Jump to content

SteveB523

Members
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SteveB523

  1. I agree with John; here’s my more wordy version: I don’t have Lightroom, but I’ve seen LR’s radial filter used in a Simon Foster class on the Nik Collection on Udemy. The radial filter appeared to be an elliptical shape on top of a layer that one could use to control aspects of the layer such as exposure, etc. In Affinity, one could simply create an ellipse of the desired size with no stroke and a white-black gradient fill. Then rasterize the ellipse into a mask, and apply yer mask to any adjustment layer or group of layers that you desire. if you want to use the ellipse to affect color, then no need to convert it to a mask - just use a fill of the desired gradient and adjust the blend mode and opacity as desired. Olivio Sariikas recently released a YouTube video titled “Free Glorious Light Pack” that demonstrates that technique.
  2. Wow, that's some sense of entitlement there. But you're probably right - they had a fix, but then somebody said "wait, hold up - Ellj. reported that, we don't want to fix things for him!"! Makes perfect sense to me.
  3. I’ve given this subject some thought, and I’m in the DAM-only (option 2) camp. These are my basic requirements for a DAM: It should support hierarchical user-defined keyword tags. I do NOT require that the software automatically recognizes people. I would rather define my own people tags In my own hierarchy - it can be family based or place/experience based (I.e. “friends from college”, etc.) I find it easier to just define my own people tags and tag people myself, instead of filling in just the ones that the program doesn’t recognize or gets wrong. It would be cool if a person could be a member of multiple groups, but that’s not a deal breaker. I also do NOT require that location tags be tied to a map. Right now I am using Adobe’s Photoshop Elements Organizer that comes with Photoshop Elements. Right now I am using Adobe’s Photoshop Elements Organizer that comes with Photoshop Elements. At one point, Adobe switched from Google maps that created a Country/state/town/location tag system to a different mapping system. The new system started over and created its own Country/state/town/location tag system. Thereafter, there were two separate tags for locations such as USA/New York/New York/Madison Square Garden. I would just as soon create my own Country/state/town/location tag hierarchy. Keyword tags should be stored with the photo in EXIF data. The use of a database should not be required. However, if there’s just no getting around it for whatever reason (speed of searches, etc.), then perhaps the DAM could recreate it knowing only the root directory where all photos are stored. Of course, this might take awhile. The user should be able to define his own file structure independent of the tag hierarchy . That file structure should be visible to Windows Explorer or the MacOS file viewer. One should be able to move files from within the DAM, and should be able to create, rename, and delete folders. Complex search functions using tags, dates, and other EXIF data should be supported. One should be able to save complex searches. The ability to identify byte for byte identical photos would be nice. It should be fast to display thumbnails arranged by date, file hierarchy, or tag hierarchy, and one should be able to open Affinity or other image editing programs directly from the DAM. I’ve read through all 8 pages of comments on this topic, and one thing I haven’t seen addressed much is the question of what you would be willing to pay for your preferred alternative. It certainly could be that Adobe was forced to go to the subscription model because it just couldn’t charge enough for perpetual licenses to cover the cost of ongoing development and support. So if you want Affinity to make a Lightroom clone, are you willing to pay what it would cost? Plus, many of the other products mentioned here are free. They’re developed by a core team of highly talented highly motivated and highly committed people - but at some point, it seems to me that everybody has to make money somehow. In any event, if one of the free products meets your needs, how much are you willing to pay Affinity to provide the same product? As for myself, I already feel for the difficult situation Affinity is already in, trying to maintain and develop three major software platforms on three ever-changing operation systems (iOS, MacOS, and Windows) to support ever-changing raw formats on who knows how many cameras. I can’t imagine they’re going to add a fourth product on the spur of the moment, especially if the market leader is subscription based for $$$, and if it has competitors that offer similar functionality for $0. The second option seems like the only practical possibility in the near them - that is, the next couple of years. Allow me one other observation. There are some on these forums who seem upset that Affinity is not yet developed to the point that you feel you can ditch your CC subscription. You’re talking about a piece of software with a one time price of $50, vs hundreds of dollars a year. I think the fact that you’re upset at Serif is absurd. Thanks for the opportunity to consider this...
