pictures too dark in develop persona preview

[ALe5]

1 minute ago, anon2 said:

Regarding that comparison of a raw file from a D850 in Affinity and another app, I discussed only the tonality and not the sharpness because Affinity applies no sharpening by default, while I have no idea what your other app is doing with regard to sharpening. Please post a D850 raw file so I can compare the processing in various apps instead of viewing your screenshots which do not reveal many controls of the apps...

Raw file has no adjustment at all, is just as come out of the camera and is completely viewable in the screenshot from the Nikon software that adjustment controls are all set to 0. There is no adjustment done on Picture Control Utility either, even if adjustments would have been applied in Nikon PCU AP should interpret same as Nikon software. The file has been open as is in both Programs without any pre-correction of sorts.

 

 

15 minutes ago, anon2 said:

Clipped peaks in an Affinity histogram do not imply missing data. The histogram is simply not being vertically scaled adequately, and so the peaks are too high to fit in the available display space.

You are the technician ... 1 thing I know if is not within the histogram is not viewable.. then other reasons may affect that, I know data is not missing cause is RAW this also is obvious. Since what we see is a jpeg rendering data is missing from that file,  as a fact nothing is recoverable from a developed file.

[ALe5]

11 minutes ago, anon2 said:

The clipped peaks do not indicate that data is missing. If the histogram could be vertically reduced in scale, then the peaks would come into view at the top of the histogram display. Some apps will automatically scale the height of the histogram to completely prevent clipping of peaks in the histogram display.

Of course it does missing data, what we see is a jpeg file... I think you are confirming what I just said if anything is out the histogram is not viewable... Now that it may not mean that once developed, AP file is not workable but I assure you, in this conditions, some details may get lost after develop and adjustment is apply to make it looks as the original.

[ALe5]

Hi there, is there any news on addressing our issue?
Thank You

[lepr]

On 4/22/2020 at 6:01 PM, ALe5 said:

Of course it does missing data, what we see is a jpeg file... I think you are confirming what I just said if anything is out the histogram is not viewable... Now that it may not mean that once developed, AP file is not workable but I assure you, in this conditions, some details may get lost after develop and adjustment is apply to make it looks as the original.

What JPEG? Why have you brought JPEG into this?

I wasn't confirming what you said. When the histogram is too tall to fit in the height of the little panel, its peak(s) look sliced off. That doesn't mean raw data or image data has gone missing.

[Chris B]

A fix for raw files appearing dark or looking unmanaged has been made in the beta:
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/115020-affinity-photo-windows-customer-beta-184650/

All feedback is welcome if you wish to try it. I'm not sure when it will make it to retail. As this was tricky to reproduce and fix, I would recommend trying the beta to make sure that when we do update retail, the issue has correctly been addressed. 

If you are still seeing an issue, we need to investigate this further.

[ALe5]

17 hours ago, anon2 said:

What JPEG? Why have you brought JPEG into this?

As far as I know in order to make viewable RAW data a JPEG version of the RAW is made by any software and what we actually see is a rendered JPEG temporary file. I don't know what AP is using to make a RAW file viewable.
 

 

17 hours ago, anon2 said:

 That doesn't mean raw data or image data has gone missing.

I know what a RAW file is. Originally made in camera as a carved piece of marble is impossible to loose data in those files. But in my case in AP when I see a RAW file something is "missing" not lost, (underexposed from -1,5 to -3,5 stops). I bet that when the issue will be fixed histogram will look right.

[lepr]

1 hour ago, ALe5 said:

As far as I know in order to make viewable RAW data a JPEG version of the RAW is made by any software and what we actually see is a rendered JPEG temporary file. I don't know what AP is using to make a RAW file viewable.

Affinity Photo's Develop Persona and other developer apps generate an RGB image from the raw data, not a JPEG compressed file, although the apps are able to export a JPEG file. In Develop Persona, you are working with a linear floating point 32 bits per channel RGB image generated from the raw data. You have the choice of passing that linear image with no loss at all to the Photo Persona and continuing to work on it in 32 bits per channel, or passing a gamma-encoded integer 16 bits per channel conversion to the Photo Persona for further work, and then exporting an image file.

