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

I have Deleted V2 and Gone Back to V1


Recommended Posts

Just now, Brian_J said:

@fde101 I'm seeing the same thing as you and agree, the hollow circle would be nicer for the 'off' state. I wonder if it's an Apple/Windows difference. I'm on a Windows computer.

In that case it is unlikely, as I am on a Mac.  It looks the same on the iPad also.

I believe the sample image was the concoction of another poster, above, given as a suggested improvement.  I don't think it is an actual screenshot from the application.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, fde101 said:

In that case it is unlikely, as I am on a Mac.  It looks the same on the iPad also.

I believe the sample image was the concoction of another poster, above, given as a suggested improvement.  I don't think it is an actual screenshot from the application.

@fde101 Ah, okay. Well, good to know you Mac users aren't getting special treatment in this case. 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dangerous said:

Where? I can't see that option

I'm sorry, in the meantime I have learned that this option is Mac only.

MacBookAir 15": MacOS Ventura > Affinity v1, v2, v2 beta // MacBookPro 15" mid-2012: MacOS El Capitan > Affinity v1 / MacOS Catalina > Affinity v1, v2, v2 beta // iPad 8th: iPadOS 16 > Affinity v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Gary.JONES said:

No - I am not lost, but you are missing the point.

Radio buttons are INTENDED to be used where the selection is mutually exclusive - read the Apple User Interface guidelines.

When more than one item in a SET (eg a set of layers) can be selected, Radio Buttons are not used because they imply mutual exclusivity.

Checkboxes are used when more than one item in a set can be ON at the same time.

Try playing two or more stations at the same time on your Radio :)

I know that radio buttons are mutually exclusive, I also knew when I saw the first post mentioning them that it was about the look and not the action. I also knew that the image was of the check buttons at the ends of TWO layers which is clear to see by the line dividing them. Either a solid dot (ON) or a hollow dot (OFF) is just another version of a square with a tick or a square without a tick. It is simple to understand.

I was unsure about the dots but a dot I can see compared to a dot I can barely see, the meaning is clear and the difference is night & day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2022 at 3:12 AM, MoonaticDestiny said:

Lol. Youre absolutely right though. You know why? Because the eraser tool looks like a pill from the Dr Mario game and the magic wand looks like a wand for a wizard. Im starting not to like them. I really like the icons from v1. They look dark, sleek, and cool. The touch of blue looks good on the gray icons. They need to go back to these v1 icons. Dont go color with these icons. Just keep it monochromatic with a touch of blue to go with affinity designers blue color theme. 

 

icons.jpg

You can switch them to mono if that is what you prefer, personally I like the coloured ones and hate gameboy & stupid mario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is another issue not discussed on the first 4 pages of this topic: file format compatibility within the Affinity photo range.

I took a picture in afphoto format made with V1 and edited it in V2.
Then saved.

Now I want to open it with V1 and here what I got:

spacer.png

I tried to locate an option to keep compatibility within versions and found none in the preferences nor in the save as menu.

I tried thus to save the new file as a .PSD so I can import it in V1. 
And it removed the background of the picture...
So the picture is lost (I'll use a backup but that's not good for V2)

This issue alone makes working with Affinity not a viable on a business: you'd have to get all your graphists work with the very same version of Affinity photo at the same time and not be able to work with fellows using Photoshop.

Serif is not Microsoft / Adobe yet: it has no hegemony on the field so it can't play lock up strategy.

Also I think Serif has an Adobe strategy: cater for the masses not for the pros.

It's a bit like saying: "I'm an artist, I buy my artistry tools at the supermarket" and you got low quality pencil, paints, ...
Whereas the pros go to dedicated shops for pros and buy pros products at the price it costs for the quality required.

This idea "We need the whole market to buy our products" is a no go: Pros want pros products because they have the experience to match it hence the very detailed first post by Gary.Jones whereas newbies have a learning curve to climb and can't work with the pros and their tools straight away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, emmanuelp said:

There is another issue not discussed on the first 4 pages of this topic: file format compatibility within the Affinity photo range.

I took a picture in afphoto format made with V1 and edited it in V2.
Then saved.

Now I want to open it with V1 and here what I got:

 

Why would you expect an old version of a program to open the files of a new version with incompatible features and why would you want  to?

