Jump to content
HaDAk

[Fixed] Layered tiff opened improperly

Recommended Posts

The irony is that "Layered TIFF" still uses the same proprietary Adobe format data - so there is literally no difference at all!  The only possible advantage in TIFF is that a large number of apps can handle the flattened image which is always present, whereas a PSD is not guaranteed to contain a flattened version of the image.

 

@Stephen_H

 

It might sound like silently saving back to a PSD is a nice solution, but trust me - we've thought about it for a long time, and offering transparent save back to PSD is only going to end in tears for most users.  We offer it as an export option only because of the amount of conversion required to our data to put it in PSD form - it is far from trivial.  Since PSD cannot support the advanced features of Affinity, PSD export from Affinity might require layers to be flattened, reordered, restructured, in order to make the exported PSD visually correct (even if the layer structure has been changed).

 

We have been very clear that we don't want to be a middle man in an otherwise Adobe tool chain.  We have (what we consider to be) a better document format. We want you to work within Affinity - import your files and work with them in native Affinity format, or just work in Affinity from scratch.  You'll get the most out of our apps that way.  Also, native Affinity files will load and save way faster than PSD files, and you can save your command history.

 

I've said it many times - if you require close collaboration with other Photoshop users or need to produce PSD files for clients, then you really need Adobe.  It would be the same for any other third party app - PSD is a supported format, not a native format to us.  Of course, simple bitmap formats are easily supported, but complicated documents like PSD are way more involved.


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only possible advantage in TIFF is that a large number of apps can handle the flattened image which is always present, whereas a PSD is not guaranteed to contain a flattened version of the image.

Exactly and why TIFF and PSD should be treated equally. More app's can handle TIFF, that's one advantage. Adobe migration pretty much requires both formats be treated equally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure it's that straight forward - neither format guarantees conformity for all uses. It all depends on what you intend to do with your files.  The embedded PSD data in a TIFF is for people who want to maintain their source non-composited image - but it is only optionally written to the TIFF file.  Similarly, a PSD always contains the layers, but is not guaranteed to contain a flattened version (or rasterised versions of masks, etc) - so the ability of another app to reproduce the content of a PSD depends on the choices the user make when saving - something that the third party app had no control over.

 

To my mind, PSD is best for anyone maintaining their source image.  TIFF is an old format that is best for flattened images - the ability to inject the extra data into a TIFF is a (lucky?) side effect of the original specification, but it does't change the fact the the TIFF format does not have native layer data.

 

The most sensible choice is to use the native file format for the app you are using, and not to expect to be able to chop and change between formats without some sort of compromise.

 

If Affinity is your choice, then you will get the best experience by staying with Affinity files. I can give you many reasons why using our native format is going to be better.  In brief, we've developed a format that is geared towards performance in terms of storage, memory and speed, and that incorporates certain protection features.  Anyone working with very large raster heavy files and making frequent saves should see the benefit of our format over PSD or TIFF.  I used to get sick of waiting for "other apps" to just make a regular save - with progress bars!  Our saves are incremental, and our loads are structured to provide faster immediate access.


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PSD is a supported format, not a native format to us. 

 

Ah yes, sometime we forget and get a bit caught up in the features request. Thanks for putting it so succinctly.

 

Just last week I was discussing the point of "Save As" and "Export" in the studio. 

"Save as" should be saving a single native file format, and "Export" should be producing everything else supported.

 

Illustrator "Saves as" 6 file formats and "Exports" 15 (one of which is even duplicated)

Photoshop "Saves as" 22 file formats and "Exports" 5

InDesign  "Saves as" 3 file formats and "Exports" 13 (one of which is even duplicated)

 

How's that for a confused system? Zero consistency ...

(InDesign nearly gets it right because it saves 2 InDesign file formats and a Template format – all native)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly and why TIFF and PSD should be treated equally. More app's can handle TIFF, that's one advantage. Adobe migration pretty much requires both formats be treated equally. 

 

Flat TIFFs are widely supported, but the layers within TIFFs are not. so I disagree completely on this issue. If the layers within a "Layered TIFF" are not widely supported, then I cannot consider a layered TIFF to be widely supported.

 

If I open a layered TIFF and just get a flattened image, I'm going be pretty upset and NOT consider that to be a supported file. (I might as well just open the image into Preview and export it if I'm not going to get all the promised data within the file.)

 

(And the odds are, that if the application supports the layers within a layered TFF, then it probably supports layered PSDs at the same time so why the big deal? This feels like a storm in a tea cup.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flat TIFFs are widely supported, but the layers within TIFFs are not.

