Search the Community

Hi! We are making a game. We use alpha channel to store additional information like a gloss-map. Basically it is not an opacity. So it is vital to keep all color values in RGB channels even if it is zero in the Alpha. Currently Affinity does not play well with this requirement. When I do open TGA image in the Affinity all RGB values are Black for transparent pixels (where Alpha is zero). So we have to stick to Photoshop for now. Do you have any plans addressing this issue?

Hello, I posted this on another thread , but it has been closed . It would be very nice to mirror or send the output of affinity to the SDI output of the blackmagic ultrastudio to verify the look on a broadcast monitor. Blackmagic design has a plugin for photoshop... but since i use (and love affinity.... ) i can't output to SDI anymore ! Is there a chance to make this possible ? (or make the photoshop plugin compatible ?) or does anyone know a software solution to make this possible? (Mirror outpu,t second desktop etc ) ? Sienna is not avaliable anymore ! thanks ! peter

Because Photoshop makes sense, it's not about comfort zones, it's about practical application and common sense workflows, it drives me bonkers when the hand tool is selected, it's one of my biggest bugbears with Affinity apps because the imported/placed/dragged in layer or image is never sited just right, consequently, immediate adjustment is needed, either by resizing or repositioning, so, to have to select the move tool instead of it being automatically selected is an annoyance. Personally, find no practical use for the hand tool being selected after import of a layer and there should be an option in settings to have either the hand tool or the move tool used, I pretty much guarantee most users will set the move tool because it makes sense.

How many users would want to throw away 35 years worth of learning and start over again, almost none. Expecting experienced Adobe users to switch to a new way of doing things is not realistic. Money and time lost that would take years to reacquire and recoup, come on wake up! People that can afford Photoshop are high end users it appears Serif not seriously after that market but rather occasional and hobbyists not pros. This target market will also dictate future direction Serif will follow, not as a PS replacement but as a high end hobbyist sector.

This has been on my silent wishlist for Designer for ages, finally getting around to requesting it. Illustrator has a set of color adjustment tools similar to the kind you'd find in the adjustments of Photoshop, typical things like color balance, convert to RBG/CMYK, black and white, etc. These adjustments are destructive and change the set color values of fills, outlines, and gradient points on vector objects. I use this alot when doing slight warming or cooling adjustments to my vector illustrations before posting to adobe stock. Affinity Photo has color adjustment tools, but they create non-destructive adjustments layers, which are stripped away when exporting to SVG or EPS for stock use. It would be super convenient to have really simple color adjustment tools in Designer to edit vector color values. My wishlist for color adjustments would include: - Simple RGB/CMYK balance sliders - Whitepoint/Temperature adjustment (to cool down or warm up colors overall) - Black and White conversion with color sliders (so you could make yellows into lighter grays, reds into darker grays, etc.) - Convert to RGB/CMYK (to quick remove mixed color values that may be present from pasting between files) - Saturation slider - Convert to Tone (pick a color tone to change all selected objects to the same color value while maintaining light/dark tone variations) A bit of a niche use case, but i feel like it would be useful to alot of designers to have permanent color adjustment as an option. It's hard to adjust vector colors in Designer on complicated images in a way that keeps them compatible with stock imagery creation. Screen Recording 2024-04-04 at 12.14.07 PM.mov

When I import swatches using the “Import Palette…” item, I should be able to select palettes saved from Photoshop (ACO – Adobe Photoshop Color Swatch File) or Illustrator (ASE – Adobe Swatch Exchange File). Are there foreign palette formats that AD can import? Maybe that information should be in the Open dialog box… or somewhere. (The Help Center doesn’t seem to do anything. I can search for a topic like “palette,” but can’t expand the results, so maybe the AD entries are just stubs?)

As I mentioned, I was just following the instructions that worked in Photoshop. Since Photo has the same filters and adjustments, I had hoped I could also create a sketch with it. I have no idea why the particular blending modes mentioned actually work. Photoshop has aways been a bit of a black box to me. To desaturate, I chose Black and White in both. I also chose Invert in both apps. With the Color Dodge blending mode after the Invert, the image goes entirely white. In photoshop, the next adjustment, Gaussian Blur brings back a sketch all the way to a value study depending on the slider position, but in Photo, nothing happens. Gaussian Blur does not bring back the image at all in Photo. If anyone has a different approach to creating a sketch, I'd like to hear it. I just need something I can quickly create to trace for my watercolor paintings.