  4. SO stranger and stranger.... 1. Apple DNG files work fine. 2. The DNG files I'm having trouble with came from a class on the NIK Collection on Udemy. I don't know what kind of camera created them. But if you open a directory with any of those files in it, the Windows 10 file Explorer crashes. a. If you try to restart the file explorer, it's still pointing at the same directory, so it crashes again. b. I can start the file explorer with a command line command "explorer.exe /". The "/" moves the directory up a level, so the file explorer will remain up (unless you point it back at a directory that contains a "bad" DNG file. c. However, it I try to run explorer from the normal icon after step (b) above, it still crashes. d. If I try to open one of the DNG files with Affinity (production version 1.7.3), the Open dialog box will show the directory with the files, but if I select one of the DNG files, Affinity crashes. e. If I try to open one of the DNG files with Photoshop Elements 2019, the Open dialog box will show the directory with the files, but if I select one of the DNG files, Photoshop Elements crashes. f. To fix the problem with the file explorer, I had to resort to DOS commands to move the DNG files to a different directory (Boy, that was a memory exercise). g. I tried the suggestion above to convert the files using the Adobe DNG file converter (version 12.1). The converter said it completed all files, but all error symptoms remained. Since my iPhone is the only camera that makes DNG files that I will commonly deal with, I'm just going to delete the DNG files from my Windows 10 machine and deal with them on my Mac, where they work correctly. However, there is clearly a problem with Windows 10 and some DNG files.
  5. Good suggestion - since you suggested that it is associated with viewing thumbnails, I turned off the preview panel in Explorer. Voila! no more crashing. Affinity opens the DNG files without any problems, so I may not need to use the converter.
  6. This isn’t strictly an Affinity question, but I’ve recently started importing DNG files from my IPhone and developing them in Affinity on my Windows 10 machine. Affinity opens the files fine, but if I use Windows Explorer to look at a directory that contains DNG files, Windows Explorer crashes. Moreover, it tries to restart, but since it tries to open the same directory, it crashes again and again and again. I accidentally found a way to get it to stop (use the command line command “explorer.exe /?” - the /? Has the effect of moving Explorer up one level, and that level doesn’t contain any DNG files, so Explorer stays up). I’ve seen evidence on Google that this problem has been around for several years, but no suggestions of how to fix it. anybody know a fix?
  7. I also agree; getting the same error message. What is supposed to happen? Should the RAW file get replaced with a new Raw file? Or should it replace the Raw file with a JPEG with the changes made? I'm confused now.
  8. Quick question: Should I leave the beta version in my Download folder or move it to the Applications folder? It seems to run from the download folder just fine.
  9. Try Document/Flatten after using the “Edit in Affinity Photo” extension before saving; that works for me.
  10. Cecil - since the Beta installs along side the production version, I assumed you could keep both sets of extensions, and I have, at least so far. I've been able to switch back and forth, although admittedly, I've only done it a few times.
  11. Andy - try Document/Flatten before you a save and Quit in the Extension approach (“the Affinity Develop option). If I don’t do that, it gives me the error message; if I flatten it first, it works.
  12. There's a separate topic for the issue with Apple Photos. See https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/91443-affinity-photo-has-stopped-saving-directly-back-into-mac-os-photos/ That said, my testing of the 1.8 beeta shows that both the EDIT WITH and EXTENSIONS are fixed in the beta with one caveat and one exception. The caveat is that you must flatten your file before you save and quit (Document/Flatten). The exception is that, once you have a photo loaded, you can't open another from Apple Photos if, for example, you want to place it on the first. I'm pretty sure that's a bug, because you can open a second photo from, for example, an iCloud source. In any event, that's progress, and I'm happy.
  13. On my Mac running Catalina, it is still possible to save to Apple Photos directly on the File/Share menu item - the same way you would send it to yourself with iMessage.
  14. After I installed the Beta, both sets of extensions showed up when I clicked on the ... button in Photos. The Beta extensions weren’t identified as such, but they were the second set, which makes sense since I installed the Beta after the production version. So it is possible to keep both sets of extensions, which might come in handy if there are other problems in the beta. Did you try the place command once you had a picture open, and did it work?