 

Layered TIFFs are supported when a company wishes to support them! Further, there's a lot of users working with layered TIFF's instead of layered PSD's. Affinity Photo accesses one, not the other. So if they want Adobe customers to come over to the fold, they should (and they say they can and will) support layered TIFFs.

 

IT ISN'T IMPOSSIBLE! 

 

 

 

If I open a layered TIFF and just get a flattened image, I'm going be pretty upset and NOT consider that to be a supported file.

 Which is exactly why layered TIFF's should be supported! 

 

 

 

And the odds are, that if the application supports the layers within a layered TFF, then it probably supports layered PSDs at the same time so why the big deal?

 

The big deal is there's lots of layered TIFFs from Adobe Photoshop out there, I have thousands as do others. Having to batch convert to PSD isn't going to sell Ex-Adobe users to Affinity Photo if they can as they say they can do, support layered TIFFs. Photoshop isn't the only app that can read layered TIFFs. 

 

Here's a taste of the why's:

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=18965.msg134830#msg134830

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we stopped referring to these files as "layered TIFFs" and used the term "TIFF with embedded proprietary Photoshop layered data", I think this discussion would read very differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Um, that discussion is between photographers. Their concerns of file type, compatibility between converters, native file formats, colour profiles, file sizes, archiving, embedding paths and compression options are valid, but this discussion is about the layers within TIFFs. Not once has any of them been concerned with layers.

 

Layers in a TIFF is a "hack" of the original format, and PSD has a few legacy limitations that the PSB format resolves. The way I see it, we should all be dropping both in favour of the newer PSB format because Adobe is probably going to push it in future software releases. PSB support might actually "future-proof" Affinity apps better. (After what I've learnt in this discussion, I'm definitely going to do some experimenting with my workflow to see if PSB affects it in any way.)

 

BTW, you've bought Affinity Photo/Designer so will always be able to open your native Affinity files. Even if Affinity closes its doors, this will not change so why the huge concern about saving your master files in an old non-native format for archiving? Surely wider file type support is for reliably moving files between non-related applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AndrewRodney

 

I've read that link, and it is a totally subjective opinion.  The short of it is, they are wrong in their understanding of what the layer data is in a TIFF, and how the data is supported by third party apps.

 

As I have pointed out, at some effort, the layer data is the same as PSD layer data - so you cannot view the layer support in a TIFF as a "TIFF feature".  TIFFs do not support layers natively. The description of this layer data is not documented in the TIFF standard.

 

I am not sold on the wisdom of embedding native file format data in side a TIFF, even though we are going to do it.  TIFF is natively a flat image format - with these layers additions it is just as "bastardised" as the PSD format, if not more.  The additional data bloats the file size, and is not useful to all apps, so unless you work exclusively within Adobe world, the usefulness of the extra data is questionable.

Any app that can read the PSD layer data out of a TIFF will have the same problems reproducing the composited image.  We do not produce a 100% pixel perfect version of what Photoshop produces, and no other third party app will either - though I would argue that we are closer than any other app.


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, can we wrap this thread up.  This discussion is not leading anywhere.


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, can we wrap this thread up.  This discussion is not leading anywhere.

Yes; I believe we've established all that we need to.  Good discussion folks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, that discussion is between photographers. 

So what? What does the job of the person have to do with Affinity supporting a file format? 

Here's the facts; there are tens of thousands perhaps millions of Photoshop users, photographers and otherwise who have created layered TIFFs. Affinity Photo supports layered PSDs, it can support layered TIFFs and thanks to the efforts of customers and Affinity, we're told this will happen. That only adds to the product and migration from Adobe users to Affinity Photo. It's as simple as that! YOU don't like layered TIFFs? Don't use them. 

 

As to the proprietary format AFTER importing either flat or layered PSD or TIFF from Affinity, that has nothing to do with the feature request that thankfully, Affinity has decided to follow. I applaud them for treating PSD and TIFF upon import as equal citizens. 

 

I'm done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too. Thanks all – certainly one of the more lively discussions.

 

39 posts... awesome!

 

(Do we need a live chatroom facility where we can debate pre-chosen topics based on the longest discussions? Imagine 20 people logging on for an open, time-limited discussion of topics like file formats, best practices, workflows or something more lighthearted like "the most useless features in graphic software. Should I post this as a feature request?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I think we've all had our say now.


SerifLabs team - Affinity Developer
  • Software engineer  -  Photographer  -  Guitarist  -  Philosopher
  • iMac 27" Retina 5K (Late 2015), 4.0GHz i7, AMD Radeon R9 M395
  • MacBook (Early 2015), 1.3GHz Core M, Intel HD 5300
  • iPad Pro 10.5", 256GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×