Aftemplate
-
Posts
262 -
Joined
Posts posted by Aftemplate
-
-
Current affinity photo do not support multi-layers and multi-channel,
(OpenEXR supports up to dozens of channels).
OpenEXR supports many advanced features, and this format is excellent.
Supports lossless with loss mix. Efficient lossy compression.NUKE supports this format well.(Correct recognition of multi-layer multi-channel)
-
13 minutes ago, Niall123492 said:
Hopefully, it's been something that's always holding the apps back. It's only recently i have been able to use the isometric studio in designer without my laptop having a shit attack 😂.
I bet he's implementing Vulcan.
When I said that I thought he was incapable of driving Vulcan, he strongly contradicted me.
MacOS Metal has the available information for api-converting Vulcan. This is the easiest starting point.
For these two points, I analyze that he is implementing Vulcan.I'm a fishing guru.😂 -
28 minutes ago, Niall123492 said:
I seen this before and was wondering if there are any updates on it?
I have a GeForce GTX 1050 Ti but I remember reading that affinity doesn't make use of this and to keep the renderer at the default setting.
Under my repeated inquiries, it does have the latest news.
It is always listed as the High priority task.
Mark Ingram didn't forget it!
Predictably, the future is bound to be supported. -
You can have high hopes for this. It will give you a 10x performance leap. In the near future.
-
54 minutes ago, Niall123492 said:
Hi,
I am trying to do some basic painting for a background in Affinity Photo and my laptop is struggling with it.
Asus Zenbook Pro 8th Gen i7 16GB Ram.
Is this an ongoing problem for anyone else? Is there a way I can make the performance better?
What is the size of your brush?
-
6 hours ago, Alfred said:
AltGr is the same as Ctrl+Alt on a standard UK keyboard, and I believe the same applies to a standard German keyboard. As far as I’m aware, a standard US keyboard doesn’t distinguish between the left and right Alt keys.
This is distinguishable. You can use this utility to test.keyboardTESTutility.exe
-
You may need the Smart Similarity Selection feature.
-
This seems to be an interesting question...
-
I think you should be interested in this feature.
-
On 3/12/2020 at 1:57 AM, outgettingsubs said:
Your're welcome. Yeah, it's a pain, especially as I'm using the Levels a lot during astro processing. I hope I can find more people with this problem and draw some attention towrds fixing it.
This question is very important to me and I will pay attention to it.
-
Do you have any comments on this feature?
I think this feature is cutting-edge.
For the future development of affinity photo, it means a lot.
-
4 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:
Thanks. I think it's becoming clearer to me what you're looking for.
By the way, a forum usage suggestion for you: It is not necessary to tag someone (with the @ and their username) if you have also quoted them. Quoting provides sufficient notification to the user.
If this is the case (orange), then your suggestion is reasonable, I accept your suggestion!
-
2 hours ago, LCamachoDesign said:
As far as I know, all recent drivers actually do the opposite of what @Mark Ingram said. By default it allows more than 1024 levels, and you must activate a compatibility option to limit the levels. Does it matter in any way? Nah. I mean, I'm pretty sure anything over 256 levels is indistinguishable to the user. These pressure levels are just manufacturers err... phallic waving.
Like the Ghz race of yesteryear, or the DPI race on phones.
Also, Windows Ink isn't bad. It's just not meant for art, or at least that's clearly not the focus of the API (despite what MS might publicly claim). That API is squarely aimed at hand writing on pen enabled screens, and it's good enough for that purpose. Let's be honest here, any Windows tablet (meaning a computer device with a pen enabled screen, not a graphic tablet like Intuos) is just not good enough for art. It's not even the hardware itself, that's... serviceable. It's the software. I've had a Surface Pro 1 and a 4, it's been years now since they first came to the market, and no software ever worked very well on a touch only basis. The UIs have never adapted to a touch first approach. Why bother creating a super accurate API if the software UI essentially doesn't work without a keyboard and a mouse? I've tried to make concessions over the years so it "works" , but in the end I just got an iPad with an Apple Pencil. I'll sell my Surface Pro 4 one of these days, replacing it with a regular laptop.