I get this with Adobe Photoshop and to a lesser extent Adobe Illustrator, all other apps are generally okay. Sometimes Affinity apps start in like 3 seconds, other times it can be 20-30 sec, i think it depends on how much they've had to drink the night before lol!

Dankjewel voor je reactie. Ik werk bijna niet meer met Photoshop en Lightroom. Ik doe nu alles in Affinity Suite. Ik volg daar ook een cursus voor. Het abonnement bij Adobe kost mij € 12,09 per maand. Dit is eigenlijk zondegeld. Wanneer ik boetevrij met Adobe kan stoppen, dan doe ik dat. Het is zeer zeker raadzaam om te kijken naar een ander font. In mijn vorige boeken gebruikte ik Caslon Pro. Dat is volgens mij ook van Adobe, maar ook zonder lidmaatschap te gebruiken in Word of Affinity Publisher. Ik ben een echte Nederlander die op de kosten let. Bedankt nogmaals voor je input.

Edit/Preferences/Plugins Select the folder & hit the remove button

Thanks for your reply, Thomoso. Phocus software, unlike Affinity, does not indicate whether a flash was fired or not. I don't know if Photoshop or CaptureOne do, either. Regardless, other than manually entering one's IP info as metadata (e.g., copyright), the rest is just there in the RAW file as far as I know — generated automatically. So I'm still wondering what factors, if anything, with perhaps any other camera's RAW files, but not excluding the Hasselblad, are looked at by Affinity to determine and annotate if a flash fired or not.

I searched this title but found nothing. I searched just "selection" and got too many to completely read (686). So this might have been suggested but if so I can't find it. For me to use Affinity Photo, I need to be able to modify a selection: more than just shrink/grow. I need handle(s) to pull a selection to the edge of an object. My objects are mostly round discs that can be elliptical or circular. I work with these all the time. GIMP and Photoshop both handle this easily. Is this a feature enhancement that is already planned? If not, what does it take to get it considered? Thanks. Note: I have attached an image of how this works in GIMP. It works OK but could be better. Photoshop works better but I won't buy into their business model.

Fair point. I am looking also at their Photo Reactor program which allows the user to create plugins which can be used to bridge to Photoshop. I'm hoping that it could provide a way to allow more Affinity Photo plugins to blossom into existence. The problem might be that there is no directly supported Macintosh version which obviously would limit their application. However, this is perhaps a discussion for a different thread.

Anyway, I feel the origin of the ITPC is largely irrelevant as if AP handled it correctly, I.e. not insert the photomach tag and keep it in photoshop, then the issue would be resolved.

