dennisqdw

Woops, sorry you are of course correct. Typing a little too fast there

Ok, an update. Although it went against my experience and judgment I thought what the hell, I'll just try to install the "exe" version and see what happens - it actually worked and photo now opens in seconds. But this is not the same "program" as the *.msix installed version (see below). And btw for anyone reading this thread about the fonts, the loading window does say "initializing" first (where it took so long) and then "loading fonts" which also with this version only took a second. So the font issue is not related to the initializing issue. As some of you know the *.msix installer version puts the program files in an entirely location than the *.exe version. Although I imagine there still may be some stray registry lines for the former, I think I'll just delete the directory holding that version entirely. Ok now to do this for designer and publisher. I have sent an email to the serif folks about this, don't know if I'll get a response or not. --ds

Walt, thanx for the directions, but for many, including myself, that doesn't work. It's not listed in Apps. I've tried a force uninstall on the exe file using Revo but although it looked like it was uninstalling something, it appears not to be Photo 😞

Re the fonts, I have a little over 1000. I have a very powerful computer with a solid state drive and lots of ram, so I can't imagine this is the issue.

So apparently uninstalling affinity (the msix) version is not so easy. There is no uninstall option anywhere, nor an uninstall.exe file. I did find one solution from an internet search that says I have to do it from the affinity website itself, but I can't seem to find where that is. After someone tells me how to uninstall this I'm going to install the exe version and see if that solves any of my problems. thanx --ds

CTRL didn't help either. I'll do an uninstall and reinstall and see what happens. But fwiw I have a lot of fonts, but not in the Affinity fonts folder that settings is referenced to. Can that be a problem, and if so how do I get around it? thanx --ds

Found the directory, nothing in there. Some files in autosave that I deleted just in case. I'll try ctrl next. thanx --ds

I've had this problem too for some time. Where is the backups preferences folder? I've found another thread about resetting with the ctrl key, which I'll try soon. And report back. But still wondering about that folder. thanx.

For what it's worth I have the same problem - Windows 10, and it seems to have gotten worse with each subsequent release.

Thanx for the info on the coverage map. That will be a big help for me going forward. Never even thought it was an option.

I'd like to add my voice too. Editing alpha channels has literally been a part of every image editing application going back to the early 1990s. It's not just for gaming. This oversight is really baffling. I'm not a programmer, but I cannot believe adding this functionality would be difficult.

I'm using the default profiles that come with vray and Affinity. In the case of Affinity it's sRGB IEC61966-2.1 (Linear). But, indeed, if you're last comment is the case, then that's just the way it is, and I'll have to deal with it. I wasn't sure whether or not each app's profiles are supposed to match or not. I wanted to make certain that I'm not making a mistake at my end. Eventually, I'm converting to Adobe 98 for print. thanx for the response.

Yes, that makes sense about Windows Photo Viewer. I included it's window because in many ways it's closer to Vray, than Affinity. The monitor is calibrated to sRGB, and Vray definitely color manages to sRGB when you select that option. As I'm rendering in linear space the image is in "fact" dark, until one selects sRGB correction. And of course Affinity adds that correction by default. But now that you've brought up the monitor, it makes me wonder if the two applications interact with the monitor's space somewhat differently. The monitor fwiw is an HP z32x and calibrated with the HP Dreamcolor Solution app. Again, this is all guesswork on my part. Thanx for the response.

Thanx for responding. I have uploaded the file. I'm growing more certain of my "theory" that each software does a somewhat different conversion to display in sRGB space, but I'd love to hear from the experts 😀. thanx --ds

Ok, I've found out a little more info from this very helpful forum post: So when I use the 32 bit preview as mentioned here, the image matches the vray buffer perfectly. So I need to correct my comment above ("When I compare the RGB values of a single pixel, AF's values are indeed lower than those in the vray buffer.") That pixel disparity comes from the fact that the RGB info values are accurate to the uncorrected gamma, but the image is displayed with gamma correction in order to look "correct". My theory at this point, which is only a guess, is that AP's display gamma correction must be somewhat different than that of vray (however that sort of complicated math is done). Assuming I'm correct, I'm still in the same boat -the image in AP looks a little desaturated, and less "sharp", although I'm guessing that appearance of sharpness is caused by perhaps less contrast? I've attached a screen grab showing the "same" picture, from left to right, in the vray window, Windows Photo Viewer, and AP. And actually, as you can see they each look a little different from the others (and indeed selecting the same single pixel, will reveal that this is not just an illusion). But to my eyes, the AP image is the most desaturated looking. The differences aren't huge, but they are noticeable. example of color differences.tif

