AP Selection Tool Issues & Requests

[zypher69]

I'm a seasoned graphic designer with over twenty years of experience. I ABSOLUTELY LOVE and adore AP, but I do think the selection tools need a little refinement. My complaints have less to do with the actual selection tools available per se. Rather, my complaints have more to do with the refine mask aspect of the tools. I don't think one should have to go through the task of selecting "soft edges" when making a selection. Doesn't everyone automatically wish for their selections to have soft edges and NOT be jagged?

The refine mask dialogue box is confusing and doesn't seen to work. I know how to use it, it's just that I'm rarely (if ever) satisfied with the results I get when using it. I know PS like the back of my hand and I used to always be able to create near-perfect selections with it. I was almost mortified when I first began using AP to create selections. It's so bad that I have resorted to DOWNLOADING PNG files and smart objects for use in my composite art (for instance). I seldom extract subject / objects from actual photos now UNLESS I absolutely "have" to. I'd much prefer downloading a PNG file where someone else has done the selection and extraction task (most likely using Photoshop) than to struggle with using AP's current selection tools. I hate to even mention this, but how else will AP developers / influencers know what kinds of changes users are requesting? I'm only being honest here.

I've been working this way for a few months now. I shouldn't have to do this. If AP's selection tools were more robust and if the refine mask algorithms yielded better results, I would then be able to select / extract subjects and objects from any photo I chose with very few problems or issues. Aside from this huge issue, (and my issues with the gradient tool) Affinity Photo is a stellar image editing program. I will continue to use it, despite current issues. I love supporting Serif and I LOVE that there's finally competition for Adobe. We just have to make sure that all tools work properly and how they were intended to function. 

Edited April 3, 2020 by zypher69

[MEB]

Hi zypher69,
Welcome to Affinity Forums
Thank you for your feedback. Do you mind uploading/attach a typical image from where you have to extract the subject, as well as the result you are getting, so we can see exactly/go through the same issues you are experiencing/dealing with? A brief description of the steps/process you are taking would help too. Thank you.

[zypher69]

Thanks for your reply. Notice the first image is an average-looking photo that anyone could use as a stock image for their work. The second image is my attempt to demonstrate what happens when I try to apply refine mask after making a selection. In this particular image, I used the SELECTION BRUSH TOOL & THE FREEHAND SELECTION TOOLS to make a selection around the bear (subject). I then created a mask and clipped it to the layer containing the bear. I created a grey background and then duplicated the selection I made for the purpose of applying refine mask to it. Upon doing so, I noticed the fringing and overall optical aberrations that typically occur when using Affinity Photo. Such fringing DID NOT occur (for me) in Photoshop (which I no longer use).

I also noticed the fringing on the initial selection (THE BEFORE IMAGE). Even when I apply great care and patience when making selections, I STILL get similar results when I apply the refine mask option(s).  AT LEAST the edges were much smoother as a result of having selected "SOFT EDGES" in the selection brush tool. Before Serif (AP) offered "soft edges" as an option,  selections were much more "jagged" and rough. My point is that Serif seems to be aware of such problems and has taken some action to make the selection process more user-friendly. I simply request that the refine mask process be more accurate and robust in future versions without producing optical aberrations such as fringing or jagged edges. 

As I noted in my previous post, I have had to resort to actually downloading PNG images created by other graphic designers (from stock image websites).  I have refused to select or extract subjects / objects from images directly in Affinity Photo because it's been such a problem. I've found that inserting "ready-made" PNG images is easier. I do a lot of composite artwork. I don't feel like I should have to do that, but I refuse to insert sloppy work into my composite pieces.  It's either that or go back to using Photoshop, which I don't wish to do. Thus, if / when Serif (AP) correct these problems, I'll be able to create artwork that is far more "original" than resorting to the use of already cut out PNG images. I am eagerly waiting for a drastically refined selection / refinement process in AP.  Thanks again for reading.

[fde101]

The colors of the bear and background are very similar; I suspect most tools would struggle to handle that situation well.

[zypher69]

Pardon any perceived misunderstanding here, but I've experienced fringe (optical aberrations) COUNTLESS times when doing my best to extract subjects and objects from their respective backgrounds regardless of colors. It just happens that the example I used might not have been the "best" image to use. My attempt was to simply demonstrate the fringing and jagged edges without giving much thought to colors, etc. If I had only experienced fringing and aberrations on rare occasions I wouldn't have brought the issue up in this forum. The fact that my experience has been quite dismal compelled me to assume that I wasn't the only individual experiencing this problem.

