Merging does not merge

[srg]

As shown I merged a few layers but they did not merge. Done this million times and always worked now it doesn't, is me of AP2?

[stokerg]

Hi @srg,

This is working fine for me.

Could you attach your afphoto file or upload it to our Dropbox here and I'll see if I have any trouble with your file.

[srg]

11 hours ago, stokerg said:

Hi @srg,

This is working fine for me.

Could you attach your afphoto file or upload it to our Dropbox here and I'll see if I have any trouble with your file.

Uploaded. Please let me know what you find.

[lepr]

Merge Down merges the selected object into an already existing Pixel object. The command works only if one or both of the following conditions are true, with the first having precedence:

• the selected object is higher in the layer stack than a sibling destination Pixel object
• the selected object is mask-nested in a parent destination Pixel object

As far as I remember, that is how Merge Down has always worked in Affinity.

Your Layers panel shows the filters/adjustments clip-nested, not mask-nested, in something and with no sibling Pixel object, and so there is no destination for a Merge Down and, in my opinion, no bug.

If the filters/adjustments had been mask-nested and the parent a Pixel object then they would have merged into the parent.

 

[srg]

Understood nothing of what you said. But thank you for your effort. 

[lepr]

22 minutes ago, srg said:

Understood nothing of what you said.

Parent, sibling, mask-nesting and clip-nesting are key concepts in Affinity. Much becomes clearer when you become familiar with them.

[walt.farrell]

In this case, part of the problem is that @srg is trying to merge adjustments into a RAW layer. That won't work, as merging requires a pixel layer as the target. They would need to Rasterize the parent DNG layer so it becomes a pixel layer.

[srg]

2 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

In this case, part of the problem is that @srg is trying to merge adjustments into a RAW layer. That won't work, as merging requires a pixel layer as the target. They would need to Rasterize the parent DNG layer so it becomes a pixel layer.

The layer he's been developed.

[walt.farrell]

38 minutes ago, srg said:

The layer he's been developed.

Yes, but in the screenshot you originally showed it was developed to a RAW layer, not a pixel layer.

[lepr]

42 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Yes, but in the screenshot you originally showed it was developed to a RAW layer, not a pixel layer.

How could you tell that when the layer type icons were not visible in that screenshot of Layers panel? (Answer: you couldn't tell and could only guess (and guess wrongly it appears).)

Anyway, the Merge Down will not work in the OP's document structure even when the parent is a Pixel object because the filters/adjustments are clip-nested rather than mask-nested.

[walt.farrell]

23 minutes ago, ,,, said:

How could you tell that when the layer type icons were not visible in that screenshot of Layers panel? (Answer: you couldn't tell and could only guess (and guess wrongly it appears).)

Better answer: They are visible.

RAW layer, from first screenshot:

Pixel layer, from second screenshot: where you can see (a) the pixel layer icon and (b) the disclosure triangle is lower in the icon area, not in the middle as in the first screenshot.

 

[walt.farrell]

25 minutes ago, ,,, said:

Anyway, the Merge Down will not work in the OP's document structure even when the parent is a Pixel object because the filters/adjustments are clip-nested rather than mask-nested.

How can you tell that? Please provide a screenshot showing two adjustments, one clipping and one masking. I cannot produce a difference in appearance.

[walt.farrell]

Further to my question just above, here is a screenshot showing what I mean:

In this screenshot, the Black & White Adjustment for the first layer is mask-nested, but the Black & White Adjustment for the second layer is clip-nested. With the layers expanded I see no difference in the presentation that would let me distinguish the different placement.

However, if I collapse the layers, I get this, which shows a clear difference:

And, looking closer, I may have just answered my question, but I think it's far too subtle a UI to be truly usable. It's this tiny difference, I think:

But if that's what distinguishes it, all the adjustments in @srg's screenshots look like they're in the masking position, to me.

 

[srg]

I give up. I have done the same thing for thousand times with the same results: it merges. 

[lepr]

36 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Better answer: They are visible.

RAW layer, from first screenshot:

Pixel layer, from second screenshot: where you can see (a) the pixel layer icon and (b) the disclosure triangle is lower in the icon area, not in the middle as in the first screenshot.

 

 

No, you wrongly assumed a RAW object because a RAW object currently has no object type icon (presumably one will be added eventually) when Show Object Type is enabled.

Notice that the object type icons are missing from all objects in the first screenshot and visible for all objects in the second screenshot which reveals the parent object to be a Pixel rather than a RAW.

 

 

[lepr]

49 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Further to my question just above, here is a screenshot showing what I mean:

In this screenshot, the Black & White Adjustment for the first layer is mask-nested, but the Black & White Adjustment for the second layer is clip-nested. With the layers expanded I see no difference in the presentation that would let me distinguish the different placement.

