Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Stokestack

Members
  • Posts

    433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Stokestack

  1. If the application had a proper aspect-ratio control, you wouldn't need to touch a key or change modes. You'd set it once, and then you could click & drag to draw your marquees in the perfect aspect ratio every time at any size, visually encompassing the portion the image that you wanted to grab. No masking, no panels. Crazy, huh? And then if we had other crazy things like an always-visible display of your document's dimensions, you'd have an idea how much of the image you'd need in order to provide sufficient resolution for (as an example) HD or UHD video. Downright ludicrous, no? Oh wait, I just discovered something that actually is ludicrous. The Crop tool has an aspect-ratio lock, making it even more ridiculous that it's missing from the selection tool. The logic is already written. In fact, the Crop tool goes one better by offering a list of common aspect ratios even in free-form mode. Why is this not in the selection tool?
  2. Exactly, a ridiculous workaround limited to one tool in combination with two other tools... none of which is the primary selection tool, for which it was originally requested.
  3. There is no explicit aspect-ratio constraint function as there is in other graphics software. Play word games and cite ridiculous workarounds all you want, if you're that bored. The rest of us can move on.
  4. That's why. There's no "constrain to aspect ratio" with height and width fields in the toolbar for the rectangular-selection tool where they belong.
  5. "Learn how the app works?" My entire request was based on how the app works, and hasn't been invalidated by an exploration of it from anyone in this thread. So apparently nobody knows "how the app works," because nobody has shown how to fulfill the request. As usual with apologists for inept design, now that the feature has been proven to be missing you resort to, "Well, you don't need that anyway." Or "you're holding it wrong." Or "I don't want that." Maybe you're responding to someone else, because I never said to clone Photoshop. The simple fact is that other applications manage to show this information (and do lots of other basic things, like resize the selection marquee) with a UI that's no more cluttered than Affinity's. If you're so upset about extra crap in the UI, refer us to your request to consolidate the Gradient controls that are scattered over a dialog box or two, in addition to a separate tool in the palette that hides some critical others.
  6. Yes, this does work, thanks. R-C-R brought this workaround up in another thread also.
  7. Which is the same as what I said in the post you quoted. It's also bogus because you can't resize the marquee on the canvas while maintaining the aspect ratio.
  8. Maintaining is not the same as setting. How do you set it in the first place? Let's say you're preparing some stills for use in a video. Typically, video has a 16:9 aspect ratio. Typically, an image-editing program will let you type "16" and "9" into a couple of fields to constrain the rectangular-selection tool to that aspect ratio. Where are those fields in Photo? Apparently they don't exist.
  9. See my revised answer above. In any other application, the "hand" tool IS the "move" tool. But of course, not in the world of Affinity. I don't really see a need to explore further "workarounds" to this obvious problem. They merely prove the validity of the request.
  10. Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately that doesn't work. Screen grab attached. The real image dimensions are more than 3000 x 4000. Oh wait: After you do a Paste, Photo puts a selection marquee around the entire new layer for some reason... in addition to the "selected" border and handles that it already has. Let's look at how absurd this is: To see the "image" dimensions, you'd have to guess that they reside on a tiny tab in the corner labeled "transform," but only if you have one specific tool selected. And there'd better not be a selection on the canvas. Oh wait: You're only seeing the dimensions of one layer and not the entire document. Does that about sum it up? Screen Recording 2021-06-10 at 12.31.22 AM.mov
  11. Described in the other topic? I describe it in the same post you just quoted.
  12. Thanks for that reply. That does work, although there's still no way to set an aspect ratio. You have to type some multiple of the dimensions into the transform panel and then resize the mask area with a corner handle. Needless to say, the necessity for this workaround is.... you guessed it... ridiculous.
  13. I did. It shows that my image's dimensions are all zero, despite it filling my screen. Screen shot below. Thanks for the info. That is nearly undiscoverable and absurd. We're somehow supposed to guess that to see image dimensions, we should go select a "hand" tool. And even if we'd used said tool in the past, the chances of happening to notice image dimensions buried in a tiny text string of stats in a toolbar - for a tool that has no settings and doesn't do resizing - are very very low. Now multiply that by the chance of remembering that a string of stats was displayed when you selected an irrelevant tool, and you get vanishingly low. The workaround of choice for essentially every user is going to be pulling up the Resize Document dialog. Every damned time. Again, ridiculous.