Edited May 5, 2020 by anon2
total rewrite because I had misunderstood the quoted statement

[lepr]

1 hour ago, ALe5 said:

I know what a RAW file is. Originally made in camera as a carved piece of marble is impossible to loose data in those files. But in my case in AP when I see a RAW file something is "missing" not lost, (underexposed from -1,5 to -3,5 stops). I bet that when the issue will be fixed histogram will look right.

You have two separate problems, only one of which is a bug.

The bug problem is that Affinity was incorrectly behaving as if raw files from the D90 contain gamma-encoded values instead of the actual linear values.

The second problem is your D850 files were correctly handled as containing linear values, but you had neglected to apply a slight exposure boost and a toning curve to the generated images, plus you had neglected to apply sharpening  to the generated images. Exposure, toning and sharpening adjustments were being done for you in the Nikon developer software - they are included in the "[SD] Standard" Picture Control setting you were using.

[ALe5]

Of course what do I know? I know nothing... Bug or not, problem or issue, Jpeg or RGB, that is not  the point .. I'm not disagreeing with "you" I disagree with facts! The only thing I'm sure of and see.
I do neglect and I'll neglect again in doing what your software is not giving. Why I have to do adjustments here and there to make AP file look like original NEF file? Beside, once developed, image quality end up being a JPEG degraded file.
  Nikon Nef file looks very close (not always) to what I try to photograph and that is a base to start from. At this time AP is unusable both retail and Beta and for me is not a gain but a loss.. There is no point to buy a software* that can't give a base file to start with as camera have intended to be as I try to. AP it double the work in order to score to a desired image. Beside mine wasn't neglecting but refuse to accept your advice "to adjust" since AP software is not doing it.

* If would have known I wouldn't buy it.

 

[walt.farrell]

27 minutes ago, ALe5 said:

Beside, once developed, image quality end up being a JPEG degraded file.

Only if you export it as a JPEG. If you save as .afphoto, or export as TIFF or PNG, you can keep full quality (at least up to 16-bit).

28 minutes ago, ALe5 said:

Nikon Nef file looks very close (not always) to what I try to photograph and that is a base to start from. At this time AP is unusable both retail and Beta and for me is not a gain but a loss.. There is no point to buy a software* that can't give a base file to start with as camera have intended to be as I try to. AP it double the work in order to score to a desired image. Beside mine wasn't neglecting but refuse to accept your advice "to adjust" since AP software is not doing it.

Nikon software will try to interpret the RAW file applying all the adjustments to it that the camera did in making the JPEG version.

Affinity Photo, on the other hand, gives you the RAW image and expects you to work with it to make the image you like.

If you don't like that approach, then you're right that Photo's RAW development approach is not for you, and you should use something else.

[ALe5]

The D90 NEF file

[lepr]

Yes, a Serif representative already acknowledged that there is a bug with Photo's handling of D90 NEF files, so what is your point in posting this screenshot?

The D850 NEF files are handled correctly by Photo, but you need to learn how to use the app to get good results from it.

 

[ALe5]

11 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Only if you export it as a JPEG. If you save as .afphoto, or export as TIFF or PNG, you can keep full quality (at least up to 16-bit).

Nikon software will try to interpret the RAW file applying all the adjustments to it that the camera did in making the JPEG version.

I knew all of the above, thank you. But perhaps, what ever file will be saved with in some instances, working the AP file,  details will degrade a bit or a lot depending on the adjustments applied. 

 

18 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Affinity Photo, on the other hand, gives you the RAW image and expects you to work with it to make the image you like.

Oh I see! Well this in knew to me. Then anon2 is right: I neglected!.. Is all new world, now when shootin' I have to invent/imagine what AP file will look like. Isn't a counter producing that? What is the good in this AP approach?
 

22 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

If you don't like that approach, then you're right that Photo's RAW development approach is not for you, and you should use something else.

That is not the only reason I bought AP, actually it has many quality. Some quite good adjustments (intuitive and with great effect). Even if I know I have to explore and learn how to use them well. The final results, for what I have done so far is satisfying. Nonetheless is monthly hassle free.

Then photography has the purist side too: no PP needed!

[ALe5]

4 minutes ago, anon2 said:

Yes, a Serif representative already acknowledged that there is a bug with Photo's handling of D90 NEF files, so what is your point in posting this screenshot?

The D850 NEF files are handled correctly by Photo, but you need to learn how to use the app to get good results from it.