However, if I collapse the layers, I get this, which shows a clear difference:

And, looking closer, I may have just answered my question, but I think it's far too subtle a UI to be truly usable. It's this tiny difference, I think:

But if that's what distinguishes it, all the adjustments in @srg's screenshots look like they're in the masking position, to me.

 

 

The thing that indicates mask-nesting versus clip-nesting to me is the significantly darker background grey of a mask-nested row when compared to any other row in the Layers Panel. The nested rows in srg's screenshot are no darker than the parent row, therefore they are clip-nested.

Your own screenshots clearly have two different grey levels in the backgrounds of rows of the Layers panel.

If you cannot see that difference in greys then your display may be needing calibrated or your environment's lighting is compromising your interpretation of grey levels, or without intending offence, your vision may not be as good as it once was.

[lepr]

1 hour ago, srg said:

I give up. I have done the same thing for thousand times with the same results: it merges. 

You previously had mask-nested adjustments/filters and had no problem, but they are clip-nested in your problem document and therefore cannot be merged into the parent according to the "Affinity Rules".

Of course, if you want to merge all of the nested objects into the parent, just rasterise the parent.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, ,,, said:

 

No, you wrongly assumed a RAW object because a RAW object currently has no object type icon (presumably one will be added eventually) when Show Object Type is enabled.

Notice that the object type icons are missing from all objects in the first screenshot and visible for all objects in the second screenshot which reveals the parent object to be a Pixel rather than a RAW.

 

 

Good point. Thanks.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, ,,, said:

If you cannot see that difference in greys then your display may be needing calibrated or your environment's lighting is compromising your interpretation of grey levels, or without intending offence, your vision may not be as good as it once was.

Now that you've pointed it out, yes, I can see it in my screenshots.

However, it cannot be seen in the screenshots initially shown by @srg because both the object layer and one of the adjustment layers are highlighted, which makes it impossible to see the color of the object layer to compare it with the adjustment layers. Thus, we can't know if they are the same color (clip-nested) or lighter in color (mask-nested).

[lepr]

32 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

However, it cannot be seen in the screenshots initially shown by @srg because both the object layer and one of the adjustment layers are highlighted, which makes it impossible to see the color of the object layer to compare it with the adjustment layers. Thus, we can't know if they are the same color (clip-nested) or lighter in color (mask-nested).

Sorry, but I must contradict you yet again.

srg's first screenshot has sufficient information: the bottom row is a root level object and has the same grey background as the objects nested in the highlighted top object, therefore the nested objects must be clip-nested in that highlighted object. (If the nested objects were mask-nested, they would have a darker background than the bottom row.)

 

 

[srg]

38 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Now that you've pointed it out, yes, I can see it in my screenshots.

However, it cannot be seen in the screenshots initially shown by @srg because both the object layer and one of the adjustment layers are highlighted, which makes it impossible to see the color of the object layer to compare it with the adjustment layers. Thus, we can't know if they are the same color (clip-nested) or lighter in color (mask-nested).

One question: when I drag an adjustment layer on top of an object layer (I think that that is what my layer marked 1Z__0067.DNG is) and therefore I child layer is what I have created? a mask layer?  A clip layer?

 

[walt.farrell]

Just now, srg said:

One question: when I drag an adjustment layer on top of an object layer (I think that that is what my layer marked 1Z__0067.DNG is) and therefore I child layer is what I have created? a mask layer?  A clip layer?

 

It depends on where you drop it. The choices, if you're dropping it on that layer are:

• masking: drop on the layer thumbnail
• clipping: drop to the right of the layer thumbnail.

The blue highlighting attempts to help you, by highlighting just the thumbnail (masking) vs the entire layer entry (clipping).

[lepr]

3 minutes ago, srg said:

One question: when I drag an adjustment layer on top of an object layer (I think that that is what my layer marked 1Z__0067.DNG is) and therefore I child layer is what I have created? a mask layer?  A clip layer?

 

If you drop an object on a thumbnail, the object becomes a mask.

If you drop an object on a name area, the object becomes clipped.

 

Edit: Walt beat me to it

[srg]

8 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

It depends on where you drop it. The choices, if you're dropping it on that layer are:

• masking: drop on the layer thumbnail
• clipping: drop to the right of the layer thumbnail.

The blue highlighting attempts to help you, by highlighting just the thumbnail (masking) vs the entire layer entry (clipping).

 

7 minutes ago, ,,, said:

If you drop an object on a thumbnail, the object becomes a mask.

If you drop an object on a name area, the object becomes clipped.

 

Edit: Walt beat me to it

Thank you both, I never knew. but at this point I have question, what is the practical difference between a mask layer and a clip layer. 

 

[walt.farrell]

4 minutes ago, srg said:

what is the practical difference between a mask layer and a clip layer. 

Some information sources that may help:

https://affinity.help/photo2/en-US.lproj/pages/LayerOperations/clipping.html

https://affinity.help/photo2/en-US.lproj/pages/Layers/LayerMasks.html