Jump to content

DRM

Members
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DRM

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The instructions distributed to update to 1.8 say that if you bought Photo from Affinity it would check for updates when the program is opened. This did not work in my case. However, after logging in to my Affinity account I was able to download the new version.
  2. Microsoft are trying to move everyone to Office 365. I DO NOT WANT TO USE REMOTE EXECUTION !! I would gladly ditch Microsoft Publisher if I could move to Affinity. However, I have a dozen or more documents which I took months to write, so I also need a conversion tool, and this must go for millions of other people. I have almost moved from PSE to Affinity Photo (although I still need an organizer/database), so would be happy to switch Publisher as well if there were forward compatibility.
  3. After the additional recent comments on the format issue for Raw files, let me make one more point. Canon, Nikon, Sony and the rest sell hardware. There is no charge for DPP or similar software without which the purchasers of said hardware can't make full use of it. Thus, one might have imagined that it would be in the interest of the camera manufacturers to make their new products as easy and attractive to use as possible. Thus, as the professionals and enthusiasts who wish to use Raw format will certainly do so because the intend to edit their images (with Photoshop, Affinity, or whatever), surely it is in the interest of the camera companies to publish definitions of each new format as it comes out? Canon et al know that the software companies will reverse-engineer the codec eventually, as will the competition, so slowing them down simply makes their new products less attractive to potential customers (us!) and I can see no possible advantage in doing this. It is interesting to compare the situation with workstation companies in the 80s. DEC, Apollo and others tried to keep their systems closed, and they folded. Sun was much more successful.
  4. Having just bought an EOS-R, I produced some CR-3 raw files and discovered. as everyone else in this thread, that Affinity doesn't have a codec. However, neither does Windows Photo Viewer, nor my version of Adobe PSE, and I suspect most other applications. And this is without even thinking about opening the Dual Pixel Raw format. So far, apart from DPP, the only other app I have found which will read CR3 format is from CEWE Galerie Photo, so everyone will be pleased to hear that they can at least print their pictures! Maybe it would be helpful if all camera companies would settle on an industry standard format? Otherwise the software companies are obliged to spend their lives playing catch-up. David M.
  5. Thanks. I wondered if this topic had already come up under a different heading. I think that the key to a powerful and simple implementation is to work with pointers independent of where the files are actually stored. The implementation should allow for the user top create classes of tags (keys) which can in turn contain sub-tags. The user is then able to create instances of tags of a particular (sub) class, which may then be associated with (the pointer to) a particular image file. A feature to import and rename external files is useful but not essential. PSE organizer has some pre-defined classes of tags, plus the concept of stacks and the automatic creation of edited versions. With this structure I have never been in a situation where I was unable to create a feature I needed. Adobe has linked the Organizer with a gutted version of the Photoshop editor for commercial reasons, but this is not logically necessary so long as external editors are available as "plug-ins" of some sort.
  6. I have been using Photoshop Elements for a very long time and have recently bought Affinity, mainly because it has more complete capabilities to edit Raw files. Unfortunately there is one key item missing. Adobe seems to have put together much of their product range by buying existing products or companies, and so there is a lot of overlap which seems very messy to me. However, one of the products which they bought is the Organizer, in which I now have almost 24’000 pictures (multiplied by two if one includes the edits). This feature I could not possibly do without, as having full database capabilities with multiple tag classes is an enormous improvement over using a simple folder hierarchy. I can search for photos by date, place, person, activity and much else. Moreover, the capabilities of file Versions and Stacks I find brilliant, and the albums and events features are also very useful. Thus, in the workflow I have set up I still import my photos into PSE and then use Affinity as an external editor. Thus, looking at your product range, it strikes me that what is missing is a product which replicates the features in the Organizer, especially if it allowed to import the Adobe’s tags. Such a tool would certainly be worth as much as the editor because, for a serious amateur, a proper tool to manage one’s images is essential.
  7. Changing the system profile from LCD3090WQXi to sRGB IEC61966-2.1 makes no perceptible difference.
  8. I have tried to Export images from Affinity with various profiles, but all give an identical result if viewed by e.g. Windows Photo. The system profile, is mentioned is set for the NEC. I have changed the system profile to sRGB and will see if that changes anything, but to take effect I shall have to reboot the PC it seems. I have also found that a previous version of Photo automatically "enhanced" images, and this effect could be switched off, but I have found no such parameter in the current version. (I am using Windows-10 with all updates). A suivre...
  9. After some more digging, I find that the effect I see occurs for photos straight out of the camera as well as those which have been edited. Affinity and PSE show the images in a way I would say is correct, but Windows Photo, Edge, and Microsoft Outlook (I mailed them to myself and then clicked on the attachements) all show the images far too saturated. Thus, it looks like the windows products use the wrong mapping and not Affinity or PSE. Thus, although I deduce that the problem may not be due to Affinity, I would still like to know if anyone else sees this effect and/or has any idea what might cause it. I might add that having mailed photos to a friend, he also found the saturation too high on his machine. Curiouser and curiouser...
  10. I have output a file reduced to 1024x600 via "Export" and size settings - gives me the opportunity to discover another feature.
  11. I believe so. I am using a NEC 30 inch MultiSync. If I go to Settings -> Display this shows the colour profile is set to LCD3090WQXi, which does indeed correspond to my NEC. Normally I would have assumed that display programs would use the system profile as the default. However, Affinity and e.g. Windows Photos would seem not to be using the same one. There is also an effect with PSE, but much less pronounced. However, photos viewed in Outlook emails and Windows Photo seem to use the same settings. I might add that the difference is not a small effect, but produces unusable caricatures. (I tried to add an example, but it failed to upload).
  12. I have a trial copy of Affinity, which I am learning to use. I have edited several images (raw and Jpeg) which have the correct saturation. However, if I save these in Jpeg and open them with another program, such as Windows 10 Photo, they appear far too saturated. I have tired to use "Export" with several different ICC profiles, but all with the same result. Any ideas how to fix this?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. 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.