoto is doing incorrectly to the image, something less noticeable that will rise up to bite us later. It is frustrating to report an issue only to be told, "Oh yes. We've known about that internally for years. It's a side effect of how we render images on screen." Over the past 40 years I have used dozens of applications that display images on the screen. Only APhoto inserts white lines around the edges of the image. I am curious as to why Serif has chosen a method of rendering that introduces errors into the image. Are there not industry standard methods that don't produce such a side effect? Is there some advantage to doing it Serif's way that I don't understand?

I'm an amateur/enthusiast/hobbyist who has used APhoto exclusively for the past 3 years. Previously I used Photoshop Elements through several versions since the early 1990s. I restore old photos for family and friends, make collages and other photo gifts, make large format prints for fun. APhoto has been a great learning experience. I chose APhoto because I liked its emphasis on non-destructive editing. That being said, I have the following observations: 1.) When catching up to a superior competitor, you must innovate twice as rapidly as that competitor just to stay the same distance behind. That's what some of this discussion is about. The competition was not standing still while Serif was playing catch up and claiming it is the future of photo editing. 2.) APhoto today is no better than it was three years ago, worse actually since .aphoto files are now 4 to 10 times larger than three years ago with no benefit to photo editors such as myself. 3.) APhoto seems to be positioned as a utility to supplement Serif's main focus, which is desktop publishing on the Mac platform. APhoto is not catering to photography enthusiasts. Indeed, I think many of us photography enthusiasts feel neglected by Serif. 4.) APhoto should be judged against Photoshop Elements, which is sold outright rather than as a subscription. Photoshop Elements includes many of the artificial intelligence features in Photoshop, features that are appearing also in other competitors to APhoto. Look at the Photoshop Elements 2021 web pages and you also might say WTBH. 5.) Given that a Photoshop subscription costs no more than a couple of pizzas per month, I do not understand why professionals in a production environment would consider this an inordinate expense. I agree subscription software is annoying in principle, just as copy protected software was annoying in the 1980s. I didn't use copy protected software then (Lotus 123, e.g.), and I don't use subscription software today. Certainly a Photoshop subscription is prohibitive for someone such as myself who may go for weeks without editing a photo. But for a business professional, so what?