If you are 'trying out' a new program it make sense to duplicate the file and open the dup or open the file and SAVE AS giving it a similar name just in case till you are ready to commit fully to the new program. When I try things I'm not sure about I copy the files (have copied over 10 gig of files 'just in case') so I don't mess up. Commonsense really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, emmanuelp said:



This idea "We need the whole market to buy our products" is a no go: 

Isn't this the reason adobe keep buying out the competition, in an effort to get everyone to buy RENT their overpriced programs. I had adobe for 4 years and spent £480 or so (for one program (PS, I don't count LR as it was crap) to be left with nothing when I cancelled my subs. Both Ver 1 & Ver 2 of Affinity cost a lot less and they are mine till I pop my clogs up upgrade my computer to one that will not run them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Controversy of the dots aside, I don't take issue in variation of presentation, as long as it's evident through typical usage what it is intended to do/not do and can be learned fairly quickly. The issue with the dots and some of the other elements is there's not much variability between individual states. The irony, is there are issues with consistency/competition of elements in other parts of the interface. I'm a little concerned if I were looking at a stranger's screenshots on the forum who was using the other theme if I will be able to judge their option/choices correctly by assumption? The UI indeed needs tweaking.

Microsoft Windows 10 Home (Build 19045)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8Ghz (-30 all core +200mhz PBO); Mobo: Asus X470 Prime Pro
32GB DDR4 (3600Mhz); EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 3080 X3C Ultra 12GB
Monitor 1 4K @ 125% due to a bug
Monitor 2 4K @ 150%
Monitor 3 (as needed) 1080p @ 100%

WACOM Intuos4 Large; X-rite i1Display Pro; NIKON D5600 DSLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, emmanuelp said:

There is another issue not discussed on the first 4 pages of this topic: file format compatibility within the Affinity photo range.

I took a picture in afphoto format made with V1 and edited it in V2.
Then saved.

Now I want to open it with V1 and here what I got:

spacer.png

I noticed this straight away, there's no compatibility format. I thought, that's going to need changing. If they were working on V2 until the very last moment, then it makes some sense why it may not have been added in yet if there were still things to solidify and maybe wouldn't have had time to test a compatibility feature (and adding for the first time here, important to note as it'll be the baseline format codewise going forward...)

Microsoft Windows 10 Home (Build 19045)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8Ghz (-30 all core +200mhz PBO); Mobo: Asus X470 Prime Pro
32GB DDR4 (3600Mhz); EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 3080 X3C Ultra 12GB
Monitor 1 4K @ 125% due to a bug
Monitor 2 4K @ 150%
Monitor 3 (as needed) 1080p @ 100%

WACOM Intuos4 Large; X-rite i1Display Pro; NIKON D5600 DSLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangerous: all software working with pictures have to keep compatibility, think about it and you'll see lock up are nefarious for customers and I pay so I want compatibility.
Never had this issue with 10 years of use of photoshop.
The fact that the whole software industry is playing the very same game of renting instead of owning and put in place lock up strategy to increase money over usability is a scam.

You've bought a knife or a fork, you own them, you use them as you like when you want them, no incompatibility with slice of bread from knife 1 and slice of bread from knife 2. You bought a car, it runs on the road, it works with gasoil, electricity, hydrogen, what else and it still use the road. I want software to produce output compatible with other software version because working with others is about compatibility.

The way things go is no ownership of anything which is depossession and is obviously not what we want (If you want to give me everything you've please let me know in the comment, I'll send you address and bank account for you to send me your money btw).

The fact that Adobe has moved into this game is a sure thing that it's bad: I was using CS2 then CS6 and they were fine but when they moved to the rent model under the cloud, suddenly their tools become more and more toys like and I work with tools not toys. I want to have them having a stable UI and not 'hey we have a new function which will make your life a dream!' because NO there is no function doing the hard work for you (I saw this mesh warp function in Affinity V2 which was a remake of puppet warp intruduced in Photoshop more than 8 years ago:

). You do the hard work because you've a passion for it, you like that and painting is about patience, taking time to observe, learn, grow not clicking the magic button who do stuff you don't know how to do and paying the new function. But newbies like that: hey I'm an artist, look I push the button and the super graphics is done. So it's not you an artist, it's the software doing things instead of you: you become dependent of it. If you're great at graphics, you can do it with mspaint: no function, just your skills.

