layer lock, layer protection, image layers, let the user choice

[NotMyFault]

Dear developers,

Photo has multiple un-intuitive features regarding layers:

• Image layers are protected against most painting tools, but can be transformed feely
  • Users are unable to put pixel layers into this state of protection. Only placing files as layers result in this state.
  • Users are able to rasterize image layers, but no reverse function is available
• Layer lock protect against transformation, but not against painting tools
  • Users are able to lock/unlocklayers at any time

I suggest to provide 2 seperate lock features for all layers, to be freely chosen by users:

1. "Trans Lock": Lock against transformation (no change to curerent functionality)
   1. Active by default for placed files
   2. Deactivation will rasterice image layer
2. "Content Lock": Lock against painting, or any other change of layer content
   1. activate by user, default: inactive
   2. Can be toogled any time
3. If a user tries to act against a lock, a message could be displayed in the footer area "selected layer locked against transformation" / "selected layer protected against changes" / "selected layer locked against transformation and content changes"

 

These locks would dramatically simplify usage and provides a more consistent user experience.

Thank you for your great product.

 

 

[Pšenda]

 

[NotMyFault]

Thank you for merging this into the existing thread. I searched but got distracted by too many results in different sections  

My recommendation differs from what is discussed there in one aspect: locking of transform and edit should be both available, but separated. 
 

[fde101]

16 hours ago, NotMyFault said:

Users are unable to put pixel layers into this state of protection. Only placing files as layers result in this state.

Image layers and pixel layers are fundamentally different and each offers behavioral advantages in different situations.  Image layers represent images which are embedded or linked from outside sources: they cannot be directly edited because they may not exist in a "native" Affinity format; for example it might be stored in a compressed format and editing it would cause repeated data loss; it might not even be raster (PDF content could become an image layer for example even if that PDF is fully vector).

Image layers are in effect vector objects which are decorated with an image fill - note that not all image layers are even raster.

In Designer and Publisher you can create "linked" image layers which keep the content outside of the Affinity document.  If a large image is reused across multiple documents this can help to save disk space; it also means that if the image is modified externally then the change is automatically reflected across those documents which link to it.  Image layers may have a different color profile than the rest of the Affinity file which can have advantages in certain publishing scenarios.

Pixel layers represent directly editable grids of pixels that you can freely edit.  These are the "native" raster objects within an Affinity document.  They are always embedded (never linked) and it should always be possible to modify them within a document without losing quality due to compression or other such details.  Pixel layers generally follow the resolution and color space of the Affinity document which contains them.

[NotMyFault]

Thank you fde101 for your detailed description 

I may failed to describe my request good enough.

My intend was: give users an option to apply a protection of pixel layers against edits, analog to what image layers have. It does not mean convert to image layers. It only requires 1 bit of meta data for each layer (pixel, mask, adjustment, filter, maybe vector, text too...)

If set to 0: apply edits

if set to 1: do not apply edit to selected layer. May give a info message „layer is protected, check layer selection or tool selection“

Affinity already has a user preference setting about automatically rasterizing or not. (Image to pixel to be able to edit)
My request would complement this functionality for the reverse situation (pixel layer protection against edit by accident regarding layer selection or tool selection)

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MEB]

An Image layer is a "self contained" object that holds/preserves the original/placed image data (including colour profile) and has nothing to do with vectors (it's not a vector object with an image fill). It can't be edited at a pixel level until it's rasterised (converted to a pixel layer according to the dpi set for the document). A PDF cannot be placed as an Image layer - be it vector or not - it's always inserted as a linked or embedded document, same for other "complex" file types with multiple objects/layers (PSD, EPS, SVG).

Pixel layers are just regular (raster) layers comparable to the layers you are used to in Photoshop and other photo editors. They can be directly manipulated at a pixel level.

[fde101]

4 minutes ago, MEB said:

An Image layer is a "self contained" object that holds/preserves the original/placed image data (including colour profile) and has nothing to do with vectors - it's not a vector object.

Got that, but from the perspective of the user, it behaves like one, in the sense that you can't paint on it directly using the tools that apply to pixel layers, they don't follow the DPI settings of the document, and when one is selected with the move tool you get color options on the context toolbar that reflect the behavior of vector shapes and the like as opposed to setting painting colors for the raster drawing tools.

I would expect it to be easier for most users to think of them in terms of being shapes that display the image data than to see them in the more technical terms of being a semi-arbitrary byte container with a collection of known interpretations that some of us with a stronger technical background can grasp more easily than I would expect of most artists.

 

6 minutes ago, MEB said:

A PDF cannot be placed as an Image layer - be it vector or not - it's always inserted as a linked or embedded document 

Thanks, I do stand corrected on that one.  That is an important distinction for other purposes so I shouldn't have bridged that gap.  I was initially thinking here in terms of PDFs with passthrough but had forgotten that those are still ultimately interpreted into embedded documents for display purposes but treated specially upon export/print.

 

1 hour ago, NotMyFault said:

My intend was: give users an option to apply a protection of pixel layers against edits, analog to what image layers have.

I did get that, I was simply trying to explain why there is no option provided to go from a pixel layer to an image layer.  Pixel layers are the "native" rasterized format for Affinity documents, while image layers are more like containers for "foreign" images that have not been converted to the native format that the tools within the Affinity software are designed to manipulate.

[catlover]

When you lock a layer, it should be locked. 

As in : not editable. 

As in NOT.

Anything else  constitutes unlocked.

[Fritz_H]

On 3/20/2021 at 2:25 PM, catlover said:

When you lock a layer, it should be locked. 

As in : not editable. 

As in NOT.

Anything else  constitutes unlocked.

exactly!
I really do not understand why we have to discuss this "how much locked" a layer can be with Serif-Staff.
I wonder if they are aware that they develop software for customers and not for their own "fancy colorful unicorn-world" where only Apple-Users count?

locked means locked.

Serif? deliver! fast!!

I guess not just me is tired of your "creative" excuses and horrible usability-flaws.