how to copy a selection with cmd-alt (pixel layer)

[Klaus E.]

How can I copy a selection with cmd-alt in a pixel layer without making a new layer. I like to switch fro PS to Affinity Photo and need this function a lot.

[stokerg]

Hi Klaus E. and Welcome to the Forums,

The closest we can get to this is after you've made the select use CMD+J to duplicate the selection BUT this will be on a new layer.

The only method i know of doing something like this without a new layer, would be to use the Clone Tool to clone the object you've selected.

[Palatino]

That's the only feature of PS I miss.

[Fixx]

This should be added. After all, CMD-drag moves selection as expected, adding ALT to make a copy of it is fully within affinity UI conventions.

[R C-R]

4 hours ago, Fixx said:

This should be added. After all, CMD-drag moves selection as expected, adding ALT to make a copy of it is fully within affinity UI conventions.

Alt is already used to subtract from the selection so there would have to be changed to that for this to work.

But I am not sure what the problem with copy/paste adding the selection as a new layer is. It is non-destructive & the pasted layer can be moved, resized, have its own blend mode or effects, etc. as desired. The selection can be saved as a separate file or added as a spare channel so it can be reused.

If it is important to destructively combine the two layers into one, that can be done using the Layer > Merge Selected menu item.

[Klaus E.]

Thank you for your response.

Because I use this feature to remove unneeded objects, to reconstruct patterns, etc., hundreds of layers would be added very quickly. The non-destructive idea is nice, but not necessary in this case.

I have just tested the clone tool and think this is sufficient for me at the moment. But it would still be nice to have the desired function.

And THANK YOU VERY MUCH for developing such a great tool.

[R C-R]

1 minute ago, Klaus E. said:

Because I use this feature to remove unneeded objects, to reconstruct patterns, etc., hundreds of layers would be added very quickly.

That would not happen if you use Merge Selected after pasting the new layer & positioning it as desired, & using the keyboard shortcuts for copy, paste, & Merge Selected speeds that up a bit, but I can understand why you would like to have the additional function ... I would, too! 

[Fixx]

17 hours ago, R C-R said:

Alt is already used to subtract from the selection so there would have to be changed to that for this to work.

That depends on chosen tool. In PS marquee tool works as you described but when you switch to move tool it copies the selected area.

I though think this is minor feature as you can easily make a layer from selection (cmd-J), move the copy and merge down (cmd-E).

[Fixx]

16 hours ago, Klaus E. said:

I use this feature to remove unneeded objects, to reconstruct patterns, etc.

I suggest you check clone, patch, heal, blemish removal and inpaint tools.

[Palatino]

7 minutes ago, Fixx said:

I suggest you check clone, patch, heal, blemish removal and inpaint tools.

I can also load a truck with a shovel. 

[Klaus E.]

Yes, that's the problem with the alternatives: With the requested feature, I can quickly copy hundreds of different areas. The alternatives are not really practical. The clone tool requires more clicks, and the cmd-J and cmd-E commands are also more labor-intensive. But I try it with the clone tool.

In the past, I've tested features like clone and repair and have never been happy with the result. Nothing was better than human intelligence to remove objects.

[Slotcar Bob]

Well, this turned into a great thread. The Clone Tool is probably sufficient for me. I have to say, Affinity's affinity for non-destructivity , though, is almost too much. It adds layers like crazy. 

 

Thanks to those who responded. I like the Affinity Forums a lot, so far. I am getting ready to "Catalina", so PS will die. What's wrong with Adobe that what is actually a 64 bit program, isn't upgrading the other component? That's pretty cutthroat and greedy.

[Slotcar Bob]

On 10/29/2019 at 8:36 AM, R C-R said:

That would not happen if you use Merge Selected after pasting the new layer & positioning it as desired, & using the keyboard shortcuts for copy, paste, & Merge Selected speeds that up a bit, but I can understand why you would like to have the additional function ... I would, too! 

I tried the "Merge Selected" command, but it is not as easy as just adding the PS technique. I accept that Affinity has work-arounds, but as one person stated, "I don't want to use a shovel to load a truck". That's not snark. I think, if Affinity listens in here, we may get them to move on this as an update to the program. That's not bad.

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, Slotcar Bob said:

I have to say, Affinity's affinity for non-destructivity , though, is almost too much. It adds layers like crazy. 

Is that really such a bad thing? If nothing else, it encourages using "(Group)" & capital L "(Layer)" container layers to keep projects organized, which simplifies management of large projects; facilitates reusing contained items in other projects, either by copy & paste or as assets; & of course can avoid a lot of grief if you realize days or weeks later that a destructive edit has made it necessary to redo a lot of work to fix something that otherwise would have been trivial to do if the edits had been done non-destructively. 

[Klaus E.]

Oh, usually I always keep the original photo, and when a photo has been changed, I save it under an extended filename (for example: photo_corr). Then I can see later if the photo is original or edited. I have been working with computers for 35 years and have never lost anything with this workflow.

And yes, I am also forced to install Catalina.

I would be overjoyed if I could switch to Affinity. Because I see really great features there.

[R C-R]

38 minutes ago, Klaus E. said:

Oh, usually I always keep the original photo, and when a photo has been changed, I save it under an extended filename (for example: photo_corr). Then I can see later if the photo is original or edited. I have been working with computers for 35 years and have never lost anything with this workflow.

I used to do much the same thing but at least for me keeping everything as non-destructive as possible in the Affinity apps is much less work, far less time consuming, & way more goof-proof.

It has also gotten that much better as new features like alternate futures have been added to the History panel & I have learned the value of the judicious use of snapshots & the undo brush.

44 minutes ago, Klaus E. said:

And yes, I am also forced to install Catalina.

Just curious, but why are you forced to do that?

[Klaus E.]

I'm a software developer and I want to be compatible with Mac OS in the future.

[R C-R]

4 minutes ago, Klaus E. said:

I'm a software developer and I want to be compatible with Mac OS in the future.

Could you not use a dual (or more) boot approach, & maybe even a SuperDuper! feature like "Copy with Shared User Files and Applications" so you could test with several different macOS versions?

I am not sure what development environment or tools you use but it might be worth considering something like this to test the compatibility of your stuff with older macOS versions. I suspect a lot of Mac users won't be upgrading to Catalina any time soon if they can avoid it because they still have 32 bit apps they need & there either are no suitable replacements for them or they can't afford to buy ones that will meet Catalina's 64 bit only requirement.

[Slotcar Bob]

6 hours ago, R C-R said:

Is that really such a bad thing? If nothing else, it encourages using "(Group)" & capital L "(Layer)" container layers to keep projects organized, which simplifies management of large projects; facilitates reusing contained items in other projects, either by copy & paste or as assets; & of course can avoid a lot of grief if you realize days or weeks later that a destructive edit has made it necessary to redo a lot of work to fix something that otherwise would have been trivial to do if the edits had been done non-destructively. 

I don't think it's a good/bad thing at all. I think it's preference, or job application needs. I'm not here to define anyone's worldview. We all work differently.