Workflow confusion. Redundancies?

[Doug B]

Hey all. I should preface my question with a statement: I've never been a heavy duty Photoshop user. I've got a CC sub, and use it to finish off photos which need skin retouching and cloning. Perhaps I'd use it more if it didn't seem so daunting, with the tons of ways in which a desired effect can be achieved, and the list continues to grow in that arena. 

 

Maybe I am assuming incorrectly, but I thought that Affinity was aimed at those who were familiar with PS, but that it wasn't necessary to be, in that tutorials would cover workflow, tools, filters etc.. And for the most part, the tutorials are an interesting introduction to some of these things. But thus far, I feel that they don't do a proficient enough job at really getting to the intricate how's and why's, like I'd hope they would. I figured that new software would have very detailed tutorials, rather than at the end of each one have someone say: "If you have any questions, please go to the forums". Not sure I see the point in doing tutorials unless they're really going to show the in's and out's of tools and feature or the UI etc.. 

 

Right now, I'm struggling to comprehend the philosophy behind why there are two seemingly redundant personas. Those being "Photos" and "Develop". I mean, is there really such a great gap between what these two modules have to offer as tools, that they couldn't simply be consolidated?  For example... and what really confuses me, is how you start out with a RAW photo, right.. And then, you're presented with very basic tools for adjusting exposure, white and black values, temp and cropping etc.  Great, but then when I go over to the Photos persona, I'm presented with not only pretty much the same tools, but advanced versions of them as well. And the rest of the kitchen sink. 

 

Why then, should I care about making any adjustments in the Develop Persona, when I can achieve the same exact thing (and more) over in the Photos Persona?  If I'm way off base, please let me know why. Sincerely. Maybe I'm being thick? 

 

Thanks much... 

 

Doug

[crabtrem]

I am no expert. I do not represent anyone but myself. These are my opinions, and not meant to imply an absolute or official answer by Affinity folks. 

That being said.  All RAW data files must go through a develop process. 

In most cases these might even be a different program.

The advantages to RAW is that all data from the source is saved.  Unlike a image format like, JPG for example.

The biggest advantage I have heard of being able retrieve details, that would be washed out and lost in any other image format. Although I'm certain that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Once you develop a RAW from the Develop Persona, and like any other RAW image processing element, these changes are permanent.  To change them you have to go back to the beginning.

In the Photo Persona there may be similar tools, but because they are not RAW, the dynamic range of what is possible has to be tempered. 

But, many changes you apply on the Photo Persona are not destructive.  You can go back and adjust, change, remove, etc.

In Affinity the Develop Persona can also be used by any format of image, but the results would be limited because they are not RAW data files.

So even there is a lot of apparent duplication, in most cases it's to adjust the RAW data file.  Do you need it.  You may in most cases decide that you will just develop the defaults and do most

of your work in the Photo Persona.  On those occasions where you may need to try and draw out data you thought was lost in a photo. With RAW in Develop you might be able to retrieve such data, of fundamentally change the look and feel of a photo that might be impossible to achieve in Photo without retaking the original picture.

As far a tutorials, the more you watch them the better.  In my opinion they do a great job of getting you into the rhythm of how to process, use, and go through using Affinity products.  Some

tutorials go over a tool specifically, many cover situations and processes.  The more you watch them, the more you pick up.  At least for me.

As I said, I'm no expert. I don't represent anyone else.  And I don't do this professionally. These are my thoughts on it.  I hope they will provide you with some perspective and the answers you are looking for. At least in part.  

Good Luck.

[R C-R]

RAW Image format is actually the collective term for a wide variety of different image file formats that store the data from a camera or scanner sensor in unprocessed ("raw") form. They do not contain images in the conventional sense, just the sensor data & various kinds of highly detailed metadata that processed image files generally lack. This makes it possible to process the files into bitmapped images in multiple ways based on the metadata as well as the image data.

[anon1]

Doug B, your point is certainly valid. I´ll explain it a little bit though.....

 

1. I´d do it like this https://vimeo.com/143980549 make that raw (haha) adjustments in the RAW converter and proceed in the pixel persona.

 

The reason that the RAW converter exists is:

- RAW files have a greater dynamic range than final JPG which are (normally) 8bit (2^8) whereas RAW files have up to 16bit (2^16) of variations per channel

>> Some (if not most) users work in 8bit mode in pixel persona because it saves the computer much processing power and some say that you don´t see any difference anyway (you do see a difference especially in gradients/ transitions/ skies/ black-whites)

>> to get the 16 stops (may be less) of dynamic range out of your camera you shoot raw and then you push in the shadow and highlights (as shown in the video) and then squeeze the whole thing into your 8bit pixel persona to save computing power and disk space (like LOG profiles in video)

 

But if you´ve got a powerful Mac, disk space and a well optimized program, then you might as well just keep it 16 bit (or 32bit in the AP1.5 version) and you don´t need to make any adjustments in the RAW converter (read this https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/15873-coming-2016-32bit-hdr-editing-sneak-preview/?p=72119)

- so then the RAW converter only has the purpose to demosaicing the pixels of the camera https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing

 

btw: recovering highlight and shadow detail from RAWs works because the camera itself (mostly) shows you the histogram of the preview JPG it generates all the time so you don´t actually see the highlight information until you pull down the highlights in the RAW converter. So even if you think the picture is blown out it might not be the case.

