Aftemplate

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25157976 So far there have been two ways to to heavy compute tasks on GPUs: CUDA (Nvidia only) and OpenCL (all vendors). Nvidia invested a lot in software and toolchains to make CUDA the go to option for many projects (especially in the machine learning community). Meanwhile OpenCL is falling apart and sees less and less support and updates. However, the Vulkan API which is also supported by most vendors (except Apple where you have to use a compatibility layer called MoltenVK) is gaining traction in the compute sector. If you trust the benchmarks, then this library here is showing that you can get a similar performance out of Vulkan compute than what you would expect from CUDA. It is just that this library only provides a very small fraction of the features of what the CUDA ecosystem does, so the Vulkan compute ecosystem still has a lot catching up to do.

I like imho. For you previous "another one" comment, I agree with part of it and oppose part of it. But, as you said, it's up to the AP team. So there is no point in arguing between us. Layers are timelines, Low complexity. It is changing at this moment..

No need to apologize. (I don’t want to spend my time saying I’m sorry. I’m not a rude person, I just want to type the most useful words. After listening to your explanation, everything is now clear. (I hope you edit the previous reply and correct it. I want to respond to that.

You misunderstood what I meant. Could you please re-edit it? I'll respond to it. @IPv6

In order to enter fewer words, I didn't make it clear. Now I will make my intentions clear. You may have heard of Autodesk Maya. It allows traditional "layers" while also allowing users to manipulate nodes. Maya is built entirely on a node, and each property has a corresponding node. Which one to use. Depends on what the user likes. I don't want to remove layers. I want layers and nodes to coexist. Nodes are used at this time when the layer is unable to do something. If you can do a two-way conversion between them, that's definitely the best! (But it may make it more difficult for you to write code for it) I just think that having a layer with a small number of nodes can upset things. This is what node patterns should do, and I want to maintain the purity of both, while they can interact freely with each other. Problems of this class due to layer limitations. Implement the node pattern as early as possible. is a way to address the root cause of the problem. By then, you can focus more on engine writing. Instead of writing hacks for the limitations of such layers. I really appreciate you work. @Andy Somerfield

Linked Layers Such workarounds will increase complexity. I don't think this is a good plan. Pure layers and pure nodes keep the architecture simple. Combine any two unrelated things together and you will gain complexity, I hate that.

You are still not brave enough. node mode ui needs a true brave there. You can realize their one-way conversion: layer to node(compatibility) The best way to solve a problem is to solve the root cause of the problem.

Now we can count on the hope of 2.x, this heavyweight feature will be available! Andy Somerfield is the Brilliant developer I've ever met, affinity photo is a Breathtaking masterpiece.

(This is the most shocking news I've ever heard this year!)Thank you! @Andy Somerfield I hope, node map is like a building, with multiple layers of drilling links. Avoid map that are too large. and accommodate more nodes. Fully Expose as many nodes as possible and provide an expert mode options to lose warranty: remove all limit. Max freedom!! The person who redefines the rules of the photo editing game is you! Adobe recently acquired Substance Designer. A node editor.

@IPv6 I'm believe the warp real-time filter and the nodeUI will come true!

Do you have plans to implement this Full Nodeization at some point in the future?

- Added “Live Mesh Warp” layers - This allows for better controllable deformation. compared to Liquify. @Andy Somerfield

Use the same hardware and affinity version.

I've already replied to you, In another topic. Windows Acceleration is garbage and is currently 2 times slower.

1. All 2. No

Also missing mesh deformation Live filters.

Nuke has recently improved their node channels, Now, defeat any opponent of the same kind(node channel).

I don't agree with you. I object to this. These are two very different things.

Only 64-bit version. There is no 32-bit version of Affinity.

WinKey(start menu)=Command⌘ : they are located on the same physical button. Control=Ctrl : they are located on the same physical button.

(Windows)Ctrl=Control(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (Windows)Alt=Option(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (Windows)WinKey(start menu)=Command⌘(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (Windows)Shift=Shift(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (I'm not talking about affinity shortcut keys.) (I am only stating : This is related to the macos key mapping between windows.) https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202676 If this does not make you understand it, then I can do nothing. @Alfred @walt.farrell

I am only stating: (Windows)Ctrl=Control(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (Windows)Alt=Option(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (Windows)WinKey(start menu)=Command⌘(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (Windows)Shift=Shift(MacOS) : to the same physical key. (This is related to the macos key mapping between windows.) And you are talking about: shortcut keys for affinity. (I'm not talking about affinity shortcut keys.)

(win)Ctrl=Control(mac) Ctrl+Option=Control+Option Ctrl&Control (They are located on the same physical button.) @R C-R So this is no error.

You did well! I support you.

Just to be clear, are you saying that your (American) USB keyboard allows you to use the Windows key to work like the Command key on a Mac, so you don’t have to do the horrible RMB+LMB thing that most of us have to do? No!No!No! That was not what I meant. I mean: Use this keyboard: When I'm in Windows OS, I press WinKey (it's actually Command(⌘). When I'm in MacOS, I press Command(⌘) (it's actually WinKey) Command(⌘) and WinKey share the same physical button (Command(⌘)&WinKey) This is what I mean. I only mean this.