Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

AAAAGGGHHHHH, I hate it! It's so unintuitive!!!!!!! This should be easy.


Recommended Posts

Every time I want to do something straightforward, it doesn't work as expected, and I have to search the internet to find a solution.  I've been unable to quickly find a solution to Affinity's latest bizarre refusal to work logically.

Here's what I'm trying to do.  copy one layer into a mask layer.  I though it would just be a case of click the layer to copy, select all, copy (tried both ctrl c and copy flattened), then right click on the mask layer and choose 'edit mask', then paste..........Nope, doesn't like it...it's completely nonsensical.  Can anyone point me in the right direction?  

Affinity, if you're listening, for the love of all that is holy, PLEASE make your software intuitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say "copy one layer into a mask layer" do you mean that you want to use the layer as a mask? If so: Layer - Rasterise to Mask, to convert it to a mask, rather than trying to paste it into an existing mask.

Acer XC-895 : Core i5-10400 Hexa-core 2.90 GHz :  32GB RAM : Intel UHD Graphics 630 : Windows 10 Home
Affinity Publisher 2 : Affinity Photo 2 : Affinity Designer 2 : (latest release versions) on desktop and iPad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you paste copied data into Photo it becomes a new layer, it doesn't paste into an existing layer, so that one piece of this at least is consistent and intuitive.

However, it seems to be just about impossible to merge two mask layers.  That should definitely be addressed.

It is also a pain to convert a mask layer to a pixel layer to make it easier to manipulate.  So far the only way I see to do that is to fill a new pixel layer with white, move the mask to be a mask of that layer, and rasterize the layer to apply the mask to it.  Once the mask becomes a pixel layer it can be merged with other layers and used as a mask directly (without needing to convert it back to a mask layer).

This is one of the reasons I generally don't use mask layers.  A pixel layer is much easier to work with and can do the same job without the hassle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

It is also a pain to convert a mask layer to a pixel layer to make it easier to manipulate.  

Select the mask layer in the Layers panel, right-click, and Release Mask doesn't work for you?

-- 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

2 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Select the mask layer in the Layers panel, right-click, and Release Mask doesn't work for you?

That option moves the mask layer out from underneath the layer it is a mask for, but it is still a mask layer, not a pixel layer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fde101 said:

When you paste copied data into Photo it becomes a new layer, it doesn't paste into an existing layer, so that one piece of this at least is consistent and intuitive.

It's consistently unintuitive perhaps :D  What is paste inside for if it's not to paste inside a layer?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically the answer is, you cant paste into a mask.  I'm guessing if you want to combine masks you cant, and you have to have an endless number of masks instead.

How do I convert a mask to pixels?  I though perhaps as rasterize to mask turned pixels data to mask data, then rasterize would turn it back to pixel data........nope.  And what's the logic behind needing mask data and pixel data....couldn't pixel data suffice for both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, in this video I have absolutely no idea what's happening.  The red layer is showing as gray in the layers panel (second from the bottom).  The masks above that layer seem to mask the red layer, even though they're above it.....can anyone explain this, or is it just time to boycott the software and put it down to a not so expensive lesson to never buy cheap?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 3d illusions said:

The masks above that layer seem to mask the red layer, even though they're above it.....

Just like filter layers and adjustment layers, mask layers affect everything below. In all cases you can group the layers or nest the mask/adjustment/filter to the target layer if you want restrict its scope.

Alfred spacer.png
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

35 minutes ago, 3d illusions said:

How do I convert a mask to pixels? 

If I understand you correctly

1. Select the Mask layer
2. In Channels panel, right-click Mask Alpha 
3. Select Create Greyscale Layer

To save time I am currently using an automated AI to reply to some posts on this forum. If any of "my" posts are wrong or appear to be total b*ll*cks they are the ones generated by the AI. If correct they were probably mine. I apologise for any mistakes made by my AI - I'm sure it will improve with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, carl123 said:

If I understand you correctly

1. Select the Mask layer
2. In Channels panel, right-click Mask Alpha 
3. Select Create Greyscale Layer

Wouldn't it make more sense for rasterize layer to do this?  It's a given that it's going to be grayscale.......or are you telling me we have pixels layers, mask layers, and grayscale layers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

That option moves the mask layer out from underneath the layer it is a mask for, but it is still a mask layer, not a pixel layer.

Good point. Thanks.

-- 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

3 minutes ago, 3d illusions said:

Wouldn't it make more sense for rasterize layer to do this?  It's a given that it's going to be grayscale.......or are you telling me we have pixels layers, mask layers, and grayscale layers?

Personally, I would have started that sentence with "Thanks, " but I guess that's just me.

 

To save time I am currently using an automated AI to reply to some posts on this forum. If any of "my" posts are wrong or appear to be total b*ll*cks they are the ones generated by the AI. If correct they were probably mine. I apologise for any mistakes made by my AI - I'm sure it will improve with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 3d illusions said:

So basically the answer is, you cant paste into a mask.  I'm guessing if you want to combine masks you cant, and you have to have an endless number of masks instead.

How do I convert a mask to pixels?  I though perhaps as rasterize to mask turned pixels data to mask data, then rasterize would turn it back to pixel data........nope.  And what's the logic behind needing mask data and pixel data....couldn't pixel data suffice for both?

I like to use a normal layer as a mask, without any restrictions. A group of layers can make a composite mask, and you get full creative freedom.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, telemax said:

I like to use a normal layer as a mask

I love this technique and I'm toying with making this my new workflow. It does solve a few of the mask layer headaches Affinity is prone to, but a big disadvantage is editing the "mask" in b&w only mode. With a regular mask, a quick Option+click on the layer gives me b&w only. The new way, I have to reset the blend range and erase to see b&w only. Too many steps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, prophet said:

I love this technique and I'm toying with making this my new workflow. It does solve a few of the mask layer headaches Affinity is prone to, but a big disadvantage is editing the "mask" in b&w only mode. With a regular mask, a quick Option+click on the layer gives me b&w only. The new way, I have to reset the blend range and erase to see b&w only. Too many steps.

stick a black and white adjustment on the 'mask'

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, prophet said:

With a regular mask, a quick Option+click on the layer gives me b&w only. The new way, I have to reset the blend range and erase to see b&w only. Too many steps.

In that case, I would use groups. Mask-Group.afphoto

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.