[Doug B]

I appreciate that you guys have tried to answer my questions, but perhaps I did not explain what I was after well enough. I wasn't asking about how RAW files work, or why a converter is needed. I'm very well aware of the above. Let me try this again though:

 

The options appear to be no different between the develop and Photos personas. To put things another way: Until the RAW file is demosaiced either by way of exporting to jpg of tiff, all editing done in either persona module is non-destructive. So technically, it shouldn't matter which persona you're in. For example, it shouldn't matter where I make exposure, temperature, contrast or saturation changes to a RAW file, because the effect is the same no matter which persona I'm in. Hence my query of why it is necessary to have two personas which basically perform the same function.

 

And really, if someone tells me that the demosaicing process is actually being done before I do any of the other things from the photos Persona, then that is very counterproductive toward producing a well developed image. At least in my experience with how any other RAW developer works.

 

I really hope that my question is a bit clearer now? I'd go on, but not until I know that what I'm asking is being understood/that I'm being clear.

 

Cheers

 

Doug

[anon1]

I´ve given reasons why it is desirable to make some adjustment prior to the photo persona (dynamic range, while preserving speed and disk space, ease of use)

 

"And really, if someone tells me that the demosaicing process is actually being done before I do any of the other things from the photos Persona, then that is very counterproductive toward producing a well developed image."

- it´s done when before applying the adjustments in the develop persona and that´s the way PS works as well and people get great results with that

 

You can just ignore the develop persona and go straight ahead in the pixel persona if you prefer to, others like the develop persona - it´s therefore also available for non-raw pixel layers in both PS and AP and will be non destructive in a future AP update (similar to PS smart objects)

 

There are many different approaches in an application like this, why is there levels black point, white point, exposure and all stuff when you have curves? 

[R C-R]

And really, if someone tells me that the demosaicing process is actually being done before I do any of the other things from the photos Persona, then that is very counterproductive toward producing a well developed image. At least in my experience with how any other RAW developer works.

Until the demosaicing process is performed, there is no viewable image to work with, just the unprocessed color channel information from the CFA.

[Doug B]

I´ve given reasons why it is desirable to make some adjustment prior to the photo persona (dynamic range, while preserving speed and disk space, ease of use)

 

"And really, if someone tells me that the demosaicing process is actually being done before I do any of the other things from the photos Persona, then that is very counterproductive toward producing a well developed image."

- it´s done when before applying the adjustments in the develop persona and that´s the way PS works as well and people get great results with that

 

You can just ignore the develop persona and go straight ahead in the pixel persona if you prefer to, others like the develop persona - it´s therefore also available for non-raw pixel layers in both PS and AP and will be non destructive in a future AP update (similar to PS smart objects)

 

There are many different approaches in an application like this, why is there levels black point, white point, exposure and all stuff when you have curves? 

I only really see one advantage with the Develop Persona, and that is having access to the "Assistant Options".  But I'm still waiting for someone to give me a compelling reason as to why that option, as well as any other option within that persona, could not be in the Photos persona, or visa versa for that matter. It just seems like an arbitrary way of splitting up some functions, maybe for the sake of not cluttering up an entire UI.  And that's fine, if that's the reason, but I simply find it a bit weird that you have to commit to an action (by hitting develop) before being able to get to the Photos persona, where you also have exposure, curves etc etc.. which all perform the same function. 

 

Speaking on demosaicing.. I suppose I'm looking at this from a Lightroom perspective. I do basic editing such as exposure/temp/curves/sharpening in LR, and then bring those changes into PS for final skin retouching and cloning. Therefore, the demosaic process is being done before hitting PS (as you inferred without knowing that I start in LR, since you don't have to, technically).  I think you guys might be over-thinking what I'm getting at or saying. Unless one of the devs/mods can tell me for certain, that there is something truly unique to using the tools in the develop persona vs the Photos persona, then I'm simply asserting that there's no technical reason for needing to do anything *sans turning off the automatic curves adjustment and utilizing Apple's RAW engine* in the former.  

 

The only thing I can assume at this point then, is that once you hit "Develop", it is akin to going from LR to PS which is where the demosaicing process takes place. Or, in the case of those using just PS, it would be akin to using Camera RAW/ACR and making basic adjustments, then going further with the other adjustments past that. So maybe I just answered my own question... Told you I might be being dense! 

 

All that being said.. My issue at present, is with HOW ACR handles Fuji X Trans files (hence why I'm attempting to get a handle on AP) during the demosaicing process. So, thanks for putting up with my perhaps dumb questions and aggressive line of questioning. I do appreciate the help! 

Until the demosaicing process is performed, there is no viewable image to work with, just the unprocessed color channel information from the CFA.

True, but not exactly up to date or accurate. Most, if not all modern cameras at this point, do demosaicing on the sensor, via firmware..  but we are also given the ability to demosaic RAW files via software. RAW files of most varieties are readable by said software. A bit different from the logistical standpoint of how things used to be, I suppose. The process of demosaicing is simply to reconstruct an image from incomplete color samples, when talking about how it would be done IN camera. But RAW files, which are just bits of data that are able to be read and interpreted by software such as ACR and its kin, give us the ability to do this outside of the cameras firmware. 

 

Best, 

 

Doug

[Doug B]

Wish I had seen this thread earlier: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/17702-confused-about-the-use-of-develop-persona/

 

Basically confirms my thoughts of:

 

The only thing I can assume at this point then, is that once you hit "Develop", it is akin to going from LR to PS which is where the demosaicing process takes place. Or, in the case of those using just PS, it would be akin to using Camera RAW/ACR and making basic adjustments, then going further with the other adjustments past that.

 

 And maybe that is exactly what you guys were trying to tell me, but I wasn't really getting it because you were hoping that I would assume that the workflow was the same as with PS.. My problem I guess was that I was thinking that because AP is so new, that it somehow worked differently than that. Which... I guess is dumb of me.  :ph34r:

 

Doug