Merge Down improvement

[Wosven]

38 minutes ago, NotMyFault said:

He used circle etc and needed them pixelated.

Wheb using AP, the view is already on pixel mode. Yoy should already see the result (what your vector shapes will look raterised, and if you need to lower the PPI to accentuate the "pixel effect"). You can add a blur effect on you shape to get more diffusion also. And the vector shapes are already at the document's PPI, so there won't be any "surprising difference" as a result. If you want to "double" the pixel effect, just duplicate the document and use a lower PPI, and paste it back in the higher PPI one.

So I did a test. A paysage, with a white circle with blur effect, and above a red circle without gaussian blur.

• If I group everything and rasterise, the result is like expected and displayed on screen. No surprise.

• If I merge down the red circle ob the white one, and this new layer to the background, the circle shapes are as expected, but the whole background is blurred. I don't think it's what is expected, and certainly not when doing pixel art when lines should stay defined.

56 minutes ago, NotMyFault said:

 

If you want to combine multiple DPI versions inside one document, you get a much simpler workflow

The workflow is simpler since the same as in a layout app, but the result is wrong when you want to merge down part of your layers — since Affinity apps grouped layers work differently than in PS, (where you can group them to "clear" the layer panel, and they'll keep on acting as before grouping on the layers below) —, you can't group them as easily. So for different reasons like responsiveness of the app or just to get fewer layers, you want to merge down.

Now, if you only work with the background layer, you'll be able to merge down. But you won't be able to an "image" layer without rasterising it first.

I'm not sure talking of "keeping the original PPI" is relevant with mergin down, since it'll only be possible with items of the same PPI, that end up being the ones of the document.

 

Grouping and merging will rasterise all layers before merging, avoiding bluriness, and Merge visible too.

It just look like a forgotten step in the Merge down command.

[R C-R]

2 hours ago, Wosven said:

And the vector shapes are already at the document's PPI, so there won't be any "surprising difference" as a result.

Actually, the vectors are not at any PPI since they are resolution independent. In AP they are just always rendered on screen at the document's PPI. This becomes obvious if the document is edited in AD or APub.

3 hours ago, Wosven said:

If I merge down the red circle ob the white one ...

Maybe I misunderstood what you meant, but I can't merge down a circle (an ellipse shape) unless I rasterized it first, converting it to a pixel layer -- otherwise, Meger Down is greyed out. The same is true for the white circle (I assume to be another ellipse shape) -- both must be rasterized for merge down to be available. Also, if I decide to rasterize the while circle with the blur FX applied to it, I get a dialog asking me if I want to preserve the FX or not. If I do not preserve the blur FX & then merge down the now rasterized red circle, in the merged pixel layer the red shape is not blurred. If I do keep the blur FX, then both are blurred.

If I have a separate background layer below the circles, it is unaffected by merging the two layers above it. If I merge down the merged circle layer, that does not blur whatever was on the background layer.

It might help me better understand what you mean if you could post your test file, maybe with the history included.

[NotMyFault]

4 minutes ago, R C-R said:

but I can't merge down a circle (an ellipse shape) unless I rasterized it first, converting it to a pixel layer -- otherwise, Meger Down is greyed out

Only the lower layer must be pixel. The upper layer can be of any type.

[R C-R]

4 minutes ago, NotMyFault said:

Only the lower layer must be pixel. The upper layer can be of any type.

Yes, I neglected to consider that. However, I still get different results if I keep or discard the blur FX on the lower while layer when rasterizing it & then merging down the red layer with it. If kept, the merged layer blurs both circles; if discarded, only the lower white one is blurred.

Do you get something different?

[NotMyFault]

Actually there is and known issue with "rasterize" leading to unwanted anti-aliasing.

Interestingly, merge down correctly interprets anti-aliasing and could act as workaround. So if Affinity follows my feature request i hope they will use a fixed "rasterize" functionality 😂

 

[Fixx]

18 hours ago, Wosven said:

Affinity apps grouped layers work differently than in PS, (where you can group them to "clear" the layer panel, and they'll keep on acting as before grouping on the layers below) —, you can't group them as easily

Can you clarify what is the difference? I thought they behave similarly.

[Wosven]

2 hours ago, Fixx said:

Can you clarify what is the difference?

Unless the behavior was modified (I didn't needed working on image like this recently):

• in PS, you can group different adjustment layers in a group, they'll keep on morking on the layers below the group,

• in AP, the grouped adjustment layers will only work on a pixel layer (and perhaps a fill layer, possible trick) at the bottom of this group, but not anymore on the ones outside and below the group.

[edit] it seems the behavior was improved and if there isn't any pixel object inside the group, the adjustment layers keep on working on layers below. But like with fire, when I learn a "bad move", I tend to not reproduce it, I don't test to check if it was improved/modified. [/edit]

[walt.farrell]

2 hours ago, Wosven said:

edit] it seems the behavior was improved and if there isn't any pixel object inside the group, the adjustment layers keep on working on layers below. But like with fire, when I learn a "bad move", I tend to not reproduce it, I don't test to check if it was improved/modified. [/edit]

I think that's the way it has always worked in Photo.

[Wosven]

21 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

I think that's the way it has always worked in Photo.

I don't think, or we needed time to realise having a pixel object in a group keep the adjustements to work below. I remember discussions about this, and simply avoided grouping adjustments... Using adjustements, grouping them and masking the group is a worflow I use a lot in PS. I certainly tried it in AP from the beginning I installed the app.

[JulianB]

Was working on line work for an illustration, and I didn't realize how merging my layers was blurring my work until it was too late. Looked around and I cannot believe topics have been made years prior and this is still a thing.

[josbin]

Hey hey,

I just ran into the problem as well. This is a big thing in my opinion in illstration work and as pointed out, anyone coming from PS will be hit hard, like @JulianB ... Sorry Bro!
I love Affinity and the Integration within the three apps is sooooooo fckn nice, thats why I stick to Affnity. But I cannot recommend Affinity for Illustration work because of this weird behavior (and some other problems). Please integrate this function as suggested  The workaround is just too tedious... 

I opened it as a new topic in the V2 Forum just so it doesnt go under the radar! 

 

[Fist of the mighty Bob]

It's also useless for lofi pixel art work. Rasterizing destroys the pixel art as it adds unwanted aliasing pixels.