I'm no Adobe apologist, but how does one explain the fact that Photoshop's selection refinement process is far superior to Affinity Photo's current refinement process? As I said, I've been a graphic designer for many years and I have come to just expect software to work, without much hassle. I understand nothing is perfect, but why is the issue so bad that it was one of the first things I noticed when I began using AP nine months ago? I've had to resort to using PNG files created by other graphic designers from stock photo websites for my own artwork. No one should feel like that's a better option than using the tools within their own software. Other people may NOT have had this problem, but I feel quite certain that it's been an issue for other users. The current refine mask / refine dialogue - the whole process is simply substandard.

My ultimate point here is NOT to trash AP. I love using Affinity Photo for my work. I just think Serif can do a better job in some areas. Settling for second best is not an option (for me). I look forward to new and improved updates of AP in the future. Requesting that a tool be made better and more accurate is NOT a crime. The issues and problems with the tool are about more than just choosing the right colors and images. Serif can do better - and "must" do better if PS is to become second best. I believe that could well happen in due time. We have to remember it took Adobe many years to become King of the software world. If Serif works hard enough, it can only get better and better. I happily await such a time. After all, how will Serif know to correct such issues if no one mentions them?

Edited April 4, 2020 by zypher69

[Robrr]

Yes, agree. This is a basic function that AP might better address or is there a better solution altogether?

In my own struggle with AP I saw this same issue on a video upload by a company  (Affinity Revolution) looking for an audience. It was a picture of an Asian model and the instructor was trying to isolate the model from the background and in doing so, remove issues around the models shoes.

The instructor showed how to combat the shoe issue with the Gaussian Blur tool but didn’t acknowledge the horrible artifacts the technique created in the models pants.

Is this not a good resolve to an issue.

 

[zypher69]

Robrr - thanks for your response. I think I saw the same Affinity Revolution video you mentioned. I agree with you that the issue must surely be dealt with and I'm surprised more people haven't noticed it. Many people may not have enough graphic design experience to know what's acceptable and what's not. Not everyone has attention to detail awareness. I just hope the issues with the refinement process get resolved soon in future versions.

[Murfee]

11 hours ago, zypher69 said:

the issue must surely be dealt with and I'm surprised more people haven't noticed it. Many people may not have enough graphic design experience to know what's acceptable and what's not. Not everyone has attention to detail awareness

I am all for improvements to the software and maybe some refinement to the algorithms are needed to deal with such low resolution images as the one you have provided. 

I am not so happy to see insults to other users of the software, I am sure they are not seeing the issues to the extremes that you are because they are more likely to be using higher resolution images. The image that you have provided is only 600x400px...that size image and the fact that the bear and the background are such similar colours will prove difficult for any pixel selection tool in any software, with good technique it is possible. 

I have attached a screenshot of two different selections, the one on the left was done with the Pen Tool and took less than 5 minutes. The one on the right was done with the selection brush set to a very small size, this gave a reasonably good starting point, the selection was then used to create a mask. I then refined the mask, there was a small amount of bleed but nowhere near as much as your example. I used a very small brush to clean this up. This method took about 15 minutes.

With regards to attention to detail I included the bear's back right paw in my selection, I am sure you had your reason's not to but I felt he looked better with all four paws.

If you regularly need to cutout such small images the Pen Tool may be a better option for you.

Just for information masks can be refined using the Levels or Curves adjustment layers & Live Blur filters, these are nested into the mask. The areas they are needed in the mask can be controlled by using the built in mask features of those layers.

[zypher69]

30 minutes ago, Murfee said:

1. "such low resolution images as the one you have provided."

2. " I am not so happy to see insults to other users of the software, I am sure they are not seeing the issues to the extremes that you are because they are more likely to be using higher resolution images. The image that you have provided is only 600x400px...that size image and the fact that the bear and the background are such similar colours will prove difficult for any pixel selection tool in any software, with good technique it is possible."

3."With regards to attention to detail I included the bear's back right paw in my selection, I am sure you had your reason's not to but I felt he looked better with all four paws."

4. "If you regularly need to cutout such small images the Pen Tool may be a better option for you."

5. "Just for information masks can be refined using the Levels or Curves adjustment layers & Live Blur filters, these are nested into the mask. The areas they are needed in the mask can be controlled by using the built in mask features of those layers."