I agree with some of your views.
However, if better, the choice should be preferred.
Windows lnk cannot beat WinTab at 1%.
If reversed, it is possible.
So I reminded him to try to avoid lnk. -
48 minutes ago, Frozen Death Knight said:
I have now been able to test the latest tablet changes and the good news is that all the fixes in the patch notes work as expected! Drawing feels overall very good now.
One issue that remains still is the non-functioning modifier shortcuts like alt+R click+L click and 100% brush size painting while using L click on your tablet pen using the side buttons. Lastly, and I can't stress this enough, is that Affinity does not remember brush pressure size from the last known drawn spot when you create straight lines using shift and clicking on the canvas.
Fix those two problems and I will overall be very satisfied with the precision of the brushes while drawing. 🥳
I use AutoHotKey to solve this problem perfectly.
My keyboard has two win keys.
I replaced the right win key with the right mouse button. (using AutoHotKey)
AutoHotKey is free and open source.
Highly optimized modern 64 bit multithreading.
Less than 0.1% of CPU resources and 1MB of memory are used.
The relevant codes are as follows:RWin::RButton
Far better than your solution. I hope you like it! ☺️
(This is the standard method for MacOS versions of affinity photo)
You can download AutoHotKey from many places.
(they have official websites and programs with digital signatures (secure)
@Frozen Death Knight -
4 minutes ago, NoSi said:
You are aware of the title of this thread "WebP in Affinity Photo" ?
I'm sure by now all readers of this thread know that you are an ardent admirer of XnViewMP. Your missionary zeal in honor, but this is - according to the headline - about something else.
I would really appreciate it if you would respect that.
I believe that the debate should stop.
It's no use continuing to argue. -
7 minutes ago, NoSi said:
One reason we can discuss online here is that deep in the past someone came to the conclusion that there should be development in transporting information. Thus the idea was born printing information written on stones on paper instead of carrying the stones. (…)
The best editor will vanish if it ignoring changes outside, which belong to it's "core" targets: sharing results.
Keep in mind that you can never complete 100% of the operation in a single program.
Affinity photos currently have some of the most basic export formats. Not 0.I tend to use multiple programs,
And you tend to do your thing in as few programs as possible.
This is the difference between you and me. -
20 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:
Yeah, but if it doesn't export at all you have everything stuck in it's own internal format . So export is core functionality (unless you only print everything)
I export using the following format:
PNG (non-destructive)
JPG (lossy)
SVG (Universal Vector)
EPS (Universal Vector)
EXR (advanced, non-destructive or lossy)
If I want to use any other format,
Then I'll use XnViewMP.
In some cases for JPG,
I'll use MozJpeg (bitrate super optimized)XnViewMP supports a number of features,
Allows you to calculate the maximum number of colors for a picture.
Affinity photos do not support this feature.
I use XnViewMP to do this (no need Affinity photo supports it) -
6 minutes ago, NoSi said:
To be honest I do not bother about resource budgets – because it is not my part to decide this.
But I can see that the decision to implement webp was made by the development team. Which could be because "core function" is in the eye of the beholder. Or simply a question of relevance.
"core function"
Affinity Photo is a picture editing program,
Not a universal picture format converter. -
3 minutes ago, NoSi said:
… and if you have a hammer you can punch a screw into the wall, too. Are we talking about "workarounds" or "solutions" ?
Change the tool at each time(The price paid is negligible)
Core features are clearly particularly important. (Especially in the current affinity photo growth and evolution)
-
36 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:
It is true XnViewMP has been mentioned before, but it is not right to have a go at a user for mentioning a work around to a limitation in the software, even if it has been mentioned before. Once WebP is implemented there is no need for a workaround, but suggesting a free one just this once is IMHO OK, just not repeatedly by the same user as if it is a solution. (expecting a contributor to read a whole thread when it gets to this long is pushing expectations, again IMHO. I know others disagree and make their replies having read all contributions)
You are absolutely objective. (Orange) gives you a round of applause.
