Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

AffinityFran

Members
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    AffinityFran reacted to sumsum in shape builder tool   
    we will not mention the other program .... but if there is one thing that they do and I miss in affinity designer , thats the shape builder tool. 
    please, i am sure that im not the first one to ask for it. but it is almost essential for some of us.
    keep doing the great work.
     
  2. Like
    AffinityFran reacted to affinitydemoguy in Fail: Boolean Divide Shapes With Tangents   
    I agree with you.
    And just to get it out there, I am not trying to belittle Affinity Designer in no way. But that should be a relatively straightforward operation as you said. It only takes one click to do this in Illustrator, and no matter the complexity of the shapes, one gets perfect results every time.
  3. Like
    AffinityFran reacted to affinitydemoguy in Fail: Boolean Divide Shapes With Tangents   
    Thanks for the tip! That's an interesting approach. But what if the shapes are more complex, as is often the case?
    Also, in my example both shapes had identical dimensions (300 * 300 px). They were both centered vertically and horizontally. In theory the circle should be touching the four edges of the square. And thus the ellipse should have cut the square in 4 pieces (exactly where their edges touch). But that's not what happens.
    Even as seen in your video example, when you align the square to the circle, the indicators show that the selected object snaps on all four sides. And yet Boolean > Divide won't cut the corners of the square. I don't understand why.
  4. Like
    AffinityFran reacted to affinitydemoguy in Fail: Boolean Divide Shapes With Tangents   
    Hello everyone!
    (I am new here, so pardon me if I posted my issue in the wrong category.)
    I've been playing around with Affinity Designer on and off for the past year and a half. I really want to fully transition to Designer (coming from Illustrator), but I keep bumping into the same little annoying issues that would make my workflow painfully slow.
    One issue in particular has to do with the Boolean operations. I've seen this question raised a few times on the forum before, but no solution so far. Will there ever be?
     
    The problem
    It appears that the Boolean Divide action doesn't work well with shapes that have one or more overlapping edges. The result is a big mess. You either get the compound shape partially divided or not at all. Then you would also get those pesky thin "hair" lines coming out parts of the resulted group. Artifacts... artifacts everywhere!
    Anyone can replicate this issue in a matter of seconds with basic shapes. Create a square and a circle of the same size. Apply different fills. Align them to the center of the spread and make sure that the square is behind the circle in order to see the individual pieces better. Divide both shapes using the Boolean actions panel.
    Normally you should have the four corners of the square that are seen outside the circle cut into separate pieces. The result would be 5 shapes in total (including the ellipse in the center). However, Affinity Designer has something else in mind (see images below).
    I have given up hope that they will fix this bug. Therefore, can anyone suggest an alternative work-around method for this issue instead?
    Thanks in advance!


