Jump to content

N'Awlins Contrarian

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About N'Awlins Contrarian

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't usually run beta versions, but I just tried the regular 1.7.0 release, and indeed it fixes the problem. Thanks!
  2. I'm using Affinity Photo 1.6.4 on a Windows 7-64 bit Home Premium machine. I have some TIFFs that Affinity Photo does not open correctly--even though Windows Photo Viewer, DxO PhotoLab, and GIMP open them fine. For whatever it may matter, these TIFFs are grayscale instead of RGB, and are 16 bits per pixel. Opening the file brought up the Develop persona instead of the Photo persona. The file displayed completely wrong--grossly over-exposed, high contrast, like somebody had grabbed the top right of the tone curve and dragged it almost all the way to the left edge (while leaving it at the top). The first attachment is a screen capture from immediately after opening the file. The second attachment is a screen capture of the same file opened in Windows Photo Viewer, which displayed it correctly. Back to the Affinity screen capture. Note the histogram at top right, which seems to correspond to what I see. Maybe more significantly, note the "RGBA/32 (HDR) - RAW" text toward the top left, which seems to be wrong. In other words, Affinity appears to be misconstruing what it's opening. Just as an experiment, I clicked Develop, but the image did not get fixed or even change appreciably. Also: this is a big file, over 150 MB and 80 MP (it's a scan of an old 8x10 negative). In case you want to experiment, the file's page at the U.S. Library of Congress is: http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/det/item/2016796043/ and the direct location of the full-resolution TIFF is: http://cdn.loc.gov/master/pnp/det/4a20000/4a23000/4a23600/4a23684a.tif Thanks!
  3. Doh! Thanks, that's exactly what I needed. I just tried it, and it worked as desired. Now I can't believe I didn't try that before--if it had been a snake, it would have bitten me.
  4. I feel like I must be missing something basic, but I cannot get a mask onto a layer. The issue may be that a pixel layer and a mask layer are totally different things, and never the twain shall meet. If so--and I think this has to be my ignorance--then that's a terrible design flaw. Background: I have an image where the foreground and sky need very different raw conversion to look good. Years ago in GIMP I painstakingly created a very detailed mask to combine TIFFs from the two different raw conversions. Now I want to use Affinity Photo to do the same thing, so I can work from 16-bit TIFFs in ProPhotoRGB instead (the stable version of GIMP is limited to 8 bits per channel, so ProPhoto RGB is not a good choice). So I exported from GIMP the layer mask as a TIFF. It opens fine in Affinity. I can paste it as a layer into the same file with the two raw conversions, but when I a Mask to Below, although the operation seems to work, it does not have the masking effect. I've also tried New Mask Layer followed by Paste Inside, but I can't seem to get my previously-created layer mask to function as an Affinity layer mask. I have to believe there's a way to paste into a mask a pre-existing layer, and thereby use it to create a mask. So how do I do it? Thanks!
  5. Grr, nope, unfortunately the technique suggested in the tutorial video that Toltec embedded does not do what I want. Specifically, what I want is a layer (adjustment layer or whatever you want to call it) that captures the relative changes to an underlying pixel layer that are made by healing and cloning. While the technique suggested does produce non-destructive changes, those changes are not transferable as relative changes to, say, a different (outside-done) raw conversion with different color or exposure. Instead, what happens is you get a new pixel layer that puts on top the actual pixels created by healing and cloning. Here's an illustration, showing respectively, by checking and unchecking layers, the original image, the healed image, and the same healing layer atop a different raw conversion with the color cranked up: As you can see, it is merely the exact pixels generated by the healing that are on that layer, not the relative relationship of the healed pixels to the underlying pixels. If the technique had done what I want, then the third segment would have had the orange skin but with the same relative healing applied to the more normal skin color. Back to the drawing board. Hopefully someone has another suggestion (I guess recording a macro being the only other thing to try, but that's a kluge). Thanks all.
  6. Toltec, that's it! Thanks! How did I not find that video? But yes, that technique looks like it should do exactly that I want. I tried it just now with my own photo, and it seems to be working as I wanted it to. Thanks all for the suggestions.
  7. Thanks for all your replies, and sorry if I was unclear on what I want, why, and how I think it should be able to work. Maybe two examples will illustrate the issue: (1) My camera sits on a tripod, and other than changes in shutter speed, nothing changes as I take a series of photos of a sunrise or sunset scene as the sun rises or sets. There are some distracting foreground elements. I want to take the first image in the series, add an adjustment layer, on that layer clone out the distracting foreground elements, copy that adjustment layer, and paste it on top of each of the other photos in the series. The relationships among the source and destination pixels in each photo in the series should be the same, or very nearly so. How can I do this? If I cannot, is that not an omission that should be rectified? Barninga / Stefano, and everyone, if I have several such TIFFs, can I stack them as layers in one file, simultaneously perform the same clone operations on all of them, then just export versions with only one of the source files visible? (2) I take a portrait. I perform a raw conversion in other software, and export the result as a 16-bit TIFF. I want to use the healing tools to fix facial blemishes in Affinity Photo. If later I decide that I want an 11x14 inch print of the portrait instead of the 5x7 inch version I originally planned, it might be very desirable to apply stronger noise reduction during raw conversion. If my healing tool work is on an adjustment layer, I can just copy that layer and paste it over a new TIFF, the revised version from the raw converter. Again, the relationships among the original pixels and retouched pixels in each photo should be the same, or very nearly so. How can I do this? If I cannot, is that not an omission that should be rectified? In this scenario, I don't see how what Barninga / Stefano suggested would help me--but maybe I'm missing it. Straight up, the prospect of applying cloning and healing from a prior effort to a new file (either a new raw conversion of a prior photo, or a new photo of an essentially-identical subject) was the driving reason for my definitively concluding that I'd outgrown GIMP. Yes, better color-management facilities and support for higher bit-depths (in non-beta versions) also contributed. But this was my top hope / goal. Am I just out of luck? Thanks!
  8. I've watched a bunch of the tutorial videos, but can't seem to find a way to do what I want. Basically, I want to create a set of healing- / cloning-type adjustments on an adjustment layer, to preserve them independently of the pixels from which they were originally derived and to which they were originally applied. I want to do this so that, for example, if I fix facial blemishes on a portrait, or clean up its background, but then decide I want to change the underlying raw conversion (which I do in another program, and export as a 16-bit TIFF), I don't have to start over and redo my facial retouching. Ideally, I could have a 'zit fix adjustment layer', a 'background cloning adjustment layer', and just copy those adjustment layers and drop them on top of a new, differently-raw-converted TIFF. I have to think others want similar capability, and that it probably exists, but I can't figure out how to get at it. Thanks!
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.