Aftemplate
-
Posts
262 -
Joined
Posts posted by Aftemplate
-
-
1 hour ago, IPv6 said:
Oh, sorry! I just saw so many heated conversations regarding nodes vs anything else, that just reacted in advance. Regarding re-edit - don`t want to be involved to another one... Points mentioned does not correspond to your message, but they are still valid (imho)
Imho this is totally up to AP team to decide how to improve AP, they already proved to be quite reasonable for a product of such complexity
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.. -
12 minutes ago, IPv6 said:
Oh, sorry! I just saw so many heated conversations regarding nodes vs anything else, that just reacted in advance.
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. -
3 hours ago, IPv6 said:
C..o
You misunderstood what I meant.
Could you please re-edit it?
I'll respond to it. @IPv6 -
53 minutes ago, Andy Somerfield said:
Linked layers aren't a substitute for any potential future "node mode" - they are a useful feature in layer-based documents which we have been hoping to add for some time.
I do agree about node-based image editing being useful for only a subset of jobs - we have no intention of making the default layer-based editing mode go away
Also, why make the assumption that going from layer-based to node-based is a "one way" conversion? I don't believe that is the case..
A
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. -
On 11/17/2020 at 6:39 PM, Andy Somerfield said:
Aftemplate,
I have nearly implemented the "node mode" feature a few times now - never actually got round to doing it - I imagine it will happen at some point (although not for 1.9!).
It would be interesting to hear what people would expect from a feature like that..
Thanks,
A
On 11/17/2020 at 6:13 PM, fde101 said:The devs mentioned somewhere on the forum that the Affinity products use something like a node-based architecture internally as part of their engine. Obviously it is presented to the user using layers instead.
This is not a change, it has been that way for some time now (presumably from day 1) so I wouldn't read into it. If they are already node-based internally but are using the more limited presentation of layers at the user level then this was obviously an intentional design choice they made and I wouldn't expect it to change quickly.
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. -
On 11/17/2020 at 6:39 PM, Andy Somerfield said:
Aftemplate,
I have nearly implemented the "node mode" feature a few times now - never actually got round to doing it - I imagine it will happen at some point (although not for 1.9!).
It would be interesting to hear what people would expect from a feature like that..
Thanks,
A
(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.
-
On 11/12/2020 at 7:56 PM, Aftemplate said:
- Added “Live Mesh Warp” layers - This allows for better controllable deformation. compared to Liquify.
@Andy SomerfieldOn 11/20/2020 at 5:54 PM, Dazmondo77 said:I got a bit too exited when seeing this, but after testing, now realise it was just a suggestion -
Also when is the bug gonna be fixed with mesh warp, where you click on a control point and it disappears leaving infinite spinning beachball - it seems to happen every other time I use it - just last week it happened three times in a row so I thought I'd make a bug post with a screen capture detailing the issue, but just sods law, I couldn't reproduce the issue - but just opened photo beta 1.9.0.203 just now made a shape and mesh warped and it happened straight away
@IPv6 I'm believe the warp real-time filter and the nodeUI will come true!
-
17 hours ago, Andy Somerfield said:
R-C-R,
Apologies, I am confusing the issue by using our internal terminology in the release notes (layers are "nodes" in our parlance).
- Fixed repeat issue with pattern layers.
- Fixed issues with pattern layers when they contain child layers... would be more correct.
A
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.
-
On 9/18/2020 at 12:09 AM, Novak said:
Well we know now it's OpenCL. Does anyone know how well it performs vs metal and vs non accelerated version?
I've already replied to you, In another topic.
Windows Acceleration is garbage and is currently 2 times slower. -
14 hours ago, grunnvms said:
I've been reading this thread with interest, and my first question is what kind of Affinity work would benefit from hardware acceleration. I only do simple work with Affinity products, and I've never come across a moment that It thought, well this is going too slow. Hence my question.
And then my second question, isn't hardware acceleration provided by DirectX on Windows, in other words you don't need to know too much about the underlying hardware?
1. All
2. No -
On 7/21/2020 at 8:21 PM, Shotster said:
I like to do as much as possible non-destructively, so I was surprised to learn there was no live filter for Zoom Blur. That forced me to merge everything to a new pixel layer and then apply the Zoom Blur from the Filters menu. I was just curious if there was a technical reason it was omitted or if it's just an oversight.