I bought Affinity V1 5 months ago, now Serif wants me to pay again and make my V2 pictures not compatible with V1 while removing the layers panel and changing the UI with strange choice (dots instead of crossed square) and I should be happy and tell them thanks?
Come on, this is critical thinking.

If Serif wants to improve its UI that's ok, just enable more options to enable / disable it in the preferences.
Want to change the file format? Ok again, just enable compatibility option in the preferences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, emmanuelp said:

The fact that the whole software industry is playing the very same game of renting instead of owning

Technically, on maybe a pedantic note, we have never 'owned' software, even when we bought it in a box from the store - we have only ever paid for a license to use it. We're paying for the right to use someone else's software, under certain conditions and terms. It just used to be easier to exploit and break those terms and conditions. Online registrations, dongles and now subscription models are ways the software companies introduced to try and prevent us from doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, emmanuelp said:

Dangerous: all software working with pictures have to keep compatibility, think about it and you'll see lock up are nefarious for customers and I pay so I want compatibility.
Never had this issue with 10 years of use of photoshop.
The fact that the whole software industry is playing the very same game of renting instead of owning and put in place lock up strategy to increase money over usability is a scam.

You've bought a knife or a fork, you own them, you use them as you like when you want them, no incompatibility with slice of bread from knife 1 and slice of bread from knife 2. You bought a car, it runs on the road, it works with gasoil, electricity, hydrogen, what else and it still use the road. I want software to produce output compatible with other software version because working with others is about compatibility.

The way things go is no ownership of anything which is depossession and is obviously not what we want (If you want to give me everything you've please let me know in the comment, I'll send you address and bank account for you to send me your money btw).

The fact that Adobe has moved into this game is a sure thing that it's bad: I was using CS2 then CS6 and they were fine but when they moved to the rent model under the cloud, suddenly their tools become more and more toys like and I work with tools not toys. I want to have them having a stable UI and not 'hey we have a new function which will make your life a dream!' because NO there is no function doing the hard work for you (I saw this mesh warp function in Affinity V2 which was a remake of puppet warp intruduced in Photoshop more than 8 years ago:

). You do the hard work because you've a passion for it, you like that and painting is about patience, taking time to observe, learn, grow not clicking the magic button who do stuff you don't know how to do and paying the new function. But newbies like that: hey I'm an artist, look I push the button and the super graphics is done. So it's not you an artist, it's the software doing things instead of you: you become dependent of it. If you're great at graphics, you can do it with mspaint: no function, just your skills.

I bought Affinity V1 5 months ago, now Serif wants me to pay again and make my V2 pictures not compatible with V1 while removing the layers panel and changing the UI with strange choice (dots instead of crossed square) and I should be happy and tell them thanks?
Come on, this is critical thinking.

If Serif wants to improve its UI that's ok, just enable more options to enable / disable it in the preferences.
Want to change the file format? Ok again, just enable compatibility option in the preferences.

They are keeping compatibility as Ver 1 files can be opened in Ver 2 but how do you expect files that use a new feature that is not in Ver 1 to open that file & use it correctly. Are you saying you can create a complex file in PSCC, save it and open it in PS ver 1? I doubt that even adobe can do that. It didn't happen with MS word 2007 when they changes to word 2010 (doc to docx) and many other programs.

You buy a 1600cc mark 1 car, You can run it till it falls apart  but you can't keep it on the road with parts for the 1800cc mark 2 upgrade. The manufacturer won't keep repairing it forever or upgrade you to the mark 2 with a 40% discount.

So what if PS had puppetwarp 8 years ago. Serif is not adobe. Their programs are not clones of photoshop, craproom etc.

"you do the hard work" A good workman can (often) do a good with poor tools but can (often) do a better job faster with good tools. If you are happy with mspaint then why did you buy Ver 1? So you can push a button and have super graphics done for you?