Hi, I'm trying to make the complete transition from photoshop to affinity, and I seem to be having a peculiar problem. When I render an exr file using 3ds Max and Vray (either 16 or 32 bit), and open it in AF it looks somewhat darker and somewhat desaturated. It is not the same big difference as from the typical gamma shift from 1 to 2.2. I am working in sRGB colorspace in AF, and viewing it as sRGB in the vray buffer (and working in vray with linear workflow rendering). And for what it's worth I've also saved the image as an 8 bit tif just as a test, and everything I'm describing here is the same for that image too. When I compare the RGB values of a single pixel, AF's values are indeed lower than those in the vray buffer. But here's where it really gets weird. If I save the file from AF as a tif, or jpeg (with sRGB profile), and open it in the vray buffer, or even windows image viewer, they all match vray, and none of them match AF. I feel like there must be a preference setting somewhere that I've missed. Under the color tab, as mentioned, both RGB color profiles are set to sRGB. I've tried changing Rendering Intent to each of the 4 choices with no visible difference, but it is currently on Relative Colorimetric. Black point compensation is checked on. I don't know if "Grayscale Color Profile" can be changed from D50 to anything else, as there are no other options, or even if that matters. BTW I am using a color calibrated monitor that is set to sRGB color space, and D65, luminance 120. Obviously, I can't color correct in AF if I don't see the image correctly. Does anyone have any ideas what's going on? It's driving me nuts. thanx to anyone who knows what's going on. --ds

Hi all. I've written on this topic before, on one of the threads here. Although I can't say how well this will work for any of you, I've found a free software, that does do select fill, stroke etc by same color, and at least for my simple purposes the software will work for me. It's called Inkscape, and I'm sure you can do a search and find it. Maybe a little competitive pressure will get Affinity to move on this.

Hi all. I've written on this topic before, on one of the threads here. Although I can't say how well this will work for any of you, I've found a free software, that does do select fill, stroke etc by same color, and at least for my simple purposes the software will work for me. It's called Inkscape, and I'm sure you can do a search and find it. Maybe a little competitive pressure will get Affinity to move on this.

Going back to the original question, I'd like to change the default from "Drag+Shift to constrain" to "Drag+Shift to add". Am I correct that this is not possible? Independently from that it appears that my Drag+RightMouse doesn't actually work, but I wouldn't be surprised if that problem is only at my end.

That's too bad about the command. Maybe someday it'll turn up, as I really really hate to have to use Adobe products, and except for some confusing things about Affinity Photo, I'm pretty confident that I'll be able to use that one. Anyway I bought it as a direct download so I'll go return it right now. Thanx to both of you for the quick responses.

I'm not a power user of illustrator by any means. I have to "process" ai files that have already been created by others for use in other software. In illustrator there are a number of "select" options such as "select same fill color", "select same stroke" etc. These are critically important for what I do. Do commands like this exist in Designer? I haven't been able to find them. If they don't then unfortunately as much as I'm trying not to use Adobe products I'll have to "return" Designer if that's even possible, and go back to illustrator.

I think I got a reply from someone that you folks were going to work on this. Any progress yet? it's a major sticking point for me. thanx --ds

Sorry for the delay at my end, been busy with work. I'm not sure why there's no support for targa, it's quite popular in my world at least. But I can work around it. I'm including 3 files referenced above, and the names of the files should explain things. But all you really need is the max rendered exr file and you can recreate the problems. The most peculiar thing is that simply resaving (exporting) the exr file loses the alpha channel, even when reopened in Affinity. I don't know anything about software writing, but this definitely seems odd to me. Thanx for looking into this and the other issues you mention above. I mainly want to use your app for exr files, since the last version of photoshop that one could buy doesn't handle them well. I also use photoline which does, but I don't like the interface, so I'm hoping to use yours once this problem gets resolved. exr opened in affinity and saved as psd looks wrong when opened in max.psd simply opened in affinity and reexported alpha not correct.exr Original rendered from max alpha correct.exr

Any responses from anyone?

Thanx for the quick response. As you no doubt know there are already several threads in this forum regarding this problem. But let me outline several quick examples. 1. create a teapot in 3ds Max, render and save as numerous file formats (details will follow). 2. if saved as an exr file, and opened in affinity, and then exported again as an exr, the alpha channel then appears completely white in Max and completely black in photoshop. So it's been lost, just from the simple process of opening the file and then resaving it. 3. if saved as a tga file the alpha channel isn't even there in Affinity (and it also imposes a color space, not sure why) 4. if saved as a tif file and opened in affinity the background is cut out to "clear" matching the alpha channel, which although not exactly my first choice, is at least consistent with some applications (although not Photoshop -if the original file is opened in Photoshop, the background is black with a separate alpha channel.) And if the file loaded in Affinity is resaved as a tif and opened in Photoshop the background is clear also, so at least they match. And it reads correctly back in Max. 5. If the tif file is exported from Affinity as a psd file, then it opens as anticipated in photoshop (no alpha channel by name but there is transparency of the background), but if opened in Max, there is no alpha channel nor transparency, the teapot is now on a white background instead of black. I could probably go on endlessly with different combinations and inconsistencies, but you get the idea. In all of these cases, there are workarounds which involve extra steps, but I'm not really sure why I have to do these extra steps in the first place. Any thoughts on this?