RAW sidecar-file required IMPORTANT

[lefteye]

I've read many requests for this, the reasons for it's importance (BTW it's pretty much essential!), the reasons from Affinity why it hasn't been implemented and the cumbersome totally impractical workarounds; I'm not going to reiterate all that here, but simply state the case...

1. if the .xmp sidecar format cannot be implemented due to incompatibilities with Adobe etc, use a proprietary sidecar format (to cover the all the Basic / Lens / Details / Tones adjustments).
This is actually an easy job, I could write this code in less than a day - its just a write/read text file.

2. if local adjustments cannot be included yet, omit them, just give us the global adjustments in a sidecar now (and then work on inclusion of local adjustments).

3. add an option to use the 'Previous Conversion' settings (this is just a copy of the last 'sidecar' file in an application known fixed location - that's overwritten with each conversion).

/

4. associated to raw though not to sidecar files... when in Develop, viewing gat 1:1 zoom, and adjusting the Detail / Sharpening, the pixel render of the screen result is persistently smoothed, when he file is Developed it is not smoothed. Why is the screen smoothed in Develop mode?? - this renders Sharpen adjustments erroneous and impossible to equate to the developed outcome, please remove this weird smoothing of pixels in raw Develop mode!

Thank you.

Edited December 1, 2020 by lefteye

[fde101]

On 12/1/2020 at 1:32 PM, lefteye said:

I've read many requests for this

Then you should have added to one of those rather than create yet another thread requesting the same thing.  As per the guidelines (https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature-requests-suggestions/):

Quote

• Please search first, it may well be that you have a suggestion that others also want. If so add your feelings to their thread.
• If you cannot find your idea, make a new post. Try to keep your post as concise as possible, and for the title of your post to describe the request as best you can.
• Please just do one suggestion per thread. If your post title is “Here’s a few ideas to improve Affinity Publisher” you’ll be asked to split them up.
• Please understand we can’t possibly do everything which is requested, but we try to make the best calls we can in terms of prioritising our work. Constantly nagging or being overly ranty that we haven’t implemented one of your suggestions will not help your cause, and such posts will be deleted.

 

On 12/1/2020 at 1:32 PM, lefteye said:

This is actually an easy job, I could write this code in less than a day - its just a write/read text file.

Affinity Photo is a destructive image editor by nature - not a RAW developer.  Think Photoshop, not Lightroom.

The "sidecar" file would need to contain actual image data if it has been edited, at which point it may as well just be another image format.

[Fixx]

16 hours ago, fde101 said:

Affinity Photo is a destructive image editor by nature - not a RAW developer.  Think Photoshop, not Lightroom.

Funny thing is that PhotoPersona tries very hard to be non-destructive, but Develop Persona is NOT. BassAckwards compared to most other software solutions. 

Really the point s that RAW developer is one function, DAM is another and pixel editor is yet another. I am not sure Affinity has working plan for this whole set.

[fde101]

34 minutes ago, Fixx said:

Photo Persona tried very hard to be non-destructive

No, the Photo Persona is not really either.  It has some limited "non-destructive" functionality (masking, adjustment layers and live filters when you do not "apply" them but leave them as layers, cropping which may later depend on the mode), but the majority of it (brushes, "rasterize" commands, adjustment layers and filters when you "apply" them, frequency separations, the "auto" levels/colors/contrast/white balance buttons, etc.) is quite destructive.

[lefteye]

17 hours ago, fde101 said:

Affinity Photo is a destructive image editor by nature - not a RAW developer.  Think Photoshop, not Lightroom.

The "sidecar" file would need to contain actual image data if it has been edited, at which point it may as well just be another image format.

I'm not sure why you are trying to look away from the fact Affinity Photo is an image editor AND a RAW developer.  Just like I don't use Lightroom, I use Photoshop and ACR.

When Affinity develops a raw file the raw file is not destroyed - this is obvious, the raw developer is not destructive. The settings used to develop the raw could be saved within a sidecar file without any problems or length coding. The settings are not an 'image file' they don't need to be another image format, they are just a text file - this is obvious. I presume you know what an .xmp file is - it's not an image file. I can't believe I'm having to explain this.

The raw develop settings, under the Basic, Lens, Curves and Tones tabs, can at present be individually saved as presets - these preset are not image files, they are just text files - this is obvious. If all the Basic, Lens, Curves and Tones tabs could be saved as one collective preset then associated with the raw file as a sidecar then the raw developer within Affinity would become incredibly useful - and just by saving presets collectively as a sidecar. Affinity already has all the raw power it needs, it can save presets, it just need the guys at Affinity to do an afternoon of coding to add the sidecar save/load ability.

Alternatively we could all forget that Affinity can already develop raw files and save raw setting presets, and also pretend that it destroys raw files.

 

 

[fde101]

21 minutes ago, lefteye said:

Affinity Photo is an image editor AND a RAW developer

Final Cut Pro has built-in color correction tools, but that doesn't make it a color grading application.  While you can do basic and even some relatively advanced video color grading from within Final Cut Pro, it is not really suitable as a dedicated color grading tool as it lacks an appropriate workflow for doing that.

DaVinci Resolve separates color correction onto a different "page" with a workflow that is engineered for color grading.  That is actually its "bread and butter", even though it can now do editing as well.

