Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'psd format'.
Found 3 results
hi If any solution for my problem... cutout an image in AP but find that the layer mask appears differently in PS. The mask looks correct in PS Channel but no idea why some background still intact.
Hi everyone, so here are some trials i had to make to see workflowperformans in Architectural Companys , when they have to exchange Affinity Data with external Companys that still use Photoshop. I poste this in the hope, that there will ways to improve this in the future... Our Architectural Company with about 500 Architects is heavely involved in international Competitions. In the Progress of a Competition we often have to exchange Documents with external Companys for example with the Greenplaner who on they´re own make greeplans but most time use Photoshop. So i had to look for the workflow and had to see how it fits.. 1. As told from affinity, embedded and linked embedded Objects get rasterised, 2. Embedded objects coming from affinnity Photo will be exported as Rasterised too. 3. this one is fine. Layereffects are translated nice to layereffects in Photoshop. 4. Workflow of architects heavily depends up on CAD Programms.. so Layer and setups for plans first get drawn and changed (and changed very often) inside of the cad Applications like Autocad, ore Revit .. and they get Printed / Plotted as PDF files ore as eps files.. / then they will be imported to Photoshop as embeded AND LINKED files, so changes in the Cad file can be reprinted very fast, and Photoshop automatically will notice the change.. Affinity still has got embeded files that manualy can be pointed to the changed CAD Printed pdf ore eps files. this is a little bit slower but it works. Now ! when exporting the embedded Eps or Pdf tiles and exporting them to Photoshop, which in case of Architectural workflow with Greenplaners for example sometimes has to be done, the embedded Vektorfile format gets Translated to Pixellayer to... This for our workflow realy is bad, because we loose the workflowadvantages of embedded files (with layer effects) for example, we get very big filesizes... and for most, the bad antialiasing seams of the vectorelements in the embedded pdf files of Affinity photo will get translated to gaps in the rasterised psd layers... So you have to scale up the dpi of your plan befor exporting it furthermore.. which is even slower... So maybe maybe as i hope very much , affinity will find a way to solve the export of pdf and other vektorelements so workflow will get better ... I will post a pdf file showing my tests and the results at the bottom of this post.. comparison import and export PSD to Affinity and back.pdf
A rather unexpected bad surprise for me on this! I was dismayed (after the facts) to see the huge file produced by Affinity Photo. I performed a search, didn't get an answer... Has no one raised questions about this so far? I did nothing weird or special that I am aware of, processed a Fujifilm X-Pro1 raw file to the best of my liking as I usually do with ACR. If nothing more than that, I stop there and just keep the raw and the XMP sidecar, about 26MB (for the example given). If I need to keep a PSD for whatever reason, I open Photoshop. If only for editing there, when finished I save as PSD: 96MB or so with only one layer. It can become much more when adding layers, or convert to smart object before launching a NIK plugin for instance, but that´s not the issue here. My grief is about what usually is ´only´ a 96MB PSD file (almost 4x the raw´s size already!). So I processed a sample first in ACR. I did not need to open it in Photoshop, but for the sake of the comparison I did. Ended with a 96MB file as expected. I then launched Affinity Photo with the intention to produce more or less the same result. I ended with a 218MB (!) AFPHOTO file. I didn't see anything special at all. So I did nothing else, exported the same as PSD to see what that would give. Shocking result there: 293MB file for the single one background layer!!! Just to make sure (I don´t know what could be hidden), I tried flattening before export, no change; also merge visible layer, same result as well. In fact, I suppose these did nothing a all, rightfully so. I have about 25,000 photographs, the vast majority only saved as raw + sidecar. That takes about 600GB on a 2TB external HD right now. There also is a 3TB TimeMachine for them and my internal HD... So I was thinking: if I need to organise more than 8 times the current diskspace used for the images alone (or worse), the comparison with Photoshop becomes quite a bit different, on the expenses involved alone. Imagine: for the same comfort and setup as I have now, I would need at least 16TB. Not to mention another even larger system for TimeMachine as well! :blink: I wonder, are the developers aware of this? If so, also working on it? I am now a bit afraid of comparing a picture from a 38MB raw file (my other current camera, an older DSLR).