Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'image quality'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Affinity Support
    • News and Information
    • Affinity Support & Questions
    • Feature Requests, Suggestions & Discussions
  • Learn and Share
    • Tutorials (Serif and Customer Created Tutorials)
    • Share your work
    • Resources
  • Bug Reporting
    • Report a Bug in Affinity Designer
    • Report a Bug in Affinity Photo
    • Report a Bug in Affinity Publisher
    • (Pre 1.7) Affinity Range Bugs Forums
  • Beta Software Forums
    • Affinity Designer Beta Forums
    • Affinity Photo Beta Forums
    • Affinity Publisher Beta Forums

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 3 results

  1. File size matters ! I use designer for web-design. As long as you work with pure vector and text, designer is a quite handy tool (despite some annoying bugs). But as soon, as you place images (typical workflow for webdesign) in your layout, it becomes really inconvenient. The filesize of the layout document EXPLODES and becomes really unpredictable. The size of a designer layout document becomes far bigger than the sum file sizes of the placed original compressed JPG or PNG images. I read somewhere in the forums, designer and photo store placed bitmaps uncompressed with the layout file - to speed up document loading? However, in my opinion this behaviour is not practicable. Some people may say: disk space is cheap, so why be so miserly? But first of all, all documents have to be backuped. And when it comes to data transfer it's a big difference if i can send e.g. a 20 MB file as email attachment or have to upload a huge 200 MB file to some document cloud. Filesize also means waste of time and other resources. We know the problem of Photoshop local smart objects. But PS stores/attaches the underlying bitmap data in it's original compressed format (JPG, TIFF, PNG etc.) and only points to it when rerendering an instace. I guess this is the correct method. If i have to transform the smart object instance later (e.g. design changes by customer), PS can allways rely on the original high resolution pixel data. But the PS document size increases only for the amount of the rendered instance layer + original bitmap attachment. It's even possible, to edit the smart object in place (isolation mode) and reduce the original bitmap resolution (destructive scale) without touching the instance position and size. In essence the filesize of the whole PS document is far smaller than a comparable AD document and approximately predictable. In essence: placed/imported images should either NOT be stored within the document. OR if stored within the document, then in it's original file format and compression. Placed images should not blow up the overall document size in the way they do now. Designer workaround - the rasterize dilema The only way i found to minimize document filesize is, to rasterize placed images, so they become a local pixel layer. This reduces overall filesize but the result is stil unpredictable. Sometimes the document becomes soon very small after rasterizing a high resolution image layer and saving the document again. Sometimes it becomes even bigger - later it becomes smaller again. So it seems, that redundant pixel data is not cleaned up at every save procedure? The bad thing: the document becomes smaller at the end, but now i loose everey connection between the bitmap layer and the orginal placed image. AND i loose every layer effects! I even don't know what was the original scaled size of my old bitmap. If i have to do design changes lateron (we all know our customers...) i have to spend extra time to search the orginal image, place it in its actual size, rebuild layer effects (hopefully made some notes in the layer label). After that extra work i can do the actual design changes. Much, much extra time spent! To prevent this, next time i leave the original image in the document and have - yes a huge file again :-( Another impractical point of rasterizing is the lack of control over pixel density. I'm talking about real count of pixels in the bitmap NOT the relative dpi (document settings). There is an ellipsis beneath the menu item "Layer -> Rasterize..." that meant to show an additional settings dialogue before rasterization is done. But there are no raster options to set. The document dpi has no effect on how the layer is rendered - to say how many pixels are created from the layer. And the rasterized quality is only moderate - seems to be 72dpi with method bilinear? There should be precise settings for the rasterize command: - absolute resolution: means, how many pixels are rendered per inch/cm (presets or explicit manual setting). - relative dpi (relevant for print) - render method: there should be an option for high quality rasterization of layers - e.g. bicubic andd so on. Simply compare this to the slice settings in the export persona.
  2. engrgroundzero

    Image Quality

    Hi, I just have a question with regards to the quality/resolution of the images that were processed in Affinity Photo in Ipad. I just noticed that those images that I process through Affinity Photo in iPad were not too sharp after I export it to jpeg. All my settings like the image quality were at 100% before I exported it but when I already posted it in social media like facebook, the quality was not too sharp even it freshly came from developed. Before when I'm doing my photo editing in PS/LS, even I already posted it in facebook, the quality of the image is still there but now it seems no longer sharp after I posted it on Facebook. Is there can somebody can help me to sort this out because I'm now doing all the image editing through my ipad but the quality that I want to achieve is not there. I hope there's a way that I can get the quality images that I usually get in processing from LS/PS through my Macbook. Thanks a lot!
  3. Every time I merge down on affinity photo the image quality decreases. Is this a common problem, or am I doing something wrong?
×