Not even in 2D, be it web, print/corporate image, game graphic work, film, etc. Despite having lots of indy studios working with other software (Affinity and many more), the very high end, large firms, etc, it's pretty much Adobe (like Autodesk, Houdini, custom solutions in 3D/animation) territory. Despite being a fact that you can do a lot of high end work with Affinity (as you can with Blender in 3D, but until film companies start doing large productions using Blender, that area of the field is exclusive of certain tools. The technical capability of the tool is only part of the equation). I think Canva is well aware of the current market for Affinity. And IMO, they might want to add new niches or increase/evolve some. As for knowing about Canva (I'm talking about several comments, not just this quoted text) I very well knew about its existence since very long ago. When working with small business owners, and not only having them as clients, also watching and reading material related to marketing, business matters, etc, Canva is everywhere. Tons of times I have handled stuff for some step needed in these users and companies' Canva based workflows, or added/fixed stuff which they started there. It quite makes sense the addition, to empower and help it grow (so, the opposite future of what some predict), from what I have been seeing for a long time with Canva's users. I think they want to expand to a bit higher niche than their current, and compete there, or that their current users are increasingly needing more functionality. Or maybe both. Whether more or less integrated in Canva itself, that would be hard to know, right now. But that they really want that level of functionality and nuanced work, for me that's plain clear. About competing with Adobe... I said it earlier. I doubt any of the alternatives (including Affinity) is realistically hoping to dethrone any time soon the king of the industry (industries) in decades-long pipelines and ways of working which got established through decades in companies of all sizes, custom plugins, familiarity of high end firms and clients, etc. It is a huge ecosystem that, even if it wouldn't upgrade (but it upgrades, a lot, and very fast, I keep up to date with that, even if just a bit, enough to realize it), it would be extremely hard (or impossible) to be really threatened in the high and mid-high end (but... companies. Some freelancers are in my book very "high end", and I know a few that already moved fully or partially to Affinity). At least for some time. Honestly, though, Corel Draw and Xara have been strong competitors in certain areas many years before Affinity appeared, and are still alive, though slightly niche, not a serious worry for Adobe. But they have quite a chunk of users over the world. The same happens with specific apps for certain functionality, which are even better suited than Adobe's for certain activities, (specialized tools, I call them) but this did not put Adobe in danger, either, as a whole. Monopolistic players (monopolies are always bad for us) usually only have themselves as a threat, or regulation/governments, if anything. But Adobe is doing pretty well. Long plans can be ambitious, though (till some point, being realistic), the free for schools and non profits thing is really smart. If it is a strategy. If it is not, kudos for the gesture, anyway... that is similar to how Adobe and Autodesk made most of their huge user base. Not them directly, but it was already so common in many graphic workers' machines (in "that type of license", I don't condone it), even at companies, and I have seen huge industry standard apps and companies fall before (often due to their "way of the dodo" behavior more than by competitors' actions...ie, Mirai disappeared by its own). Like I never saw coming XSI would stop being the leader or a very key tool for the film industry, and it happened. Autodesk ended up "acquiring to eliminate" it, and so it happened (there was a serious overlap!! Maya and XSI, and 3D Studio till some extent), but people feared the same with Maya when this happened, as it was also acquired by Autodesk, too, while the same company acted very differently with Maya. This software had a huge users/companies base, was much a better tool for character animation than 3D Studio (although, 3DS was good for that with certain addons), had a solid foot in plugins, scripts, pipelines in animation (games and film) based companies, heavily production tested... and so, all this made no sense to kill it after acquired, so it kept strong and updated, despite all the dark predictions. There were also bad predictions with the buyout of Youtube by Google, back in the day (2006, if I remember well... 18 years ago....). More even the case as Youtube was losing money (btw, Twitch was acquired by Amazon, and it was also losing money. Did not kill it and still is the main game streaming platform), due to Youtube's servers costs in video and stuff, it was a non profitable company!. And that seems to have worked out darn well (in terms of numbers, or in convenience for Google), currently is the second search engine in the world, and many marketers think of it as the the best tool for promotion. Some of us had thought it would just close their offices, be done and that services similar to Vimeo would take over, as Youtube costs are immense. 18 years ago, though.... So, it's a mixed bag, not always in one direction. I dunno, people is free to think whatever, but I always think about if the buying company has an actual something that is really competing with the acquired product/service (and so, 'acquires to annihilate' ), or if, quite the opposite, needs badly what the acquired company has. Google knew that the future of content and promotion was in video, and Autodesk had no interest in killing the best (some would say that this was indeed XSI, though... I had the Foundation version. At least way less intuitive than Maya, in the UI, for new users) character animation tool available and so, lose all that business. But higher end is super hard to compete with, IMO. The way I see it though, many bosses that I had, small business clients, marketing departments, etc, have a very hard time trying to navigate through Illustrator and Photoshop UIs, while for them Canva is intuitive from the start (one of the main advantages of Affinity is also good UI), and they keep using it. That very low end (but massive! BTW, wasn't the number mentioned 175 million, not 100, neither 75?) market is where they have an enormous chunk of users, and I guess Adobe is not particularly happy about it. I am not saying that's a good or bad thing, but it is a fact, to me. [ About the "professional" thingy, well, at least in art, I have a Fine Arts degree, and besides I really learned painting much before going to college (almost free in my country), and a lot of people finishing those studies can't really draw or paint (sad, but it's that way), as it depends on certain level of personal effort and compromise, mostly, than in any academic studies (you can learn the same on your own! even if harder) and in a way you could say comparable to a master in the US, the fact is that I never considered that this made me a professional in any way. I think a professional is a person able to both solve the problems and do the activity required for an specific profile at a company or to cover a market niche successfully (if working by your own as a business owner or freelancer, etc). Also, a person that has the skills and training (by your own, with courses, or college) needed for what the job profile requires, and who has a background (knowledge and technical capabilities) good enough to adapt to any situation in that field. These skills are most likely coming from a mix of personal study and practice, and the actual professional experience. Still, in many jobs in programming, academic titles are required to even get to the interview, but IMO there's always a place for the individuals who are serious about their job, and good at it, with or without college studies. If not in one company, it's in another] About the main issue, I think a) there are other alternatives, but in terms of export for professional work, stability (yep, some of the competitors, which are very few in doing all what A. does, are a bit of a fest of bugs and lacking key features) and feature set, many of them are still behind what Affinity has. A very small few are in very good shape, though, but for a lot of the Affinity user base, price counts quite. I have paid even 2.5k for a software license decades ago, but these days people even doubt it when it is 300 - 800 $. The other alternatives and FOSS could be used, though, if Affinity ceased to exist (I mean, I certainly would use them). b) the possibility of Canva wanting Affinity to get a medium user ground is very likely, hence not much sense in putting all that money to not use what you just bought. They have absolutely nothing to have that functionality. And yep, I agree with those that think they will make it (even as an standalone suite of apps) highly connected with the cloud. I do not think they will trash the permanent buy possibility, as neither did Celsys, which keeps releasing a very nice ClipStudio full version once a year, for those willing to update it (I did, while I really did not need it, but it's affordable. Still, I like to have the freedom to decide not doing it). Affinity's presence now as an "alternative" on internet articles, forums, reddit, etc, is huge (as Canva's. IMO, some people here did not know about Canva because we are immersed in our bubble of usage, and rarely need to go outside that, it is happening also a bit with social media) and mainly the whole user base is about the permanent purchase option. So, I don't see Canva going against that, it would not be wise from a business perspective, if it would mean losing 2.5 (random number) of the 3 millions users, and surely all the marketing that made Affinity big, once they'd make such thing. So, nah, I don't think they will.