  14. Not for me. Maybe it's a Mac-specific bug. Check out the screen grab. What "Color Picker tool?" I'm using the color selector for the object, right in the toolbar. I wouldn't put it past Affinity to hide another "color picker" tool in the palette, but I don't see it there either. The first thing you learn is that clicking the eyedropper applies the color in its well to the selected object. So why would you drag it? I don't try to drag buttons around. Screen Recording 2021-06-09 at 3.43.24 PM.mov
  15. There's no way to drag the marquee to resize it, regardless of the ratio being locked. Thanks, but that didn't work when I tried it. The field simply reverted to numbers when I pressed return, and the ratio is not enforced. Not to mention that this should not be necessary.
  16. The fact that you can't resize the selection marquee, combined with the fact that you can't set a fixed aspect ratio for it... is pathetic. There is no excuse for it.
  17. This is such basic, necessary information... and not only is it missing from the main UI, but it's also missing from the Info panel. Seriously? It should be in the UI at all times. Show us the dimensions of the current document in the unit of our choice (mine would be pixels). Photoshop does so in the status bar. I don't really care where you put it, as long as it's always visible. If anyone seriously needs to ask why this is necessary: It tells you immediately if you need to resize something, perhaps for a particular use. It also tells you if an image has sufficient resolution to support a particular use. Now you think of some uses! It's fun.
  18. Your point about the tool resetting with every file change is on the money. It's annoying and dumb. You forgot the eyedropper. First of all, this thing is backward. Who the hell drags A COLOR WELL around a screen instead of the eyedropper itself? And once you look up what the problem is and drag the well to select a color somewhere... it doesn't set the color of the object you're working on. In fact it does nothing, except put the sampled color in the eyedropper well. You then have to click on the eyedropper well again to move the color into the main color well and actually change the color of the object you're working on. WTF? Why do you think I was sampling a color? So I could change the color of the object I'm working on, DUH. I tried to find some granule of benefit to this asinine workflow. I thought maybe there's some reason you want that color in the eyedropper well... perhaps to serve as a handy quick-access storage area for the color in case you want to go back to it after changing the foreground or background color wells. But nope: The eyedropper well doesn't even retain the color between uses, so even that tiny bit of utility doesn't exist. Straight-up stupid.
  19. I'm not talking about simply shift-dragging. I'm talking about setting a fixed aspect ratio, like square or 16:9 or 2:1. I don't see this in the toolbar (or anywhere else) when using the rectangular-selection tool. I want to set the tool to 16:9 so I can select regions of the right shape for video. Even worse: You can't even do it by drawing a marquee to the correct aspect ratio manually (and tediously) one pixel at a time and then Shift-resizing it... because apparently you can't transform a selection in this application. And after a search I've found that people have been calling Affinity out on this defect for at least four years. Another day, another basic feature missing from Photo. Useless junk.
  20. The original problem report doesn't involve a filter, and the degradation is in fact rendered into the final result.
  21. I neither have "more work to do" nor do I know any more about any of these "fine points." None of those "fine points" has held up to testing or logic. Pixel-snapping turned out to be on, and the mismatched layer DPI has also been eliminated as an issue by copying from and to the same layer. Nor does the document-DPI hypothesis explain multiple degradations. That's the only method I know, so that's what I used. It doesn't matter how I arrived at this document. It was created entirely in Photo from Mac screen-shot PNGs. The observed behavior shouldn't happen. Affinity engineers have the file and they can step through their code with it. I've done plenty of work and entertained more than enough excuses.
  22. Then the degradation shouldn't have occurred yet. If you're saying that merging requires a resampling to match the document DPI, it should happen once. Why would it happen over and over again? Nope. I resized the canvas. I save image resizing until the final step.
  23. These are screen shots, taken seconds apart. I have no idea what rounding error has produced a DPI mismatch of 1. Regardless, as I noted in reply to Gabe: After the first merge-down, the "adjustment" has been done. But copying and pasting from the same layer onto itself (and thus same DPI) continues to degrade the image. You can even take the file I provided and delete one layer entirely and work on just one. It continues to blur without the DPI conflict. And finally: I started this document by right-clicking on one of the screen shots and saying, "Open with..." If there's a DPI issue, Photo created it without my involvement. Affinity Photo can't be trusted to maintain image quality. Period.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.