  15. You know, reading is a great skill to have! Also, the normal beta considerations apply.
  16. I understand better now, I think. I was partially mislead by the title of the topic ("Affinity Photo has stopped saving directly back into Mac OS Photos!!"), which made it look like Affinity Photo on the Mac couldn't save edited photos to Apple Photos at all, which, of course isn't true at all - the Share menu worked fine. Edit With I tested the Edit With function with the new Beta version. I closed the 1.7.3 version of Affinity, selected a thumbnail in Apple Photos, and clicked "Edit With" and then Affinity Photo Beta. On the first try, the beta never opened, and the crash window popped up. I got rid of that and tried again. This time, the Beta started fine and opened the photo I selected. I then tried to use File/Place to open a second picture from Media/Photos. The open dialog box opened, and initially it listed both Photos and PhotoBooth at the top and started grinding away on finding the photos - but then it finished, the Photos item at the top disappeared, leaving only PhotoBooth, and no pictures ever showed up - I waited at least 30 seconds, way longer than it usually takes. I cancelled the open dialog box and tried File/Place again - and exactly the same thing happened. No pictures ever showed up. This appears to be a bug in the Beta. Giving up on the Place command, I just applied an obnoxious HSL adjustment and tried File/Save. Affinity flattened the file and appeared to replace the original in Apple Photos. However, it was possible to revert back to the original in Apple Photos. Extension a. Simple HSL adjustment without flattening I then tried the extension with Affinity Photo, and got the error message as expected. I tried the extension with the Beta. The Place command fromMedia/Photos didn't work here, either. I applied an HSL adjustment, clicked File/Save (didn't get a message about flattening), and then Quit the Beta. The modified photo showed up in Apple Photos, which was still in the Affinity Edit mode. At the bottom of the Apple Photos screen, it said "Editing Complete - press Save to Keep these changes". When I clicked "Save Changes", I got an Error Dialog Box that said "Unable to edit with "Edit in Affinity Photo". An unexpected error has occurred". (see image attached). When I clicked "done", I was back in Apple Photos with an unmodified photo. b. new image placed plus HSL adjustment But here's where it gets weird. I tried the extension for a second time. But this time, I tried the File/Place command with an image from iCloud, and that worked fine. That tells me that not being able to Place photos from Apple Photos really is a bug. I also applied an HSL adjustment, clicked File/Save (no flattening message in Affinity), and Clicked Quit. This time, because I also placed a new picture in the original, there was a different message at the bottom of the Apple Photos screen: "Editing Complete (16 MB change limit exceeded - Document will be flattened) - press Save to Keep these changes". When I clicked "Save Changes"; the changed document appeared in Edit mode screen. When I clicked "Done"; the photo with my changes appeared in photos as expected. It could be that the image has to be flattened before saving, so I repeated the first extension experiment: c. Simple HSL adjustment but flattened before saving Select the same photo as in (a) above in Apple Photos by double clicking it Click Edit. Click the "..." button. Click "edit with Affinity Photo" (the beta version) Applied HSL adjustment (no Place command) Clicked Document/Flatten to reduce file to one layer. Clicked Save, then Quit the Beta. Even though I already flattened the file, I got the "Editing Complete (16 MB change limit exceeded - Document will be flattened) - press Save to Keep these changes" message. When I clicked "Save Changes"; the changed document appeared in Edit mode screen. When I clicked "Done"; the photo with my changes appeared in photos as expected. So, in summary: Edit With appears to work in the new Beta. the Edit Extension Appears to work in the new Beta IF you flatten the image first The File/Place command from Apple Photos does not work with either method.