Yes exact this. now i need test Photoshop elements trial if have it if i someday get it also premier elements. no money get full Photoshop. other serosu thing some things use precent scale and some use 0-1 scale when photoshop uses 0-255 (for images 8bit chanels) which is much more accurate. is silly not have it option even some cases precent is more clear but sometimes perfect value needed not looks good value by eye. what some special uses lies.

@William Overington William, if I may be so bold, I suggest you contact Serif/Canva regarding your idea and see if they would be interested in it. Or, if your idea truly has merit, you could write a plugin for Adobe Photoshop and sell it on any marketplace online. I believe Photoshop plugins can be used in Serif software but do not know anything about creating them or any limitations. Here is a link to more information. You could also suggest to Serif/Canva that they develop a plugin program for their products that would enable interested parties to develop and sell plugins that specifically take advantage of Serif/Canva products and their unique functionality. Best regards, henryanthony

I have to admit, I'm a pretty bad graphics designer. That's the reason why I dream of AI functionality like I see in Photoshop - https://www.adobe.com/dk/products/photoshop/ai.html I really hope that Affinity will not be left behind in the area. Also I would love if it was easier to apply some basic filters to photos. I'm using levels etc. But it would be cool if I could quickly browse through a gallery of artistic filters, adjust and apply it. Best regards Chris

Hi , i second this need , i would be very nice to mirror or send the output of affinity to the SDI output of the blackmagic ultrastudio to verify the look on a broadcast monitor Blackmagic design has a plugin for photoshop... but since i use ( and love affinity.... ) i can't output to sdi is There a chance to make this possible ? ( or make the photoshop plugin compatible ?) or does anyone know a sofware solution to make this possible? sienna not avaliable anymore ! thanks ! peter

I'm a bit late to the party, but is there actually also a way to tilt the brush like in photoshop? Painting shadows in perspective for example, is way more easy that way. Cheers.

In Photoshop there is the the puppet warp tool to deform an image by moving pins around. It's great if you want to put an object into an compositing and want to bend it in a way that everything fits. Affinity Photo has the same thing under "Filter -> Distort -> Deform". I really like that you can see the original position AND the deformed position of a pin. You can't see that in Photoshop. However, in Photoshop the puppet warp is non-destructive as long as you use it on a smart object. In that case, you get a puppet warp entry below the smart object in the layer panel and when you open it you see all your pins right where you left them. That's really essential. We don't live in a perfect world where we get every operation right on the first try. In reality, usually you notice at some point that it still is not the way it should be and you tweak it. When you do a new deform over and over again you will lose quality over time. So please add a non-destructive version of the deform filter. For example, as a live filter right next to the perspective live filter.

