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

Has V2 fixed Affinity's biggest issues?


Recommended Posts

Just now, walt.farrell said:

François R was talking to Psenda there, not to you.

Indeed. Some in here could learn a lesson or several thousand from Walt. He is very balanced, actually listening, he asks curious questions to understand better and is actually a very helpful person.

 1) You have completely wrecked the layers panel, Serif.

2) I recommend Reddit groups instead of this forum. Not the same few bot-like users replying to everything, a wider representation of users, fewer fanboys, more qualified users. In short, better!

3) I was here to report bugs and submit improvement requests for professional work professionally in a large setup and to bring a lot of knowledge from the world, i.e. professional product development, web- and software development, usability, user experience design and accessibility. I actually know what I am talking about!

BUT! We are phasing out Designer and Affinity in 2022 Q1 - and replacing it with feature complete and algorithmically competent alternatives.
Publisher is unsuitable for serious use, and was never adopted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, François R said:

From the profile I was actually replying to.

My mistake @François R.  I thought it was odd. Thank you both, @walt.farrell too.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Words are crude implements, difficult to get perfect, easy to get tied in knots with, and often - usually - misunderstood, which is why 'tolarence' is the best word of all.

The word "professional" fits us all - amateur, semi-pro, beginner, advanced, middle, beyond it all, and on....., because professionals are tolerant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ProDesigner said:

My mistake @François R.  I thought it was odd.

No problem. 🙂 It is getting late. 🌛

 1) You have completely wrecked the layers panel, Serif.

2) I recommend Reddit groups instead of this forum. Not the same few bot-like users replying to everything, a wider representation of users, fewer fanboys, more qualified users. In short, better!

3) I was here to report bugs and submit improvement requests for professional work professionally in a large setup and to bring a lot of knowledge from the world, i.e. professional product development, web- and software development, usability, user experience design and accessibility. I actually know what I am talking about!

BUT! We are phasing out Designer and Affinity in 2022 Q1 - and replacing it with feature complete and algorithmically competent alternatives.
Publisher is unsuitable for serious use, and was never adopted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

I don't think they are starving if they are paying hundreds a year to Adobe. 

"Starving" for features in the apps. You've not understood, and that's ok, it's getting late.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Words are crude implements, difficult to get perfect, easy to get tied in knots with, and often - usually - misunderstood, which is why 'tolarence' is the best word of all.

The word "professional" fits us all - amateur, semi-pro, beginner, advanced, middle, beyond it all, and on....., because professionals are tolerant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ProDesigner said:

"Starving" for features in the apps. You've not understood, and that's ok, it's getting late.

Patronising comment. I understood well enough. You don't know what hours I work. 

Tell me, why are self-named professionals who are starving for features using the programs at all if they don't have those features?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

😳

Holy disastrous dialogue derailment Batman! Does Affinity need a Meta forum for this kind of thing?

I'm the one who triggered this whole thing with my offensive use of the word 'pr*fessionals', so let me be the one to try and end it. Who cares what happened on other threads with other forum members? On this thread, I used the word, and when brought to task over it, I explained exactly what I meant by it. And I stand by that. Now, you're free to agree or disagree with the point I was making, but let's play the ball and not the man. Many have commented that our society has largely lost the skill of respectfully disagreeing with one another, and forums like this one seem to prove the point.

Now, to those who resent the very existence of this thread, because I dared to complain about software which only cost me A$159… In my original post, I said:

Quote

I'll still purchase all the apps, and I'll still recommend them to family and friends. They do a lot of great things, and you certainly can't beat the price.

 

For those who are still offended, let me spell it out. It's not about the price. The price is great. So, you get what you pay for? Yes. So, that denies me the right to express any disappointment over this V2 release? No. I am disappointed because the software is clearly positioned as a competitor to Adobe's Creative Cloud software. As others have pointed out, Affinity uses the word 'pr*fessional' in their own marketing! Go take a look—it's the first effing word on their home page!! Oh but that's just marketing hyperbole right? We all know not to trust marketing, right? Well here's a thought… If you want to take someone to task over their use of the word 'pr*fessional', why don't you start with Affinity? If you think it's marketing bullsh*t, why not hold them accountable?! Why take it out on me when I simply come here to express my personal disappointment that the experience doesn't match the hype?

I've been pretty patient on this thread up 'till now (even when the first two comments tried to shut down the discussion before it even began). But the way some people make things personal (even getting precious and defensive on Affinity's behalf), is reminding me why I tend to avoid the Apple forums—so many precious Apple users who take unofficial residence outside the glass walls and guard their turf ferociously. I have better things to do with my time—and so do you I suspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we could just leave this talk of “professional” versus “prosumer” versus “amateur” behind us, once and for all. — In the end, it is all about tasks that can be fulfilled with the help of a particular software and about the level of difficulty or ease of fulfilling these tasks. Also, and not to forget, about the way in which the design of a particular software can inspire us in doing our work. Tools can be inspiring, remember. What @debraspicher said earlier in this thread made a lot of sense to me. Forget about labels like “professional,” as they really do not tell anything in themselves. Rather talk about use cases and tasks. That will be more fruitful.

