SteveB523

PeanutsA,
Sorry, but that was a forum email you (and 192 others) are subscribed to this announcement thread. It was a copy paste error on the important 1.8.0 announcement, and I have corrected the wording now. If you do not want to be notified then unsubscribe from that thread. If you do want to continue to receive them, then I will do my best to not make copy/paste errors in future.

Keep in mind this thread was not begun by Serif themselves. It was a consumer that posted the poll and comment thread based upon a number of rumors and a few isolated unofficial statements made by forum moderators. Very few companies pre-announce their future products at least until they are only weeks or months away from delivery. If they have nothing near delivery, then I don't expect to hear anything from them. 
This thread says less about Serif and more about how consumers' minds work. We don't "deserve" better treatment by Serif. They've already gained my trust, and I signal that by spending my $$$ on their imaging products. If and when they release a DAM, I'll be happy to check it out. But for now, there are other capable products that perform this function well enough for my workflow.
Creating a true DAM (which Lightroom itself is NOT) is difficult business. I hope Serif figures out how to define and design one that fits in with the aesthetic and capability of their rest of their tools.

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.
 

The problem I see in most of these posts is the requests are for another limited photo manager/processor a PAM or PAMP. Lightroom is far from the bar a real DAM solution should reach for. A full featured DAM does not hinder its use for photos only. I agree LR is probably the standard for photo manager/raw processors, but it too falls short even in that limited scope. LR does HDR but saves as a DNG, another attempt to lock you in. The standard is openEXR or older and more limited .HDR, some of us care more about that "super raw" than the tone mapped/fused byproduct (which by the way is no longer HDR). A real DAM needs to follow standards, the metadata needs to be written to the correct sections of XMP (Extensible Metadata Platform), yes that means sidecars for files that don't allow embedding the data, like raw files. When standards are followed, any other program that also follows standards can read it and use its functions to sort and search on it. All proprietary metadata should be easily extracted for remapping to the next DAM. Nothing should be locked into that particular DAM. At the very least it should handle graphics files, but that's just a GAM  
Steve said: 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. 
Yes, speed of searches is why you need a database. Following XMP standards would take care of the second part if the XMP was written to standards in the first place at least for EXIF, IPTC, and hierarchical keywords. I agree that it should be a referenced database that leaves all files where you want them in your file system. 
Steve also brought up mapping and location tags. Again I have to bring up IMatch. I create location boundary on the map, then fill in all the location data for the IPTC section of XMP. I also can specify keywords to be written. I have my own location hierarchy in keywords, and some locations may also have keywords written unrelated to the location branch but always wanted for that location. I can use the GPS data if present or drop the photos on the map and even add direction of view. From there all the metadata is written and I'm in full control of all of it. I never use reverse lookup. It is too often wrong and/or not granular enough for my desire.
Don't confuse XMP or other sidecars with transferring your raw conversion. Yes, some processors store the recipe for conversion in the XMP, that can serve transferring the raw in its parametric edited state to the same processor in another location. Yes some raw processors will attempt to translate that recipe to its own "kitchen" People need to understand the fact that each raw processor has its own selection of tools, and even if the tools have the same names they work differently. If they all worked the same, only the subjective attractiveness of the UI/UX would differentiate them. That is not the case, and it is a blessing and a curse. If you want a permanent copy of how that photo looks as edited in the raw processor of the moment, export it to jpg. or better 16 bit tiff. The non-destructive parametric editing we love about raw processors is the reason only that processor can read, write, and properly "cook" the recipe. If you want to use a different processor, start over. Look at it as an opportunity to do better. This is also argument one for separation of DAM and processing. 
Hierarchical keywords of course. Those that don't need them, don't use them, but without them a DAM it isn't. It should support import and export of controlled vocabularies. These can be created in app,  found for free online, or paid curated lists. Those need to be easily editable. There should be controls for grouping keywords (keywords that are only used for organizing the list such as Who, What, Where, Why, etc.) LR has this. There should also be controls for the mapping between flat keywords and hierarchical keywords, LR doesn't. It should be quick and painless to fix the files where this mapping fails because it will. One cool feature in IMatch that I've come to depend on is color coding keywords. I color code each first level branch of keywords. All keywords under it then have that color. I can see at a glance of the thumbnail if I'm missing branches of keywords. Drilling down hierarchies can be time consuming, so you should be able to start typing and have matching keywords show in a list to speed up the assignment of keywords. Synonym support can help the organization and speed of assignment. Animals are a great example. You probably want the taxonomy, then you often have multiple common names (Puma, Panther, Catamount, Mountain Lion...) Sure you could build all of that into the hierarchy, but then you'd need to remember which did you use for the leaf. Better to use synonyms so that entering one common name applies all and the hierarchy of classification. The lack of synonyms in C1 is what drove me to separate DAM from processing when I dumped LR.
Version and buddy file (sidecars like xmp, processor files, even supporting documents) control is vital. This way you can control how metadata is copied to child files and moving the parent also moves the children and and buddy files.  
Labels are so useful, most programs cripple them. Lightroom gives you sets of labels, you can only see, search, and filter one set at a time. You can change the label text, but not the color. There are only 5 colors plus the white custom label. Capture One has seven colors, cool two more, but you can't change the text or color and there are no sets. IMatch labels allow editing of the color and text. If there is a limit to the number, I haven't found it yet and I have 19. I have labels that match C1, others that I use for stages of workflow outside of C1 or non photo files, and others that match my main set from LR. I can see all of these labels in the IMatch viewer and thumbnail windows. I can quickly click on one in the collections list and instantly filter my view and I can use them in complex filters that combine other metadata. The point is in a real DAM I can make it work with the limitations of LR, C1, On1.... both to read the labels they can write or write labels to XMP that they'll read and filter on.
I think Affinity can come up with a number of ways to make the raw conversion more like dedicated converters. Maybe something like a raw adjustment base layer that brings up the develop persona when selected with the settings always adjustable. They could facilitate copying raw settings in a number of ways without creating a PAM/PAMP/GAM or best of all DAM. If they do create a manager I hope it isn't as limited as the majority of requests on here are asking for. At the very least it would have to support all files types the current suite can edit. It must follow XMP standards so that if it didn't write metadata with the control and flexibility of IMatch it could sort and filter what I create in IMatch without mucking it up. I still stand by my post back on page 3, I'd rather they concentrate their resources on Photo, Designer, and Publisher. All amazing version 1 products. I look forward to paying for version 2.