  17. I installed the Beta on my Mac and tested the integration with Photos. Here's what I found: PS: I have a MacBook Air: Model Name: MacBook Air Model Identifier: MacBookAir6,2 Processor Name: Dual-Core Intel Core i5  Processor Speed: 1.4 GHz Number of Processors: 1 Total Number of Cores: 2 L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB L3 Cache: 3 MB I was, in fact, able to open files from Apple Photos. I'm no Mac expert, but it seems kind of strange to me where Photos shows up: In the File/Open dialog box, it's at the Bottom, under the heading Media. Photos is the only item in that category. When one clicks on Photos, it opens another dialog box with 2 items at the top: Photos and PhotoBooth. It takes awhile to populate the Photos portion (that may be because I have thousands of photos stored), but it seems to work. Once it is populated, it shows all photos under the Photos header, plus the usual groups and albums underneath. I also have a copy of Pixelmator; the behavior of the open dialog box in both is exactly the same. In the File/Open dialog box, Photos is at the Bottom, under the heading Media. Photos is the only item in that category. Both programs are a little flaky in that sometimes the Photos portion fails to populate. Maybe I'm just impatient, but if you close the open dialog and File/Open again, it then usually works. Again, both programs work in exactly the same way. I was able to open multiple photos, combine them, adjust them, save the result to iCloud - and then export the result to photos. Unlike the iPad version, there isn't a Share button on the export screen - rather, there is a new Share category at the bottom of the File menu. File/Share has 5 options: Mail, Airdrop, Messages, Add to Photos, and Set Background Image. Again, it seems odd to open images from Photos under File/Media/Photos but save them back to Photos under File/Share/Add to Photos. Again, however, Pixelmator implements it pretty much the same way. I tried Add to Photos and Message - and got error messages both times (see attached). However, after clicking OK, Both worked as expected. So, still some rough edges, as one would expect from a beta, but clearly on the right track. Thanks, guys!
  18. I installed the Beta on my Mac and tested the integration with Photos. Here's what I found: PS: I have a MacBook Air: Model Name: MacBook Air Model Identifier: MacBookAir6,2 Processor Name: Dual-Core Intel Core i5 Processor Speed: 1.4 GHz Number of Processors: 1 Total Number of Cores: 2 L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB L3 Cache: 3 MB I was, in fact, able to open files from Apple Photos. I'm no Mac expert, but it seems kind of strange to me where Photos shows up: In the File/Open dialog box, it's at the Bottom, under the heading Media. Photos is the only item in that category. When one clicks on Photos, it opens another dialog box with 2 items at the top: Photos and PhotoBooth. It takes awhile to populate the Photos portion (that may be because I have thousands of photos stored), but it seems to work. Once it is populated, it shows all photos under the Photos header, plus the usual groups and albums underneath. I also have a copy of Pixelmator; the behavior of the open dialog box in both is exactly the same. In the File/Open dialog box, Photos is at the Bottom, under the heading Media. Photos is the only item in that category. Both programs are a little flaky in that sometimes the Photos portion fails to populate. Maybe I'm just impatient, but if you close the open dialog and File/Open again, it then usually works. Again, both programs work in exactly the same way. I was able to open multiple photos, combine them, adjust them, save the result to iCloud - and then export the result to photos. Unlike the iPad version, there isn't a Share button on the export screen - rather, there is a new Share category at the bottom of the File menu. File/Share has 5 options: Mail, Airdrop, Messages, Add to Photos, and Set Background Image. Again, it seems odd to open images from Photos under File/Media/Photos but save them back to Photos under File/Share/Add to Photos. Again, however, Pixelmator implements it pretty much the same way. I tried Add to Photos and Message - and got error messages both times (see attached). However, after clicking OK, Both worked as expected. So, still some rough edges, as one would expect from a beta, but clearly on the right track. Thanks, guys!
  19. Hey Henry - maybe you should give KipV’s suggestion a try.I’ll bet they would benefit from your constructive criticism, too.
