jumbodufus

Thanks to you for giving this some consideration. Net 4.7.2 was the download it did automatically and it said it was successful so i don't think it has much to do with that. On whole I am quite happy to be using earlier vrs of the program. i don't really know what is different in the latest vrs.

This vrs was from Serif.Obtained @https://store.serif.com/en-gb/update/windows/photo/1/ . I must have upgraded from vrs 1.7.0. When Exe/installing the latest vrs of the program it wanted to download some vrs of Microsoft Netframe which it did successfully. After I wrote this topic I decided, this morning, to download vrs 1.7.1 which I installed after removing vrs 1.7.3 to see how that worked. I can report that vrs 1.7.1 works just fine without the time delays that I experienced with latest vrs so I am pretty certain it is not my computer. Vrs 1.7.1 works as expected and is comparable to what i previously experienced when using vrs 1.7.0

I just downloaded and installed latest vrs of Affinity Photo. To me it seems like a Beta vrs because it is so slow on Windows Platform. Everything I do on it seems to take ages-Every task is laborious even just zooming in and out. Nothing feels intuitive anymore. Even Export calculations are taking forever. This has seriously reduced workflow times and overall enjoyment of the program. I will be going back to previous versions if I cannot get it sorted. seems a step backwards and that why I am suggesting it feels more like a Beta vrs. It feels on the border of crashing all the time!

On the whole I would have to say I am pleased with Affinity Photo although feature wise it is not much different from Serif Photo Plus 6. The depth of editing is immense and a match for Photoshop which I have also used. I would use it if i needed to use deep editing capabilities such as cut outs and layer adjustments. However in my opinion where Affinity Photo falls short and where improvements need to be made to match either Photoshop or Lightroom is in the image sharpening department. In my opinion Affinity is quite disappointing in this respect because it lacks sensitivity. Maybe I would use it to sharpen with a High Pass Filter but the Unsharp Masking is disappointing and less sensitive than even that of Lightroom. i have found that even my Canon Software can produce considerably sharper images that are far sharper and less blacked up. Fine detail is preserved with both Unsharp Masking and basic sharpeners whereas I tend to find that with Affinity I am loosing colour sensitivity ( tends to blacken things up) and fine detail. I have tried it with a number of portrait images and in my opinion Affinity falls short in this area against both Lightroom and Canon ( camera supplied editing software). this means that I am having to swap about programmes to do the sharpening which is slightly annoying that i am unable to complete all my editing successfully in Affinity. In Affinity Photo there is a huge choice of outputs and jpg converters but in Lightroom no choice is given nor in Canon but the results are just as good if not better. I think that these are basic requirements and that Affinity should have been able to get in right but unfortunately in my opinion it has not. To be a truly serious contender to Adobe it needs to get these small but important basics right and when it does it will certainly rival Adobe PS and Lightroom but until then I am afraid I will still need to go to other programmes to complete these essential steps. I have provided examples. The file names provide clues as to the editing paths used. The one developed in Lightroom was taken into Affinity Photo simply to deal tidy up the stray hairs and get rid of them. That was its only Layer edit in Affinity. I gave the sharpeners in Affinity the best try but to my opinion the results from Lightroom and Canon are both superior & sharper, less blocky and seem to be much smoother generally. I have tried to get the same with Affinity Photo but it has eluded me. In Affinity I used a Live Filter Layer with both Unsharp Mask and High Pass.