I’ll give you an example. When Affinity Publisher came out some years ago, I had hoped I could soon start using it for typesetting press-ready academic books with the application (my focus of work has changed to a different area since then). But without footnotes and an option to organise Publisher documents into books, that was unfeasible. In Version 2, we have a footnotes system as well as a book system now, and my first tests show that Publisher does handle large documents with footnotes quite well. Unfortunately, we still lack a robust cross-references system that would also be required for the intended task, at least for the kind of publications I have in mind. So I have to conclude that for the specific task of typesetting academic books with footnotes and cross-references, Affinity Publisher is still lacking an essential feature.

Such a description does not make use of the word “professional” or the like. It just describes requirements for fulfilling a task, and I think it does not really make much sense start a debate concerning the question whether a “professional” DTP application must be capable of being used for typesetting publications whose production would require a robust system of cross-references. Remember that housands upon thousands of books are printed and published each year that do not contain a single cross-reference. Ironically, a majority of academic books and publications are today produced by people who wouldn’t call themselves “professionals” in the area of typography or book design at all, for these books and publications are typeset by their authors themselves. The typical work environments of these authors are LaTeX or Microsoft Word. So when you take a look at the provided example, I think it should be sufficiently clear that using the word “professional” is highly uninformative in comparison to descriptions of tasks and task requirements. Please let’s leave this debate behind us, as it really doesn’t get us anywhere, does it?

In short, I found @Kal’s approach at the beginning of this thread very fruitful, and I hope this post may contribute to get back to the intention from which this thread was started. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kal, seems we cross-posted, so my post shouldn’t be read as a direct answer to yours. Rather to the endless discussions about the term “professional” that tend to derail useful threads like this one quite regularly.

I think the problem is that “professional” is a semantically open term that can have a lot of meanings which are largely context-dependent. So everyone may understand something slightly different when using this term. Some authors in this thread have successfully, as I think, explained their specific use of the term. But the semantic openness remains. And if we consider the matter carefully, it is precisely this semantic openness that invites marketing folks to employ this term in their communications. It helps them establish a certain perception of their products without promising or advertising anything too specific. Should they rather not use this term? — Maybe. But I doubt anyone in a marketing department will lightly forgo the benefits that result from the semantic openness of the term and the specific air it carries. Up to a certain point, this is … understandable … I fear. 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

@Kal, seems we cross-posted, so my post shouldn’t be read as a direct answer to yours. Rather to the endless discussion about the term “professional” that derails useful threads like this one in a regular manner. 🙂

Thanks for that. I've used up my daily allowance of 'reactions' again, but you've been a voice of reason here, and I appreciate it.

 

18 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

Forget about labels like “professional,” as they really do not tell anything in themselves. Rather talk about use cases and tasks. That will be more fruitful.

Sure. Words and labels without context are always prone to misinterpretation. When I said that Affinity needs to 'listen to the pros', that was just a succinct way of labelling a very diverse group of users who would, in the process of sharing feedback with Affinity, provide the necessary context. But I think you probably understood that, and I agree, it would be good if we could 'leave this debate behind us'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone is interested, here's my own personal context. I was a pr*fessional graphic designer for many years, doing both digital and print work. Around the time macOS stopped supporting CS6, I was transitioning away from print work anyway, and focusing more on software design/development. And so for me, it seemed like the perfecting opportunity to say goodbye to Adobe and hello to Affinity. (I detest the forced subscription model, where your personal files are forever held to ransom, so I was not willing to keep paying Adobe for that indulgence.)

I found the transition frustrating. IMHO, UI/UX is not Affinity's strength. Like someone else said in this thread, all those little annoyances do add up, and they contribute to a less enjoyable experience. You learn to adapt of course, but I've never been able to say that I truly enjoy using Affinity software.

And then, occasionally, I still pick up a print job, where I feel like I'm p*ssing into the wind trying to make things work. I've come to the conclusion that Affinity either doesn't understand print very well, or they just don't think it's important. If it's the former, then they need to enlist the help of some knowledgeable consultants (which is what I was trying to say in my infamously contentious post).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, debraspicher said:

Sending prayers and condolences

I didn't know we could run out until I think launch day. I actually PM'ed one of those mods because I thought it was the forum glitching out 😂

😂

Thank you Debra. It is quite traumatic to reach into your little bag of love hearts and find it empty.

But let us be consoled by what the Affinity forum administrators have allowed us… no limits on verbal diarrhoea!! 💩🎉 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm finding this thread to be quite interesting @Kal ... just found it. 