Serif may or may want you to buy Ver 2 but it is an offer you can refuse if you wish. Your Ver 2 FILES (not pictures) will not be compatible with Ver 1 but your ver 1 file will be with Ver 2. If you want you pictures to be compatible the export them as tiff, jpg, png or whatever. If you are happy with crossed square (rather than dots) then you will not be happy with Ver 1's ticked squares!

I have not seen any program I am 100% happy with (even Affinity) but mspaint 2%, LR -2,367%, PS 80%, AP2 to early to say but a lot more than 80% up to now.
PS I've supported Sefif for 18 months (AP) and 6 months (AD & APub), can I have a bigger discount and more say in future developments than you plaese?
 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, emmanuelp said:

Dangerous: all software working with pictures have to keep compatibility, think about it and you'll see lock up are nefarious for customers and I pay so I want compatibility.
Never had this issue with 10 years of use of photoshop.
The fact that the whole software industry is playing the very same game of renting instead of owning and put in place lock up strategy to increase money over usability is a scam.

This is only version 2. Relax. A compatibility version schema must be created and considered before it's finalized in code. It requires a bit more foresight than "just insert these elements into v1 when I tell it to" because they must support the same baseline schema going forward in future versions. How they go about this can impact how future features are written. It can also contribute to problems with saving (corruption, bloat, bugs, etc...). Once it's actually made, then it's easier to maintain across versions. They would then have to update with every feature that is added, so there's also the scaling issue. That's why sometimes you will see in older programs, there's multiple compatibility versions because things have to be rethought... or it makes no sense to keep supporting ver1 when certain rare used versions are contributing to 50% file bloat. Just as an example...

Microsoft Windows 10 Home (Build 19045)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8Ghz (-30 all core +200mhz PBO); Mobo: Asus X470 Prime Pro
32GB DDR4 (3600Mhz); EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 3080 X3C Ultra 12GB
Monitor 1 4K @ 125% due to a bug
Monitor 2 4K @ 150%
Monitor 3 (as needed) 1080p @ 100%

WACOM Intuos4 Large; X-rite i1Display Pro; NIKON D5600 DSLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Backwards compatibility is not about making V1 do V2 things. It's about V1 compatible data being ported from V2 to V1. Of course, that would strip V2 features that are manifested in the file format, which still leaves you with maybe 99% of features being compatible.

For reference:

Dedicated topic:

Current Serif stance:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were Serif or Adobe or whatever I'd do the customer surveying this way:

1- at the first start of let's say Affinity photo I'd ask this question:
Do you want to help us design the future Affinity?
If yes, are you ok for us to spy 10 hours of your work in an anonymous way (we don't see the picture just what you do) so we know through statistics how you use our app.
This will let us focus on the most used functions to make them the fastest and most ergonomic.

2- each year I'd ask for a week a 5 questions survey about new features wanted (on the web using surveymonkey or something similar)

and reward the first X participants with let's say the next version of Affinity free plus random bonus for others.
I'd contact users by email (if agreed at registration time) to launch the big brainstorm campain.
And make statistics about the answers to know where to focus, and get an idea of who use affinity for what.

I'm sure there are a varied list of profiles of users out there who don't use Affinity photo for the same thing: 
we have lived since then without 4K, 8K and other novelties, they may come handy for some people and completely irrelevant for others.

Because looking at forums is a very time consuming task and maybe complex to exploit information: lots of people are on different pages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shushustorm said:

Backwards compatibility is not about making V1 do V2 things. It's about V1 compatible data being ported from V2 to V1. Of course, that would strip V2 features that are manifested in the file format, which still leaves you with maybe 99% of features being compatible.

For reference:

Dedicated topic:

Current Serif stance:

 

sigh at that 2nd thread

Microsoft Windows 10 Home (Build 19045)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8Ghz (-30 all core +200mhz PBO); Mobo: Asus X470 Prime Pro
32GB DDR4 (3600Mhz); EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 3080 X3C Ultra 12GB
Monitor 1 4K @ 125% due to a bug
Monitor 2 4K @ 150%
Monitor 3 (as needed) 1080p @ 100%

WACOM Intuos4 Large; X-rite i1Display Pro; NIKON D5600 DSLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it's come up in this thread, or not, but there has never been backward compatibility in the Serif suite. You could not open 1.9 files using 1.8, for example. Nor 1.8 files in 1.7.