Well on the positive side:
It works for RAW, which it didn’t, the extension develop works for jpeg. That’s an improvement also.
It’s still a beta release for which Affinity indicates they are still working on a solution because it hasn’t been fixed in this beta.
so I keep my hopes up.

First thing I tested was '- Improved selection refinement performance & quality.'
and it really works well.

I agree, Develop is not working for RAW, which presumably is its main purpose

If you have not already found it the latest Photo beta can be found here: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/104964-affinity-photo-customer-beta-180163/

Really hate to get into this "fight", but I just tried doing a Photos pic: duplicated it, Edit, Edit In Affinity Photo. Made changes (did a colour halftone), saved in APh, then closed the pic in APh. The changes were saved back to Photos, did a Done there and the changes were reflected in the pic in Photos. 
I also tried the APh extension Haze Removal from within Photos and it worked and saved just fine. I will readily concede that this performance might not be universal for everyone's configuration, but for my fairly "normal" Mac, works fine here.
I do have to say that as a pro photographer, I don't use Photos as a DAM since I need all my master files readily available in client folders/directories, not in a "library" file. (Been a pro for decades and have used numerous apps for DAM, but today do not like the current options. Liked Aperture a bit since I could store originals/masters in their original locations and not within a "library" file.) But I would likely welcome an Affinity DAM since I am generally pleased with what they are doing with the other apps. 
Just my 2-pence.

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!
 

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?

How long have you worked for them?

How long have you worked for them?

Please, let us be greatful for the work Serif Dev team are doing. Yes, all of our desired features may not be in at the moment but with time, I am sure they will get there.  Photoshop has 20+ years of lead and it's still buggy and laggy.

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!

Regarding Apple's Photos, my personal opinion is that while there is a lot of like about it, there are still many ways in which it's inferior to iPhoto and there are some basic features it still doesn't have that iPhoto had for years. I finally had to give up iPhoto a little over a year ago and still miss it. For instance, I have to use a third-party script to auto name and number photos, something iPhoto did from day one. Apple is not interested it adding that back in, and I've reported on it many times.
I see very little new features added from year to year. iPhoto seemed to get a lot more attention back when it was not bundled with the OS. It seems like every year they change or add more ways to view/browse photos while ignoring other areas that need improving. I still think the interface is lacking and less streamlined than iPhoto. I hate the "back" button.
P.S. I don't use the editing extension but can understand the frustration. However I agree that some people keep stomping their feet and throwing digital hissy fits claiming Serif is not listening blah blah blah when clearly they are, and have stated the fix will arrive in version 1.8. Just be patient. Or find something else.

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!