  5. Like
    AffinityFran reacted to kjdavies in Affinity Photo Bump Map using Existing Layer   
    Hi Edferg,
    I think I see a way to do what you're trying to do. You might have to dedicate a layer to your bump map, but you'll be able to edit it locally.
    Create a pixel layer, give it a solid color (I'm using a darkish green, #1d710c. Call it 'grass'. Create another pixel layer on top of that. Call it 'bumps'. This layer will get your heightmap (I used Filters -> Noise -> Perlin... and on my second try, remembered to set my colors to black and white, rather than black and dark green). Add to this second layer a Live Lighting layer of type 'Directional', with azimuth and elevation set appropriately. Set the pixel layer to 'overlay'. This gives you a layer that can provide your bump map:
    Hide the pixel layer to turn off the bumps. Hide the lighting layer (and change the pixel layer's blend mode back to Normal) to see the height map. Edit the pixel layer (height map) to change the bumps. Add a mask layer to the pixel layer (height map) to turn the bumps on and off selectively. (I tried cropping my sample file but the cropped version was bigger! So I went with the original)
    Keith
    bump map.afphoto
  6. Like
    AffinityFran got a reaction from DigitalVisuals in AP: Using an external RAW editor (Darktable, Win10)   
    I have to say I have become a big fan of Darktable (ex Lightroom user).  I do still have a current Adobe subscription in place but I almost never open either Lightroom or Photoshop any more as the Darktable/Affinity Photo combination satisfies my requirements. I won't be renewing my Adobe subscription when this current year runs out.
    Just because Darktable is free and opensource does not mean it cannot achieve excellent results. Yes the interface is different to Lightroom, but at the same time it is very familiar. Yes some of the tools seem a bit geeky in their presentation, but in many cases are far more powerful that the equivalents in Lightroom.  Like any new software when I first used it I felt lost and became frustrated because I knew what I wanted to do but not how to do it. But, if you invest some of your time trying things out, watching a few videos on YouTube, playing with each module to understand what they do, limiting the visible modules to the few favourites you use on nearly everything, setting up a few default module settings that can be different depending on the incoming file's EXIF data, making use of the straightforward (hierarchical) tagging system (which uses separate sidecar files - no central catalog to get corrupted) and your life becomes so much easier.
    The only thing, and it is only one thing, that I miss from Lightroom is the side by side comparison feature that is not present in Darktable although you can achieve something similar using the snapshot feature. I would pay good money for Darktable, the fact that is free is quite unbelievable. It's worth noting that you don't have the ability to create a panorama within Darktable, and although you can merge several backeted shots to a HDR file (you do your own tonemapping using the existing DT tools) the images have to already be aligned as the process does not currently do that.
    It is possible to more or less integrate Affinity Photo with Darktable. There is an extension to Darktable that gives another option in the export module to open the selected image in The Gimp. It's straightforward to install (copy and paste a few files into a folder) and then instead of pointing it at the gimp executable, you point it at the AP executable.  Then in Darktable you select the file you want to edit in AP,  use the new export option which opens up the file in AP, do your edits, save and close AP and the new image is automatically imported back into DT and grouped with the original source image. Works a treat (on my Win 10 machine - no direct experience of any other OS). some info here: https://github.com/darktable-org/lua-scripts If you are at all technically minded you can edit the script to change references in the displayed text from "gimp" to "external editor" although this is not needed for this to work.
    Spend some serious time with Darktable and I'm sure some people will find it an excellent replacement for Lightroom, whether you are on a budget or not.
  7. Like
    AffinityFran got a reaction from Didix in AP: Using an external RAW editor (Darktable, Win10)   
    @Didix I wouldn't say I've got lots of experience of DT, but I have spent time understanding what it can do. I just had a go with your raw file. I wanted to emphasise the warm golden sun, so this is my interpretation of the image. One final stage I would do would be to open it up in AP and use the inpainting tool to get rid of the cable and the lens flare as DT's spot removal tool is not that great.
    I normally wouldn't do this much in DT alone, so this has been an interesting exercise.  My preferred way of working is to use DT to get a well exposed, tonally even but very flat looking image with no clipped highlights or shadows, remove any lens distortion, set the white balance and correct any colour shift and then pass that on to AP as a 16bit TIFF for any other manipulation, also making use of the Nik Collection toolset.
    [Edit - just replaced image with a slightly tweaked version I prefer]
     

  8. Like
    AffinityFran got a reaction from Didix in AP: Using an external RAW editor (Darktable, Win10)   
    Everything you see in that image was done in DT (although I would not normally do it that way!)
    Noise was reduced using a combination of the "Denoise (profiled)" module with very low settings and also the Equalizer module, only for chroma noise.
    Sharpening and contrast was achieved with the Equalizer, Local Contrast, Tone Curve, Sharpen and High Pass modules, each one contributing only a small amount.
    I have found that layering small amounts of different processes often achieves a better result that trying to do everything in one or two steps. It does take longer, but you are less likely to "break" the picture. 
    I have also found that changing the blend mode of a module can make a dramatic or subtle difference to how it works.  For example I used the "average" blend mode for the Sharpen Module, but sometimes also use "darken" as well as normal, and change the opacity of the module to get the effect I want. 
    If you haven't already seen Harry Durgin's videos about DT on Youtube, check them out.  They are quite long and very technical in places, but I learned a lot, many things that can be applied to lots of different editing programs, not just DT. https://www.youtube.com/user/harrydurgin/videos
    No apology necessary - that sounds like an excellent three days! 
  9. Like
    AffinityFran got a reaction from Nilla's Photography in RAW file vastly different between processing software when jpg output   
    Here's where I quickly managed to get (with settings).  In a nutshell, because of the extreme contrast of the source you need to get those highlights down and bring out the shadow detail - exactly what the shadows and highlights section is for.  As soon as you try to adjust by exposure you'll blow it all out.  A nudge up on the brightness helps bring out some of the dark to mid tones without blowing out the highlights.  I needed to drop the saturation down a little as it got very orange, and a little clarity helped with the pop.  This is with the developer assistant auto-applying a tone curve (lazy!).
    Hope that helps, and fantastic image!

  10. Like
    AffinityFran got a reaction from DreamLight Images in Add gradient to existing Layer Mask   
    How about like this? (see attached .afphoto file).  The additional gradient mask was created by using the gradient tool on a new pixel layer, then using Layers -> Rasterize To Mask and then dragging that mask down below the existing mask.
    Add Gradient To Mask.afphoto
  11. Like
    AffinityFran reacted to Nilla's Photography in RAW file vastly different between processing software when jpg output   
    Wow! Thank you and I'm amazed you were able to replicate the auto function. I have a lot to learn about PP and AF - like I said, I really do not like playing around in PP.
    Thank you for your feedback - not bad for handheld, no flash, and loads of movement. :-)
    Thank you so much again - very much appreciated.
     
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.