Ocean Quigley

As long as you make sure that your offset is a whole number, then it will do it without blurring. So if you're offsetting a 1024 texture, use like 50%, or 25%, or any value that results in not splitting a pixel.

Got it, thanks! That makes sense.

Here's the original sharp texture, and after repeated applications of affine (offsetting in wrap mode)

Here's the easiest repro steps: 1. Make a new, fairly small pixel layer (say 256 square) 2. Paint a few very high-contrast (hard edged) black blotches on it 3. Apply affine say half a dozen times 4. Note that your edges are now blurry I'm guessing that it would be harder to notice the softening/blurring on a photographic texture, but it should be more obvious with a graphical one. Thanks! Ocean

Hi there, I'm using the Affine filter to make seamless, tiling textures - but I'm noticing that repeated application of the filter will slowly blur the image, until it's too blurry to use. I wish that it did a simple integer offset like Photoshops, and didn't degrade the image quality with each application. Thanks, Ocean

Hello, I'm a game artist, and the main thing preventing me from switching from Photoshop to Affinity is that we use channels (R, G, B, A) differently than you probably expect. We basically need direct access to every channel (including alpha) as an individual editable, grey-scale image. Each channel holds distinct texture data that we feed to shaders. For example, I often need to tweak the levels on just the alpha channel, or invert just the R channel. This is doable in Affinity, but it is very cumbersome. In particular, the way that Alpha is always displayed as layer opacity makes it almost impossible to treat the alpha channel independently from R, G & B. Alpha often holds data that has nothing to do with layer transparency. To enable game artists to use Affinity, we need access to all of the channels and the ability individual manipulate them. Thanks! Ocean