Thomahawk Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 Once again, after a long time working on a collage, I note that the image becomes more and more blurred. I set a person over a background, and worked to make the cutout integrate better with the background. When I now copy paste the original person again into the background, the original is clearly much less blurred. I even have "move whole pixels" activated all the time. Why is Affinity so immensely destructive???? See the example, below is the person after I was working on it, on top I placed the original again. AfPhoto really it totally unreliable. I am thinking about moving over to Pixelmator instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pšenda Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 5 hours ago, Thomahawk said: I even have "move whole pixels" activated all the time. Keep in mind that this option may not ensure placement exactly on whole pixels. It only ensures that it shifts by a whole pixel, ie from 18,435 to 19,435, for example. Recommended is "Force Pixel Alignment", and disable "Move By Whole Pixels". Quote Affinity Store (MSI/EXE): Affinity Suite (ADe, APh, APu) 2.4.0.2301 Dell OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080, Windows 11 Pro, Version 23H2, Build 22631.3155. Dell Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080, Windows 11 Pro, Version 23H2, Build 22631.3155. Intel NUC5PGYH, Pentium N3700 2.40 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics, EIZO EV2456 1920 x 1200, Windows 10 Pro, Version 21H1, Build 19043.2130. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medical Officer Bones Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 In my mind bitmap layers should never ever be affected by non-decimal movement/placement. Bitmap pixel information must be maintained, and Affinity's behaviour is somewhat unacceptable. The user should not be forced to turn on pixel alignment to prevent the blurring of bitmap information. With vectors and text this behaviour is understandable, and it is correct to have adjustable options how to render the pixels. Not when editing bitmap layers, however. Pixels must be absolute, and not be affected by such settings. Pixel alignment ought to be the 'default' behaviour, just as it is in pretty much any other image editor. Fixx and Wosven 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomahawk Posted April 26, 2020 Author Share Posted April 26, 2020 Quote Recommended is "Force Pixel Alignment", and disable "Move By Whole Pixels". Yes, I have always activated both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomahawk Posted April 26, 2020 Author Share Posted April 26, 2020 Quote Bitmap pixel information must be maintained, Exactly, Bones! I have had this problem several times now, after working on pixel layers, after some time I noted the images are not as sharp as they were in the original scan and I had to place them again and repeat the work. It is also not the first time I mention this destructive blurring behaviour to Affinity, but nothing has changed since a year ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Move Along People Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 - Quote Move Along people,nothing to see here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medical Officer Bones Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 7 hours ago, haakoo said: They are vectorbased editors and use vectorcontainers to show its layers/object/rasters(pixellayers) That does not matter for the user experience: in Photo the default behaviour ought to be that pixel alignment is always on for bitmap layers. Move Along People 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fde101 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 On 4/26/2020 at 8:01 AM, Thomahawk said: Yes, I have always activated both. This can actually cause problems if an image layer winds up starting misaligned because the "move by whole pixels" can override the "force pixel alignment" for some cases and if something starts on a non-pixel boundary can cause it to stay that way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 1 minute ago, fde101 said: the "move by whole pixels" can override the "force pixel alignment" for some cases For what little it’s worth, I’ve never encountered a scenario where ‘Move By Whole Pixels’ doesn’t override ‘Force Pixel Alignment’ (so it’s always seemed odd to me that we need to enable the latter setting before we can toggle the former). Quote Alfred Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for Windows • Windows 10 Home/Pro Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for iPad • iPadOS 17.4.1 (iPad 7th gen) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fde101 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 On 4/26/2020 at 3:59 PM, Medical Officer Bones said: bitmap layers. I would tend to agree that pixel layers should always force pixel alignment and be at the document resolution. It doesn't really make sense for them to do otherwise. Image layers however need to offer more flexibility, as they are essentially vector objects which happen to contain potentially raster image information. They may be placed at a completely different DPI level than that of the document (and maintain all data when scaled) so it doesn't always make sense for those to be pixel-aligned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fde101 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 5 minutes ago, Alfred said: always seemed odd to me that we need to enable the latter setting before we can toggle the former Yes, I think "Force" pixel alignment should override "Move by whole pixels" and disable that checkbox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff MEB Posted May 7, 2020 Staff Share Posted May 7, 2020 No, it shouldn't. There's cases where while working with Force Pixel Alignment enabled as a general rule, you may need to retain decimal values/position (usually half pixels) for specific objects/elements to get more control over antialiasing in particular when working with small images like small logo optimizations, icons etc. If Force Pixel Alignment would override Move by whole Pixels all elements would end up pixel aligned and that's not desirable in very specific use cases as the examples i mentioned. Quote A Guide to Learning Affinity Software Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 15 minutes ago, MEB said: There's cases where while working with Force Pixel Alignment enabled as a general rule, you may need to retain decimal values/position (usually half pixels) for specific objects/elements to get more control over antialiasing in particular when working with small images like small logo optimizations, icons etc. For those cases, what’s wrong with disabling ‘Force Pixel Alignment’, moving the objects by a whole number of pixels and then re-enabling FPA? It seems to me that the two options are mutually exclusive (except for the trivial case where an object starts on a pixel boundary). Quote Alfred Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for Windows • Windows 10 Home/Pro Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for iPad • iPadOS 17.4.1 (iPad 7th gen) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fde101 Posted May 8, 2020 Share Posted May 8, 2020 On 5/7/2020 at 8:18 AM, Alfred said: It seems to me that the two options are mutually exclusive (except for the trivial case where an object starts on a pixel boundary) Bingo. Logically, if an object starts on a pixel boundary and is moved by whole pixels, it will stay on a pixel boundary. Similarly, if it starts on a pixel boundary and is forced to stay on a pixel boundary, then it will always be moved by whole pixels. The option to force pixel alignment as currently implemented has no effect when "move by whole pixels" is enabled; when moving by whole pixels takes priority, then anything which is not on a pixel boundary is forced to stay on a non-pixel boundary. On the other hand, force pixel alignment mostly implies moving by whole pixels when the pixels are aligned to begin with - and if they are not, then that is the entire point of the option - to force them to be aligned after they are moved. Using both of these options at the same time is completely pointless. On 5/7/2020 at 7:55 AM, MEB said: you may need to retain decimal values/position (usually half pixels) for specific objects/elements For those cases the option to "move by whole pixels" should be a property of those specific objects and override the global setting. It should not be a global or document-wide setting that imposes on everything as this defeats the purpose of "force pixel alignment". Alfred 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walt.farrell Posted May 8, 2020 Share Posted May 8, 2020 1 hour ago, fde101 said: Using both of these options at the same time is completely pointless. But you cannot set "Move by whole pixels" unless you first set "Force pixel alignment", because it's a suboption. And having set both, if you turn off "Force pixel alignment" then "Move by whole pixels" has no effect except when nudging an object using the arrow keys. Quote -- Walt Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases PC: Desktop: Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Laptop: Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU. iPad: iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard Mac: 2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted May 8, 2020 Share Posted May 8, 2020 25 minutes ago, walt.farrell said: it's a suboption I don’t think it should be. As I see it, ‘Move by whole pixels’ should be presented as an alternative to ‘Force pixel alignment’, thus allowing the user to retain decimal values (as @MEB described) rather than having each pixel coordinate rounded to the nearest whole number. fde101 1 Quote Alfred Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for Windows • Windows 10 Home/Pro Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for iPad • iPadOS 17.4.1 (iPad 7th gen) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.