Overall, I feel ya man, I'm a "seasoned pro" in all things Photoshop (UI/UX, web, print, digital art, photo editing, etc) and I've just recently dropped Adobe's Sub business model in favor of owning my stuff again.

v1 AF Photo right now is pretty solid and dependable enough to be my daily driver for all things (formerly) Photoshop. v2 however... oof, it's pretty rough right now. I mean v2 is slick looking and the whole AF Suite integrates nicely, but trying opening a 1GB PSD file and see how it all falls apart. Pragmatically, there's a lot of performance issues that need to be quelled before I can use (er... trust) v2 apps. 

I'm a fan of Affinity's main goal since 2015, I want to love their apps, but they've gotta fix v2 Photo so it's rock solid with opening my 15 year archive of PSD files first before that trust is truly grounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, JaGold said:

but trying opening a 1GB PSD file and see how it all falls apart

I'm on a medium spec PC (Ryzen 5 5600X, RTX2060, 32G Ram) and have no issues opening a 1.05G PSD file (launched from Bridge 2023 into AP2).

Personally I'm not having any issues with AP2 at all so far ... unlike AP1 which I stopped using 2.5 years ago (mainly due to (a) Destructive RAW developing and (b) the outstanding Tony Kuyper PS Plugin (TK8). AP2's new masking features now give me (us!) all the core masking of TK8 plus we now have non destructive Raw editing (not possible to open a smart object from PS back into Camera Raw with Adjustments as per AP2's new feature). 

 

Capture.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PedroOfOz said:

I'm on a medium spec PC (Ryzen 5 5600X, RTX2060, 32G Ram) and have no issues opening a 1.05G PSD file (launched from Bridge 2023 into AP2).

Ya gotcha, I'm on an older Mac Intel, so it's a different experience for you. I opened a 300MB PSD in AP1 in under 10sec, and in AP2 it took 3min! There's something very wrong with the MacOS version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tia Lapis said:

What has one to do to get such huge psd files?

That's no problem. Apart from photos, which can use a lot of memory (that starts with using 16bit channels), you can do all kind of print documents in an image editing software. I for example do puzzle illustrations in Photoshop. With A3-Size in at least 300dpi, perhaps CMYK-Mode (I use RGB as long as possible), lots and lots of layers the memory requirements can also get very high. Since clients tend to change their minds about some things, it's always good advise to not flatten layers until the work is really done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, chessboard said:

That's no problem. Apart from photos, which can use a lot of memory (that starts with using 16bit channels), you can do all kind of print documents in an image editing software. I for example do puzzle illustrations in Photoshop. With A3-Size in at least 300dpi, perhaps CMYK-Mode (I use RGB as long as possible), lots and lots of layers the memory requirements can also get very high. Since clients tend to change their minds about some things, it's always good advise to not flatten layers until the work is really done.

I guess also only lossless codecs for the image data?

Mac mini M1 / Ryzen 5600H & RTX3050 mobile / iPad Pro 1st - all with latest non beta release of Affinity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tia Lapis said:

I guess also only lossless codecs for the image data?

Well, of course 😉. You never want to lose quality, especially in the manufacturing phase. If the client agrees, maybe you can save the final version in a lossy format, but even that publishers don't like to see. Saving in a lossy format, reopening the file, and repeatedly saving in a lossy format means that sooner or later this file will become garbage. BTW, I don't know any lossy file format, that could handle layers.

You might want to add that Photoshop is not very good at compressing the file. Other programs can do that better. In Photoshop, for example, it is already decisive whether the bottom layer is a "real" background layer. If it is, this also saves some memory. For whatever reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Kal said:

I detest the forced subscription model

As do many-many others. They're pursuing freedom with the same emotion you just expressed, Kal.

So of course it expresses itself in the forums as the mirage of a better life seems in danger of slipping away altogether.

While I'm in the camp that there's too much emotionally driven stuff happening in the world, I'm not inclined to discount the emotion of frustration in here. It could be the canary in the mine ultimately.

The understandable frustration is why these forums are described as a mess, which they are. Only the Stack Overflow model works as a useful resource IMHO. But Serif are a small business despite millions on their accounts, so they've not had the resource. The few who valiantly give their time in any great quantity helping others in these forums are very much to be admired.

A bit of give n take, slowness to take offence and a calm response to those who seem a bit off key, often because emotion is near the surface, and usually without intention, goes a long way.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Words are crude implements, difficult to get perfect, easy to get tied in knots with, and often - usually - misunderstood, which is why 'tolarence' is the best word of all.

The word "professional" fits us all - amateur, semi-pro, beginner, advanced, middle, beyond it all, and on....., because professionals are tolerant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, chessboard said:

BTW, I don't know any lossy file format, that could handle layers.

TIFF should be able to handle that. As far as I remember it supports JPG als codec and multiple layers.

Mac mini M1 / Ryzen 5600H & RTX3050 mobile / iPad Pro 1st - all with latest non beta release of Affinity

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.