Thank you Murfee for your response. I apologize for using such a low resolution image in my example. I'm sure a higher resolution photo would have been more appropriate. I also apologize for hastily using the pen tool to extract the bear.

Aside from those mistakes, I still think my example demonstrates the finer point(s) I was trying to make regarding optical aberrations and bleeding. I understand that making near perfect selections takes time, some amount of precision and patience.

Additionally, I am also aware of various tips and tricks one can use to enhance selection edges and results. My issues have simply been that the Affinity Photo refinement dialogue box is a bit confusing and often produces substandard results. Shouldn't the refinement process eliminate the need to spend fifteen minutes of your time making more precise extractions? Adobe Photoshop seems to understand this.

I get that Photoshop is more expensive and "should" therefore yield excellent results, but so too, should Affinity Photo. AP is being regarded as the Photoshop alternative and truly IS an excellent software application. Regardless of price, I think Affinity Photo would be better if it produced better refinement results. I simply find it odd that the software all too often forces users to spend inordinate amounts of time refining selections.

At any rate, I do thank you for providing me and others with the reminder that levels and curve adjustments can be used with blur filters and other tools to make more precise selections and extractions. I didn't mean to offend anyone or insult anyone. 

 

[Murfee]

6 minutes ago, zypher69 said:

My issues have simply been that the Affinity Photo refinement dialogue box is a bit confusing and often produces substandard results. Shouldn't the refinement process eliminate the need to spend fifteen minutes of your time making more precise extractions? Adobe Photoshop seems to understand this.

The refinement process should in theory, My experiences with it have been very positive. My workflow is very simple when cutting areas of an image, I select what I need from a higher resolution image with the selection brush, then I refine this selection...it sometimes needs a bit of further work with the foreground & background areas if the colours & tones are very similar between them, I use a very small brush for this sometimes only 3 or 4 pixels. I then export this as a mask. Further refinements are then done if needed...often they are not.

One tip with the refinement panel, if the initial selection is good you might be better taking the tick out of the Matte Edges box, this will vary depending on the image. I often find that leaving it active will fade the edges a bit too much for a very small area, resulting in bleed.

If I need to extract a very small item with no real fine detail such as the image you provided I use the Pen Tool, I go around the edges and then switch to the node tool for tweaking the curves. I then fill the curve and use it as a mask. The good thing about this is you can use the node tool again to further refine your edges.

[zypher69]

Thanks once again for your reply. I will simply have to experiment around with / use the software even more than I do. I will implement your tips into my work flow to see if better results can be achieved. I will post results accordingly. AT LEAST we're discussing something that I think is an essential issue in Affinity Photo and I hope this dialogue will be seen and considered by Serif developers when working on future updates for the software. I'm sure many of us want to see AP dethrone PS.

[Murfee]

22 minutes ago, zypher69 said:

AT LEAST we're discussing something that I think is an essential issue in Affinity Photo and I hope this dialogue will be seen and considered by Serif developers when working on future updates for the software. I'm sure many of us want to see AP dethrone PS.

I am sure that these improvements will come in time, considering the software is still in it's early years they are doing a very good job. There are lots of feature requests and improvements to be implemented so a little patience from users helps, I know it is difficult waiting for your particular feature or improvement 😀

Edit: We have received small improvements along the way regarding the refine panel, it is a lot better now than it used to be 😀

Edited April 5, 2020 by Murfee
Added Comment

[spacecat]

23 hours ago, Murfee said:

I am sure that these improvements will come in time, considering the software is still in it's early years they are doing a very good job. There are lots of feature requests and improvements to be implemented so a little patience from users helps, I know it is difficult waiting for your particular feature or improvement 😀

Edit: We have received small improvements along the way regarding the refine panel, it is a lot better now than it used to be 😀

Is that for the beta ver? I'm using 1.8.3 

 

I can confirm there's an issue trying to refine the existing mask with 'matte edges' turned on 

 

Refining without matte edges seems to be less impactful than with it turned on. Unfortunately all my changes bleeds out if I enable it (it's as if affinity photo forgot all my changes with matte turned on) .. making it mandatory to perfect the selection in one go, otherwise we're stuck with the brush tool or whatever 'workarounds' that will only make the work harder

 

 

[zypher69]

It's good to know I'm not alone in experiencing this problem. Improvements are definitely needed.