Not being able to open 2.0 files in 1.10 (or 1.9, or ...) just continues that characteristic.

Serif have said we will at least be getting a warning soon, when V2 opens a V1 file. We have always had a warning when a v1 Beta release opens a file saved by a retail release. The existing warning (from V1) warned the usesr, and suggested working on a ocpy, and offered to make that copy. I am expecting something similar for 2.0 opening a V1 file.

-- 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

25 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

I don't know if it's come up in this thread, or not, but there has never been backward compatibility in the Serif suite. You could not open 1.9 files using 1.8, for example. Nor 1.8 files in 1.7.

Not being able to open 2.0 files in 1.10 (or 1.9, or ...) just continues that characteristic.

Serif have said we will at least be getting a warning soon, when V2 opens a V1 file. We have always had a warning when a v1 Beta release opens a file saved by a retail release. The existing warning (from V1) warned the usesr, and suggested working on a ocpy, and offered to make that copy. I am expecting something similar for 2.0 opening a V1 file.

It's less problematic as most users could just update to the next version. Generally speaking, it was better to update than not for the QoL improvements. With V2, the user who files available online for distribution has to specify the version. This can create headaches especially if people don't read closely enough (common). It makes the format a deadend (imo) for asset designers unless they were to take the trouble to export both and include them. That isn't helpful though for designers who only pick up v2.

Microsoft Windows 10 Home (Build 19045)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8Ghz (-30 all core +200mhz PBO); Mobo: Asus X470 Prime Pro
32GB DDR4 (3600Mhz); EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 3080 X3C Ultra 12GB
Monitor 1 4K @ 125% due to a bug
Monitor 2 4K @ 150%
Monitor 3 (as needed) 1080p @ 100%

WACOM Intuos4 Large; X-rite i1Display Pro; NIKON D5600 DSLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, emmanuelp said:

I saw this mesh warp function in Affinity V2 which was a remake of puppet warp intruduced in Photoshop more than 8 years ago:

For a moment I thought I'd missed a major feature upgrade to the Deform filter which on the face of it looks like it is a Puppetwarp equivalent but sadly it's still the same Deform filter we've always had, although the non-destructive Mesh warp is a killer feature it's still no puppet warp, if you need puppet like limb movement. At the moment you can only achieve similar functionality by (in the case of the previous dog example) you put all the dogs limbs on separate layers and use a deform or Mesh warp (now prob the better choice) to warp the limbs into the position required - the end result is similar to what's achievable with puppet warp, but involves a much longer process to get the required result ---- just had a thought NON- DESTRUCTIVE PUPPET WARP ----- WOW now that would be a feature, especially if it would support raster and vector

Anyhow, I'm chuffed with V2 --- great work Serif folk👍

Daz1.png

Mac Pro Cheese-grater (Early 2009) 2.93 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon 48 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 ECC Ram, Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 8GB GDDR5, Ugee 19" Graphics Tablet Monitor Triple boot via OCLP 1.2.1 - Mac OS Monterey 12.7.1, Sonoma 14.1.1 and Mojave 10.14.6

Affinity Publisher, Designer and Photo 1.10.5 - 2.2.1

www.bingercreative.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Not being able to open 2.0 files in 1.10 (or 1.9, or ...) just continues that characteristic.

I'm with you Walt - I earlier went off on a bit of a rant about the lack of a back-save option, as I have a couple of clients that can't move to V2, that I occasionally send Affinity Pub docs with all layers, FX, masks, groups and wot-not in place, and the copy paste from V1 to V2 option is a decent enough workaround for single page documents, but not really ideal for say a 300+ pg catalog - but I've now come to the conclusion that I'll just do their jobs in V1 - it still works great for me, and if I want the odd warped vector or whatever I'll copy paste from V2  

Daz1.png

Mac Pro Cheese-grater (Early 2009) 2.93 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon 48 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 ECC Ram, Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 8GB GDDR5, Ugee 19" Graphics Tablet Monitor Triple boot via OCLP 1.2.1 - Mac OS Monterey 12.7.1, Sonoma 14.1.1 and Mojave 10.14.6

Affinity Publisher, Designer and Photo 1.10.5 - 2.2.1

www.bingercreative.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

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.