 

Is a test with the Beta. Is enough as a good point?

[lepr]

3 minutes ago, ALe5 said:

Is a test with the Beta.

There could be many months before there is a fix for Photo's problem with D90 NEF. Some bugs don't get fixed for years (and that's true of almost any image editing software). If you're lucky there will be a fix next week. Nobody knows.

[ALe5]

14 minutes ago, anon2 said:

There could be many months before there is a fix for Photo's problem with D90 NEF. Some bugs don't get fixed for years (and that's true of almost any image editing software). If you're lucky there will be a fix next week. Nobody knows.

I was just saying that Beta has improved the under exposure aspect. 

[lepr]

16 minutes ago, ALe5 said:

I was just saying that Beta has improved the under exposition aspect. 

Oh, I see. Sorry for misunderstanding 

Yes, the bug I was talking about appears to have been fixed.

For comparison, here is your NEF in Capture One with default settings:

 

[ALe5]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

Affinity Photo, on the other hand, gives you the RAW image and expects you to work with it to make the image you like.

As passionate know nothing... Instead of making people to even consider if AP is convenient for them to buy it, cause the above mentioned approach; would you consider to add 1 more button to choose parent company adjustments instead AP raw RAW file in develop persona only. Don't know the degree of difficulty in doing so...

[walt.farrell]

Just now, ALe5 said:

would you consider to add 1 more button to choose parent company adjustments instead AP raw RAW file in develop persona only. Don't know the degree of difficulty in doing so...

Serif might. I wouldn't, as I'm just a user.

You could request that in the Feature Requests forum, or concur with an existing request.

However, I think that would be quite complex, and could never handle everything, because many manufacturers' RAW files contain some of the information in proprietary, undocumented formats.  And that information and format will change with each camera model. So, it's a lot of work discovering what extra information is available, and how it is encoded, and what effect it should have on the image, for each camera model from each manufacturer.

[ALe5]

On 5/5/2020 at 11:13 PM, walt.farrell said:

However, I think that would be quite complex, and could never handle everything, because many manufacturers' RAW files contain some of the information in proprietary, undocumented formats.  And that information and format will change with each camera model. So, it's a lot of work discovering what extra information is available, and how it is encoded, and what effect it should have on the image, for each camera model from each manufacturer.

I suspected that... thank you Walter

[walt.farrell]

You're welcome.

[Sunshine1868]

On 5/5/2020 at 4:49 AM, Chris B said:

A fix for raw files appearing dark or looking unmanaged has been made in the beta:
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/115020-affinity-photo-windows-customer-beta-184650/

All feedback is welcome if you wish to try it. I'm not sure when it will make it to retail. As this was tricky to reproduce and fix, I would recommend trying the beta to make sure that when we do update retail, the issue has correctly been addressed. 

If you are still seeing an issue, we need to investigate this further.

@Chris B I have installed the Beta software and the issue persists. I am using a Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 with NEF files from a Nikon Z7. Any more help is appreciated.

[Chris B]

On 5/8/2020 at 4:13 PM, Sunshine1868 said:

@Chris B I have installed the Beta software and the issue persists. I am using a Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 with NEF files from a Nikon Z7. Any more help is appreciated.

Hi Sunshine1868,

Does minimizing or maximing the Affinity Photo window refresh the view to look correct?

Do you connect the Surface to another screen? Can you also find out what monitor profile you're using? 

[Sunshine1868]

@Chris B

Very interesting - all of these issues are happening with the built-in screen of the Surface Laptop 3. When connected via the Surface Dock to an LG ultrawide monitor (I do not know the exact model), the issue goes away - unless I open the "lid" of the laptop (which forces the screens to duplicate and the issue comes back on both screens).
One other interesting note is that the histogram still shows "0 values" to the right of the "halfway point" - as if the whole histogram is squeezed into the left half of the frame.

[Chris B]

What monitor profile is the Surface using?

You want to find this screen and make sure you aren't using a Wide Gamut display or another obscure profile:

As you can see,  I'm using sRGB IEC61966-2.1 which is standard for most devices will hopefully display correctly if you start using this (assuming you already aren't). If you're set to another profile such as a Wide Gamut and the display isn't capable of handling this, you might be seeing images darker than normal.

It might also be worth checking to see what you have set in here. Because I'm not fully 100% sure what's going on, we should check all the avenues: