Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.

DeepDesertPhoto

Members
  • Posts

    145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Arizona
  • Interests
    Collect Sci-Fi TV shows and Movies. Hiking and exploring the hidden places of Arizona.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I went to the assistant preferences and it was set to 16 bit. I changed it to 32 bit and that did fix that problem. I forgot about that function since it has been a few years since I needed to open it. Anyway, thanks for the assistance on that color bit depth issue. Now I only need to wait until the timestamp problem is fixed with an update.
  2. I just upgraded to AP2 earlier this week and just started using it today. I am running it on a new 2023 MacBook Pro with Ventura OSX. I am very impressed with the quality of the image processing, but it might have a couple of bugs. The first thing I discovered that might be a bug is the timestamp of my raw photo in the metadata window is 7 hours off the actual data. The date of the shot is correct, but the time of day it was taken is 7 hours off what is displayed. I have uploaded a screenshot with the metadata window circled in red. The time displayed is 3:45:43 AM. The actual time the shot was taken was 10:45:43 AM. A 7 hour difference. The time in the camera is set correctly for where I live, and I double checked it by opening the same raw file with AP version 1, and the time stamp displays correctly with version 1. So if AP2 is displaying a timestamp that is 7 hours behind the actual time taken that must be a bug in the way it is reading the metadata. I am using a Nikon D810 camera. The 2nd issue I discovered is that when I click the develop button for developing a raw photo the color bit depth drops from 32 to 16. That did not happen in AP1. Since I need it to remain in 32bit color after clicking the develop button I have to manually convert the color depth back to 32 by going into the Document properties. I did not have to do that with AP1. So is that also a bug, or is this drop in color bit depth normal for AP2?
  3. A while back I asked if the 96 PPI resolution for panoramas, stacks, focus merge, and HDR merging would be fixed so that the final rendering would reflect the original 300 PPI of the source images. I noticed that it has been fixed when rendering panoramas using the TIFF format for the source images. However, I just tried to render a panorama with the source images being in the Radiance (HDR) format and the finished resolution of the pano was 96 PPI even though the source images were 300 PPI. Is this just an oversight by the development department or is it a bug? Just wonder, because even though I don't use Radiance or EXR formats often it is annoying to have to manually reset the final resolution to 300 PPI before doing my final editing. I mostly use Radiance and EXR for stacks and focus merging. I did a test and found that when using Stack or Focus merge I get the same 96 PPI resolution on the final rendering. Although this is not a priority fix I was wondering if this would be remedied in the next release so that when I use EXR or Radiance formats the final rendering will be the same as the source images.
  4. I don't know if this has been asked yet, but I downloaded the AP 1.9.2 beta and when I opened it the program asked me to register it. I bypassed that message since I wanted to see if the problems I reported in 1.9.0 were truly fixed. But I was wondering, if I do decided to register the Beta version will it interfere with the main program already on my Mac? I was also wondering if I can keep the Beta version on my Mac to use as a backup in case I have further problems with the original program I bought?
  5. Here's a link to my posting for reporting bugs. https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/133428-ap-19-crashes-when-exporting-lut/
  6. MacBook Pro High Sierra. I posted the specs of my Mac in a separate thread in the section for reporting AP bugs on Macs
  7. I did find a bug, however, that I reported. The program crashes when I try to export LUT. Although I don't normally use LUT sometimes I accidentally hit that tab when I try to export to other formats.
  8. I just updated to the 1.9 version of Affinity Photo a couple of days ago and I noticed that when I created a panorama, which is what I specialize in, the pano resolution was 300 PPI, which is the same as the original individual images. In the past the default resolution for panos, stacks, HDR, and focus merge, was 96 PPI. I am glad you finally corrected that little flaw because it was a hassle to have to manually change my panos from 96 to 300 PPI. Now that is a step I no longer have to do. Can I assume that the new resolution will apply to stacks, HDR, and focus merges as long as my original individual images are 300 PPI? Are there other features that were added to the program with this new update? Just wondering because I have not had the chance to check all the drop-down menus for any new features yet.
  9. Yes, this was the kind of answer I was looking for. All I wanted to know was if AP was generating 96 PPI as some kind of default setting when creating Panoramas, HDR Merging, Stacks, and Focus Merge. Most of my work involves creating panoramas and focus merging multiple exposures with different shutter speeds. And yes, having it generate images using the PPI of the source images would suit me just fine. If your development team is working on it hopefully they will have an update for this later. On a side note, I have been recommending the AP program to friends and colleagues of mine who are getting tired of paying the monthly subscription fee for Adobe's Creative Cloud. That's why I got AP to begin with.
  10. I will have to experiment with it. When I first got the AP program it did take me a few months to figure out all the picture development controls because although most functioned like Photoshop there were differences I had to get used to.
  11. Well, since I don't normally do batch work I can just do the resolution changes manually. I originally got AP because my Photoshop quit working when I upgraded my Mac to High Sierra. Photoshop support techs told me that CS5 had not been tested on anything higher than El Capitan. And since I needed a good photo-editing program for my photography work I tried AP and found that most of its features were similar to Photoshop. The resolution issue I posted about is more of an inconvenience than a real problem. Maybe the AP developers will fix it in a later release.
  12. I understand now. I was missing the terminology. Before I got AP I used to use Photoshop CS5 and it had a similar feature, but it was not called Macro. However, it did do the same thing and I did use it to make step by step presets. But I only used it if I needed to do batch work, which I rarely did. I will have to experiment with it and see if I can create my own macro. But if not I will just do it manually like before.
  13. Is a macro anything like a preset? I have created a number of presets for things like RAW adjustments, lens correction, and detail sharpening. But I have not seen anything in AP that says "Macro". Maybe it is the terminology I am missing here.
  14. As I mentioned to @Fixx I can manually change the resolution. All I have to do is go to the document menu, then go to Resize Document in the menu. When the resolution window opens I simply uncheck the resample box and then change the 96 to 300. Then I just click save and that changes it from 96 to 300 PPI.But if AP simply made the panoramas with the same PPI that the original source images were I would not have to do these extra steps.
  15. I can manually change the resolution. All I have to do is go to the document menu, then go to Resize Document in the menu. When the resolution window opens I simply uncheck the resample box and then change the 96 to 300. Then I just click save and that changes it from 96 to 300 PPI. But if AP simply made the panoramas with the same PPI that the original source images were I would not have to do these extra steps.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.