I have purchased filter forge but its buggy on mac. So i decide to request more filters and effects, especially 2 i miss from adobe photoshop which i used to quickly create graphics (which was excellent for covers, movie posters etc) already 25 years ago: Plastic wrap and frost. I could make plastic wrap look like everything from spider web to patches of ice. I could also add frost effect to plastic wrap and make some interesting designs. The ones in filter forge dont do this as well as the ones in photoshop. Then theres the filter photoshop didnt have but i find in filter forge which is making a layer look like its on fire/burning, some of these filters in filter forge looks very realistic, this would also be very useful as a filter for general use in graphics design in affinity if its well made. So plastic wrap, frost and fire, these 3 filters would be 3 very useful filters for general use. To my knowledge this shouldnt be too hard to make for affinity but it would lift up the graphics design part of affinity alot and make it even more attractive for buyers since these are very simple tools to use to make cool effects for example for text or objects.

Introduction I started another similar post titled "Using Affinity Publisher, Designer, Photo V2.40 as a Swiss Army knife program", but in this post I ask the question differently, could other programs use this same file format? And would Canva ever allow that? Canva could develop these other programs also. The afpub file can handle text, vector, and raster and so could be used in all kinds of programs There would be a big advantage in the world if the afpub file format would become the document standard in the world. It is proprietary but other proprietary file formats have become very standard like .doc, cdr, and indd. Imagine if the afpub format replaced both the docx and pdf format. The afpub file is no bigger than the pdf but the file is completely editable. This means that the same file can be used for editing and viewing just like the docx format. But the afpub file handles text, vector, and raster formats much better than docx. Also the frame based desktop publishing format results in much easier complex formatting than the word processing format. If an IFilter was created so that on the fly thumbnails and previews were created in Windows Explorer or The Finder for Apple computers, this would allow fast viewing of multiple files and multiple file text searching would be possible. Why should afpub become the document standard in the world? The best file format is the one that could become the most popular. The afpub files are small in size. They handle text, vector, and raster formats very well. The files are very fast to load. The programs needed to open them are reasonably lightweight. Some people think that only open source and free to use file formats should become standards but it takes teams of many people to do this job properly and create a reliable relatively bug free program or file format. All kinds of programs would be possible with afpub file format Some people think that Affinity Publisher is too complicated for average office workers to master. Canva or other software companies could develop simpler "light" programs for text, vector, and raster creation that had the same file format but were less complicated. All kinds of plugins could also be created also. Note taking programs similar to Obsidian could be created using the afpub format that would handle text, vector, and raster formats in one file, so no links or attachments would be needed, every note would be a single file. Everything done in a normal office would use afpub, notes, letters, reports, user manuals, papers, and books could be done in the format. Why do I care? I'm a futurist partly and like to both predict and promote things that makes sense for people to do in the world. Plus many other people are asking the same question, because they don't want to learn a program or create files if clients aren't going to want that. Popularity breeds more popularity. Presently we have Microsoft Word, Adobe Acrobat, and Adobe Indesign, Illustrator, Photoshop that are standards in the world. Microsoft Word handles anything more complicated that plain text paragraphs poorly. Adobe Acrobat has line returns in text and so can't be used as the editing file format. Adobe Indesign, Illustrator, Photo files are far bigger in size than is necessary. The world would be a more efficient and productive place if the afpub file format replaced all these. The more people that use the afpub file format, the more likely that extras would be created and the more likely that this file format would become more popular and the more likely this file format would be around for many years to come. P.S. I did buy the Affinity Suite about 3 weeks ago and already recommended it to my brother who is working on another book, and to two people at a funeral I was at yesterday, one who is also writing a book, and another who has just started a graphic design business.

I have sent the developers of Font Explorer X a request to develop plugins for Affinity Designer, Photo and Publisher but I need your help if we want to see this happen. Font Explorer is an application that auto-activates fonts for applications, and is a must have for designers who use hundreds of fonts. Please contact Font Explorer and let them know you are interested in there being a plugin for Affinity products. They have developed plugins for Adobe InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop and they work really well. However, they will not develop a plugin for Affinity unless we show there is a demand for plugins. The developers of Font Explorer X can be reached here: twitter @FontExplorerX web http://www.fontexplorerx.com/contact email: info@fontexplorerx.com Thanks everyone!

Hello. I tried to search but couldnt find any answer. I have been using photoshop since 1997. I just recently bought Affinity Designer 2. I am certainly confused about a lot of things making the switch. I am glad to be switching but I am having issues. I do not see a robust filter section. I generally used the Photoshops Render->Fibers feature. I don't see any render filters, Distort, etc. So...did I buy the wrong version of Affinity? A lot of my work lately is graphics of ww2 aircraft. So my work flow was making outlines in Illustrator and doing all the painting and texturing in Photoshop. Can someone help me with the transition and if I bought the wrong version of Affinity? I am a bit lost here.