Similarly, Affinity Photo can develop RAW files, but it is not a RAW developer in the same sense as applications such as Capture One or DXO PhotoLab, or even "ACR" (and yes I know what that is - it is indeed a RAW developer though it does not have DAM functionality the way that Capture One does; DXO PhotoLab sits somewhere in the middle).  Affinity Photo does not have the workflow of a dedicated RAW development tool, even though the fundamental capability of developing a RAW file is present in the application.

[lefteye]

15 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Final Cut Pro has built-in color correction tools, but that doesn't make it a color grading application.  While you can do basic and even some relatively advanced video color grading from within Final Cut Pro, it is not really suitable as a dedicated color grading tool as it lacks an appropriate workflow for doing that.

DaVinci Resolve separates color correction onto a different "page" with a workflow that is engineered for color grading.  That is actually its "bread and butter", even though it can now do editing as well.

Similarly, Affinity Photo can develop RAW files, but it is not a RAW developer in the same sense as applications such as Capture One or DXO PhotoLab, or even "ACR" (and yes I know what that is - it is indeed a RAW developer though it does not have DAM functionality the way that Capture One does; DXO PhotoLab sits somewhere in the middle).  Affinity Photo does not have the workflow of a dedicated RAW development tool, even though the fundamental capability of developing a RAW file is present in the application.

I use Adobe Bridge CC (which is free) and FastRawViewer to rate and select files, and steer clear of applications such as LR that require importing of photos and cataloging. Bridge does all I need in that regard. ACR is a great raw developer - simple and to the point. I use Bridge and open raws into Affinity's raw developer (just as if ACR). All that Affinity lacks is the ability to save a sidecar along with the raw. Affinity certainly does not need to integrate a DAM (if it ever does and forces cataloging I'm out). It just needs to save the raw settings as a sidecar. I'm not sure why everyone doesn't want this? It's just saving the settings as a text file, no big deal to implement. I'm certainly not asking for it to become Capture One etc, just to save a sidecar - that's it, that's all, nothing else added.

[fde101]

2 minutes ago, lefteye said:

Affinity certainly does not need to integrate a DAM (if it ever does and forces cataloging I'm out).

This has been discussed previously.  If Affinity does provide a DAM it would most likely be as a separate application.

 

3 minutes ago, lefteye said:

I'm not sure why everyone doesn't want this?

I can't understand why anyone would want this?

What purpose would it serve?

What would you do with it that you wouldn't already be able to do with the .afphoto file if they just retained the settings for when you switch back to the Develop persona?

 

7 minutes ago, lefteye said:

It's just saving the settings as a text file, no big deal to implement.

Ok, so the settings get saved to the text file... then what?  It uselessly sits there on the disk accomplishing nothing?

You would also need a way to use the settings from the text file.  That is a completely different workflow than the one that Affinity Photo is clearly designed for.

The sidecar would need to in effect replace the use of the .afphoto file, but if the settings can be stored in the .afphoto file, then you only serve to lose functionality from this as the sidecar could not store any of the other editing data relevant to the document if it is designed to only contain the RAW development information.  On the other hand, in theory, the .afphoto file could allow the original RAW file to be linked instead of embedded (much as an image can be linked rather than embedded in Publisher) and the develop persona modified to work with an image layer instead of a pixel layer, which would be much more meaningful to an application such as this one.

 

12 minutes ago, lefteye said:

I use Adobe Bridge CC (which is free) and FastRawView to rate and select files, and steer clear of applications such as LR that requiring importing of photos and cataloging.

42 minutes ago, lefteye said:

I don't use Lightroom, I use Photoshop and ACR.

Ok, so from what you are describing, you are currently using ACR as a RAW developer, Bridge + FastRawView as an organizational tool, and Photoshop as an editor.

Affinity Photo replaces only Photoshop in that situation.  While it does have some basic built-in RAW development capability, it is not a substitute for ACR or some other dedicated RAW developer.  It works more like UFRaw works as a plugin within GIMP.

RAW development in Photo is done within the context of an Affinity Photo document - in other words, you "develop" the RAW from inside of the equivalent of a PSD file - not in preparation for creating such a document.

There isn't really a "nice" way to do what you are really asking for in a way that makes sense for an application like Affinity Photo - it would need to be a separate, independent application for that to really work.

If you are looking for a replacement for ACR which uses sidecar files, check out DXO PhotoLab, On1 Photo RAW, darktable, RawTherapee, etc...  PhotoLab uses sidecar files and has very limited organizational functionality which works within the file system "in place" (but also has an optional "album" feature of sorts); On1 Photo RAW similarly works out of the filesystem and has optional "albums" and can catalog the filesystem into a database for faster access if desired (but still treats the filesystem as the authoritative source); it can use sidecars if that feature is turned on in its preferences.  Both darktable and RawTherapee are free/open-source and offer limited browsing tools and use sidecar files.

[Nikon Shooter]

49 minutes ago, lefteye said:

I'm certainly not asking for it to become Capture One etc, just to save a sidecar - that's it, that's all, nothing else added.

AF is a pixel editor… coma.

It does have the tools to develop a RAW file — only one at the time, that is — but the
main purpose of it is an immediate conversion from a data file to an image that will
be edited. Given this, side car files are irrelevant.

I do, in my workflow, use first a proper RAW converter — and that suffices most of the 
time — when not, I will publish an editable image to work eventually in a pixel editor.