-
12 minutes ago, NoSi said:
I think all of us know that. This thread is not discussing about limitations but pushing them.
Webp will undoubtedly damage the development resource budget for core features.
That's why I object to adding it (at least for now)
With the third-party tool, XnViewMP has no such concern.
You'll have a stronger core feature and webp at the same time.
Just pay a little: Change the tool at each time. -
9 minutes ago, NoSi said:
If you read the contributions here in the thread carefully, you may notic that a. this a.) was sufficiently mentioned and b.) objectively is no useful contribution to the topic.
If you don't care that you have to change the tool every time you want to create a common format - good for you! However, as the thread clearly shows - from my point of view - quite a lot of people simply see things differently – what is being talked about here.
Development resources are limited...
If the development resources are unlimited, I'll agree to add this feature.
Adding this feature to limited development resources will no doubt stifle the core features of affinity photos.
I am willing for change the tool every time Pay the price. in exchange for stronger core features.
On the premise of limited development resources, I am firmly opposed to adding this feature. (Not now) -
7 minutes ago, Andy Somerfield said:
"To support the winner of a race only after the race is quite opportunistic. Innovation and progress comes from belief in something."
Opportunistic it certainly is - and I make no apology for it!
I don't consider Photo to be a driving force for adoption of 3rd party file formats - otherwise I would have been pushing JPEG-XR for the last 10 years (in my opinion, it is clearly the best general purpose image storage format which supports HDR and can do CMYK etc. - sadly nobody else in the world cares about it!).
"
Since the formats rarely (typically never) change, it is a question of implementation. Since it is basically just import and export, these are just entries in a drop-down list, which - in a modular concept - is self-maintaining."
I agree that updating the 3rd party library code is not a big deal - they rarely update unless some vulnerability is found. The problem is more with UI - each format has a cost (for each platform) in that respect for initial implementation, and a cost for ongoing maintenance as we expand to other platforms or adopt new UI technology on existing platforms.
To be honest, this is likely to become a moot point in future (as we hope to introduce support for 3rd party plugins for file I/O at some stage). We aren't there yet, but until we are we are likely to continue to apply the same loose "rules" I describe above.
Thanks again,
Andy.
Your persistence is correct! I support you.
Affinity photos are the Most stunning program I've ever seen, created by you. -
55 minutes ago, Andy Somerfield said:
Morning,
We have decided to implement WebP export for (hopefully) 1.9.
The decision is not solely because it is now supported in Safari - although that doesn't hurt.
In the time I have been working here at Serif (15+ years), there have been hundreds of "JPEG / PNG killer" file formats announced - not a single one has succeeded. If we had supported each one, we would now have a massive amount of export code to maintain which was used by either 1 or 2 people, or more likely nobody. We don't like to remove features which we have added - so we would be stuck with the problem forever.
We generally don't implement new export formats unless a.) They are old but have some unique technical feature which is genuinely useful or b.) They are new and have either a good chance of achieving widespread adoption or have some unique technical feature which we think has merit.
WebP is being implemented because we think it has a high chance of widespread adoption.
Hope this helps,
Andy.
We don't like to remove features which we have added
This reason is persuasive enough.
XnViewMP can import and export hundreds of formats (including webp)
And it's free, and it supports macos and windows.XnViewMP features extremely powerful, highly optimized 64-bit modern instruction set, and excellent performance.
Bulk import export and bulk tuning are supported.
It is sufficient for such tasks.This is a very good alternative solution.
Affinity photos should focus on the development and repair of core functions.
I don't want to waste development resources on import exports.
(By the way, thank you very much for fixing LabL Channel 0 Change 128 issue)
Like the Ghz race of yesteryear, or the DPI race on phones.
Correct recognition of multi-layer OpenEXR and support for multi-channel
in Feedback for Affinity Photo V1 on Desktop
Posted
DJV(open source)Viewer supports viewing multi-layer openEXR.