Also, as I recall, this effect is referred to as Radial Blur in Photoshop, so when I discovered that Radial Blur in Affinity Photo was not what I wanted, I almost gave up, thinking Affinity Photo didn't have this feature.
FWIW, "Radial Blur" seems a more apt description of the effect, whereas what Affinity Photo calls "Radial Blur" would IMHO be more aptly named "Circular Blur".
Also missing mesh deformation Live filters.
-
On 7/25/2020 at 10:50 PM, arvinmoses said:
Yup totally agree on the visual graph not always being better. I used artomatix as well and while it was good, I did find myself wanting something more akin to afp and patch tools. I just wish there was a way to height blend the patches. Currently I use the feather and border search method to breakup the patch edges
Some type of hybrid would be really cool. Maybe something as simple as being able to add a layer that does a series of processes that is non destructive and procedural. In a sense it's not much different from a filter stack or a series of image adjustments. If anything it would make it a bit more stream lined.
Further more within each "procedural" layer you could add another image or af file that serves as another input.
I agree with you though. Maybe rather than a node based attack, other things would be better and more universal. I think I might start a new thread for this but on thinking about it top things would probably be
Multiple channel support a la substance painter ( useful for things other than cg)
3d viewport for visualization
Integration of Embarks texture synthesis running in 16bit (which works amazing btw. Just not in 16 bits)
Nuke has recently improved their node channels,
Now, defeat any opponent of the same kind(node channel). -
3 hours ago, arvinmoses said:
Gonna bump.
I'm a gamedev - primarily a texture/material artist. I use Substance Designer and Painter regularly which I both l love. That said there are some things that I think both pieces of software don't necessarily lend itself well to.
Currently I'm actually using afp for scan processing. Other than artomatix art engine (which might be good for inspiration as well) afp is the only other software I know of that would allow me to easily copy/clone multiple layers to create a tileable material.
That coupled with a simple 3d viewport window would go a long long way.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. -
29 minutes ago, R C-R said:
Nowhere in that article does it say that the Windows key & the Control key are mapped to the same physical key.
WinKey(start menu)=Command⌘ : they are located on the same physical button.
Control=Ctrl : they are located on the same physical button.
-
1 hour ago, R C-R said:
What USB (or other) keyboard maps both key functions to the same physical key? Consider for example that on Macs the control key & the command keys can be used individually or in combination. How could that possibly work if both key functions are mapped to the same physical key???
(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 -
11 hours ago, walt.farrell said:
No. In general, for Affinity, Ctrl on Windows is Cmd on Mac. Yes, Mac has a Ctrl key, but it's used for different purposes than Ctrl is used on Windows.
11 hours ago, Alfred said:Ctrl on Windows is not the same as Control on a Mac, regardless of how any particular keyboard has its keys configured. Hence the need for an awkward mouse button combination on Windows.
We appear to be going around in circles, so I don’t see any point in making further posts to this thread.
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.)
-
13 hours ago, Alfred said:
Thank you for confirming that this has nothing to do with the Ctrl key on either Mac or Windows! The present discussion started because you had posted the following:
(win)Ctrl=Control(mac)
Ctrl+Option=Control+OptionCtrl&Control (They are located on the same physical button.) @R C-R
So this is no error. -
4 minutes ago, GRAFKOM said:
Can someone explain why there are no and it is not possible to put these icons in the upper toolbar in Affinity Photo, of course you can mirror the object via the menu - Arrange - Flip Horizontal.
There are these icons in Affinity Designer and Publisher, but not in Photo.
What reason? aren't objects reflected in photo?
This is it, and many other shortcomings in Affinity since its launch that have been neglected and continue right up to version Beta 1.8.4.
If these basic errors in using the program are not corrected, they will move to the new version 2.0
Have someone from Serif handle the visual tweaks to the Affinity suite in addition to coming up with new stuff.
I wrote about it many times - give Serif Account number - I will transfer money for these corrections.
I use all of your Affinity suite on Windows, Mac and iPad.You did well! I support you.
-
24 minutes ago, Alfred said:
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? And if that is indeed what you’re saying, can you confirm that you can still use standard WinKey combinations to do things like opening Explorer windows?
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.
OpenCL Died at 3.0
in [ARCHIVE] Photo beta on Windows threads
Posted
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.