  20. Cecil mentioned something that bears a little more attention: the iPad version of Affinity integrates perfectly well with Apple Photos. One can open images from Photos into Affinity and can export jpgs and png files directly back into Photos from the export page. Files in Affinity format can be saved easily to iCloud, as can exported files in any format. For that matter, iCloud on my PC permits me to upload and download jpgs and pngs to Apple Photos. The new Files app on the iPad provided by Apple permits one to move files among multiple cloud services, including Google Drive, iCloud, Box, DropBox, and OneDrive. It also connects to my PC and can share files with it over an SMB connection as long as I’m connected to my home wireless router. But you know what Files can’t do? It can’t allow you access to the Apple Photos library. My points are these: Affinity clearly wants all of its software to integrate with Apple Photos; otherwise, they wouldn’t have included that’d feature in the iOS version of,their software and I’m earlier versions of the Mac version. Apple, by contrast, clearly does not intend for the file structure of Apple Photos to be accessible to users. One has to dig pretty deeply to find where in the Library the Photos files are stored on a Mac, and finding an individual photo (or its real file name) is next to impossible. Apple’s approach leaves developers like Affinity completely at the mercy of the APIs they publish, which we’re causing Affinity some issues even before Catalina was released. Catalina’s release caused even more issues, and not just for Serif. For example, Catalina completely broke my virus checker, and it took them weeks to release a version that works under Catalina. Cecil’s assumption that all developers had a solid version of Catalina for a year to test against runs counter to everything I’ve ever heard about Apple releases. Affinity intends to fix this problem in Version 1.8. There is already a beta version of 1.8 for the Windows environment. Obviously, it’s in Serif’s interest to use the same code base between operating systems to the maximum extent possible so that all versions provide the same feature set. The fact that Apple’s own Files application doesn’t integrate with Photos indicates to me that such an integration isn’t easy or trivial, so it doesn’t surprise me that Affinity May take a while to fix it properly. When they do get it fixed and release a non-beta version of 1.8, will it stay fixed? Seems to me that’s as much or more up to Apple as it is Serif. Photos changes significantly with every release of Apple’s operating systems, so its APIs change as well, and those changes may or may not turn out to be easily accommodated in Serif’s products. My original point is that this problem only affects a subset of Affinity Photo users - that is, those who are attempting to use Apple Photos as their primary DAM (which it clearly isn’t, at least yet) and who only use the Mac version and who don’t have access to either a PC or an iOS device. Serif is working on an iOS version of Publisher and is also working on version 1.8 of its products for all platforms, which involves fixing other bugs and adding new features. It seems selfish and unrealistic to expect Serif to drop everything else its developers are working on to fix one issue that a small subset of users is finding at worst inconvenient.. And some seem to be misinterpreting my comment about refunds. It’s not that I think anyone is entitled to a refund because one function of hundreds quits working temporarily while Serif deals with issues cussed by Apple migrating to a new OS (ask Adobe how much fun they’re having with that). My point was that some individuals are acting so unreasonably on this forum that It wouldn’t surprise me if Serif didn’t just pay to get rid of them by permanently revoking their licenses. Come to think of it, other forum members might consider taking up a collection for this very purpose.
  21. Thanks for sharing that, Cecil. It will take me some time to process that info in order to figure out how much it could help me in my mixed PC, Mac, iPad, and iPhone environment. Obviously, Apple is making the Photos app better every year.
  22. I’ve been generally aware of the issue with Apple Photos and Affinity on the Mac for awhile now, but I just today got curious about the status of the fix that’s obviously coming and ran across this thread. i say that the fix is obviously coming because I also have Affinity Photo running on my iPad, and it can easily export jpegs to Apple Photos - so it seems that Serif is aware that that ability is a desirable feature. Mostly, however, I am appalled at the entitled attitude some users are demonstrating in this forum about this issue. More than a few of you have stomped your feet and threatened to abandon Affinity altogether if this issue isn’t given top priority and addressed immediately. You should understand that threats are only effective if they’re actually carried out. After making the same threat theee of four times and you’re still here, everyone knows you’re just blowing smoke. MEB has FAR more patience than I would under these circumstances. Personally, I’d have revoked your license, refunded your $50, and deleted your login to this forum. Moreover, those of you who report that you have decided to use Apple Photos as your DAM - well, I’ll just say you certainly don’t have high expectations for the functionality of your DAM. At a minimum, I would expect a DAM to permit me to define my own folder structure and my own keyword tag hierarchy. I would prefer the keyword tags be written to the individual picture’s metadata (EXIF data), but I might live with an external database. Apple Photos, for all of its pluses, meet none of those requirements. For that matter, one can’t even generally determine either the name that the photo is stored under or where it is stored. So in my mind what a few of you are saying is that you’ve decided to use Apple Photos as something that it’s not really designed to be and you’re upset that Affinity Photos has a temporary issue that’s preventing you from doing what you want to do - and you’re unsatisfied with the speed at which Affinity is addressing the issue -,although what you want to do seems unlikely to be satisfactory in the long run. Nevertheless, sometime in the not too distant future, there’s going to be a new version of Affinity, and Serif has apparently committed to fixing the issue in that version. When will is arrive? When they think it’s ready. Do they no yet when that will be? No. you can either accept that in good humor OR you can find a different product. But please, do everyone else a favor and pick one of those two options. Stop with the constant bellyaching and idle threats. Happy new year, everyone!
×
×
  • 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.