Saijin_Naib

I went both directions, no problem

Weird. Normally you'd think a crash like this would affect everyone. Hopefully we can work out a fix even if it doesn't affect everyone 

Hello Chris,
I have to correct,  when zooming out in devolop persona, then crash.
but it probably depends on the picture size,
at a picture size of 6000 x 4000 pix I have no crash,
at a picture size of 4800 x 3200 pix or smaller crash from Affinity.
 
Cheers

Confirmed - crash when zooming out IN DEVELOP PERSONA

Hey Saijin_Naib,
I can get this 100% of the time. The key seems to be the Develop Persona.
Zoom all the way out in Develop Persona = crash.
Zoom all the way out in Photo Persona = fine. Now switch to Develop Persona whilst zoomed out = crash.
I'll get this logged for you! Thanks  

Hi,
while clarity has been improved, it still needs some streamlining.
Clarity in DOF live filter is in PX while on it's own its in percent. This looks messy and makes transfering settings unreliable.
ie. setting clarity in DOF I decide to move it to another layer (to make it 'global') and I can't get the same results.

Direct manipulation of channels would be best. I cannot imagine what is the reason for current system.

I voted "no" as I currently use XnView MP to view and organise my files. It has built in support / thumbnail support for almost any file you can think of (including Affinity files) and I have been using it for years. ALSO, it's FREE and OPEN SOURCE. The only way I'd use another tool / DAM / Asset Manager / Media Organiser is if it's, at the veryleast, free. I would not pay an extra $1 for something that I already have.
Yes, there may be ways of integrating such an app into an Affiniy main application but XnView works just fine for me.
If you've never heard of XnView MP, you can find it here: https://www.xnview.com/
PS: IMHO

In the Develop persona, the histogram now reacts immediately to value changes.
But in the photo persona there is still a significant delay before the histogram shows the changes.

Affinity is great, but moving back to Photoshop, the workflow is so much better I find. 
Why is it that in Affinity, the "B" shortcut which is one of the most used tools in the software, doesn't actually lead ot the brush tool but circulates through a number of other tools?
It's incredibly frustrating to press the "b" key expecting the brush, but you sit there painting away and Affinity has toggled through another tool that's not often used. It's very frustrating user experience. 
The last one that's extremely frustrating and the reason I went back to Photoshop is why do the tools not remember the settings? The defaults for the clone tool is set to Current Layer but every single time I ahve to select "Current Layer and Below" as well as a couple of other settings. It got to the point, where all the tools have to be changed every session that I'd rather go back to Photoshop because it's less of an issue. 
Sorry to be frank and savage in this post, but I really do hope the developers consider this for day to day use. I understand the B shortcut can be changed, but PLEASE consider saving the tools so they are customised for the user every session - it's such a dealbreaker. I don't want to have to set them up every single time! 

I can confirm that sometimes when using sliders the whole UI becomes unresponsive (to the point that standard window decorations start to show). It usually happens not long after launch and gets better over time.

Hi, I’ve been looking for a way to add batches of LUTs presets, but right now the only thing that I can do is to add one LUT preset per time. That’s unpractical for people (like me) who have tons of LUT Files. Please, it would be a graceful thing if you add a way to import in batches LUTs Presets.
To have faster process of LUTs import, the LUT Preset can have the same name as the LUT .3dl or .cube file
P.S: Also it seems that even on Mac/PC there’s no way to import batches of LUT presets.

Still remains an issue under version .188, so I bring up the topic in the forum list again by replying. Not to bother you but to ensure it's not forgotten.....

Any chance for this? I'd really prefer to do all of my "developing" in well, the Develop persona

I have similar observations. I support your request.

Thanks @dvdende, what we will do is incorporate your modifications into our copy of LensFun, and then offer your modifications directly to the developers of LensFun if they require it. This will allow us to more rapidly integrate changes from customers, rather than relying on 'official' releases.

Thanks! A lot of people ask if she is Russian Blue, but we think she's just an imposter. She's a shelter rescue and her  sister was full black like a Bombay.

I hope I don't come off disparaging or too critical. I'm hugely fond of Affinity, but it just doesn't work with my RAWs well yet. I hope you can get things worked out, not only for my sensor, but for all RAWs.
thanks for your work!
 

Perhaps you missed that this is an extant issue with the RAW engine that predates the beta and that I am keeping a consolidated log of changes in processing behavior in this single thread while referencing it in the appropriate Beta forum.
I hope it isn't split as the ability to easily compare rendering across the various engines and versions will become more difficult.
 

Hi @Saijin_Naib
Thanks for reporting this. I have logged it with our developers. 
Gabe. 

Went from this in v1.6 stable:

To this in v.17 betas (188):

 
An obvious improvement, and now this means I can likely migrate my wife off of Adobe to Affinity. 
The XC15-45mmF3.5-5.6 OIS PZ doesn't have a lens profile in Affinity, but that isn't on you as there isn't even one in the LensFun development library yet.
 
Thanks!

2018-09-30 01.22.55 [X-S1].7z
I know this file is a particularly difficult sample, but I've been watching your journey to improve such files since the 1.5 release and beyond, and I'd like to see the RAW processing engine handle things like this better before 1.7x launch, if possible.
I've collected a number of comparison images across other engines in this thread below:
 
Summary:
Affinity Photo does worse than most every other RAW processing engine I've tested, though I've seen improvements from v1.6 stable to v1.7 beta, though they're not drastic. However, the proper application of the Lens Profile is most welcome and appreciated.

The long awaited update !!!
How did you improved the X-Trans support ? I don't see any difference when opening a RAF file on 1.6 ou 1.7 Beta... As a Fuji Owner, I'm really interested in this part....
 

For me a Media-Persona just for show and organize all relevant files would be enough. Like Bridge vs LR.
LR should be a separate App, the Media-Persona belongs to AP. For me Serif could improve the price moderat. Or we can buy "personas" which are not included in the standard apps. Eg i would extra buy a designer-persona with vector-brushes and so on. 
However as long as the DAM is not ready, i would like to have an Interim-Media-Solution like describes here 
 

I have performed further tests (using also several other raw files from https://rawsamples.ch/index.php/en/):
If 32-Bit (HDR) is chosen within the assistant nothing happens for me. For 16-Bit there is a change in saturation......   
 
Without:

Assistant 16-Bit

 
Assistant 32-Bit (HDR)

DSC03928.ARW