RAW - No selection by menu if NOT developping to Pixel - Affinity Photo 2.3 Windows

[SaaMosD]

Error after developping RAW: doesn't work. Menu: Select >Color Ranges or >Tonal Range...

I suspect this is an Affinity program error and not an operator error. But I'm not an experienced user!

 The "bug" looks to be an incomplete implementation  by the new RAW developer:

• ·        The “selection via menus” ONLY WORKS after the RAW is developed into a pixel image.

• ·        The "selection via menu" does NOT WORK if the RAW is developed with one of the two new options "RAW-embedded" and "RAW-linked".

With several files (Sony ARW and Panasonic RW2) I had the same result, even after saving in Affinity format the error remains.

For me, this new development was the main advance in version 2. So it's important to me.

The selection via path etc. at least works (so far) and it was a good step to introduce the new RAW-Ooptions!

Best regards

[walt.farrell]

Probably not a bug. Many functions require a Pixel layer, and you have a RAW layer which is a kind of vector-like container, much like an Image layer. 

I can't check right now, but you might try this experiment: 

1. Create a new empty document.

2. Use File > Place to add a JPG file, such should give you an Image layer.

3. Try your Select operation again.

If it doesn't work, try Rasterizing the layer and then try selecting again.

[SaaMosD]

Thanks for the quick reply (despite christmas!!).

The suggestion might work, but I don't see any difference to developing as a pixel plane. This option works. But returning to the raw file and redeveloping is not possible (only via NewOpen). So you lose the big advantage of the 2 new raw development options and I would like to use it.

It would at least be necessary to name the tools that do not work with RAW. And a explanatory message from the Software would be nice.

[walt.farrell]

I've tried it now, and I was right that those selection functions don't work on Image layers, either. So, as I suspect, you would need to Rasterize the layer (whether RAW or Image) before making the selection.

I'm not sure that's required, as I think there are other pixel selection functions that work on Image layers. 

But even then, you cannot use the selections to do anything to the pixels unless you have a Pixel layer. So Rasterization would be needed as the next step even if you could make the selection.

Yes, that means that some functions require destructive operations. In the case of a RAW layer, you could duplicate the layer, and Rasterize the duplicate. Then make your selection and work with it using the duplicated (now Pixel) layer. If you need to go back into Develop, you can use the original RAW layer, and simply re-do the steps you took on the Rasterized layer.

[SaaMosD]

Thanks again for your quick responses.

As you write (and I've already tested), there are other selection tools that work.

I had assumed that the development to "RAW – Linked" creates a raster image and additionally the connection to the RAW. A new advantage of this is that all adjustments are retained and can be changed afterwards (also for RAW). Unfortunately, this subsequent amendment is clearly limited in your proposal. Going back to RAW is possible, but adjustments always require pixel conversion of the post-processed RAW to a new pixel layer. After that, the pixel plane needs to be swapped, etc., etc.

But well, there are often other pixel tools as replacements.

The question remains: why do these pixel tools (and others don't) work? It seems to me that the programmers simply haven't (yet?) adapted a few pixel tools to the new raw development. Maybe at 2.4?

Nevertheless, Affinity Photo is a great program that can usually do much more than I use (and understand).

Change of subject.
It's Christmas - time for wishes and I have only one big wish for Affinity: An easy way to transfer the complete parameters of an image development to following images. That would save a lot of time. For example, Affinity could overwrite the default values for a newly opened image with a new command with the previous ones. The previous parameters are certainly (temporarily) stored anyway.

Yours sincerely,

 EW

[walt.farrell]

40 minutes ago, SaaMosD said:

I had assumed that the development to "RAW – Linked" creates a raster image

But you can now see that your assumption was incorrect. You can see that in the Layers panel, and probably in the documentation (Help).

40 minutes ago, SaaMosD said:

Going back to RAW is possible, but adjustments always require pixel conversion of the post-processed RAW to a new pixel layer.

Adjustments can be made via Live Filters or Adjustment Layers without the need for rasterization. It's those specific kinds of Selections that require the rasterization, in your case. Possibly someone from Serif (or another forum user) will be able to explain that requirement.

 

45 minutes ago, SaaMosD said:

The question remains: why do these pixel tools (and others don't) work? It seems to me that the programmers simply haven't (yet?) adapted a few pixel tools to the new raw development. Maybe at 2.4?

It's not that, because it applies to Image layers, too, which are not a new function. They, like RAW layers, are not pixel objects.

[walt.farrell]

47 minutes ago, SaaMosD said:

An easy way to transfer the complete parameters of an image development to following images. That would save a lot of time. For example, Affinity could overwrite the default values for a newly opened image with a new command with the previous ones. The previous parameters are certainly (temporarily) stored anyway.

It can be done, using the new RAW image layers, and macros. Please see: 

 

[lepr]

2 hours ago, SaaMosD said:

I had assumed that the development to "RAW – Linked" creates a raster image and additionally the connection to the RAW.

Yes, that is what happens. An Affinity RAW object, Image object and Pixel object are all raster objects in the sense that they contain a raster image plus other data. In the case of a RAW object, its contained raster image has been developed from some camera RAW file. 

 

 

2 hours ago, SaaMosD said:

[...] there are other selection tools that work.

Yes, and all pixel selection tools/commands could quite easily work for any object (raster or vector-based) at all. The pixel selection tools/commands consider the values of the pixels of the document pixel grid representation of an object, and so there is no intrinsic reason for any of these tools/commands to be restricted to producing a selection from Pixel objects only.

 

[NotMyFault]

16 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

But even then, you cannot use the selections to do anything to the pixels unless you have a Pixel layer.

I mildly object. You can create adjustment layers with mask based on the selection, or a new pixel layer above for non-destructive pixel based workflow.

 

[walt.farrell]

34 minutes ago, NotMyFault said:

I mildly object. You can create adjustment layers with mask based on the selection, or a new pixel layer above for non-destructive pixel based workflow.

 

True, but in another sense you're not doing anything to the pixels themselves; you're just overlaying their locations in another layer.

[lepr]

3 hours ago, NotMyFault said:

I mildly object. You can create adjustment layers with mask based on the selection, or a new pixel layer above for non-destructive pixel based workflow.

 

Correct, and so we should be able to use all of the pixel selection tools/commands to create a pixel selection from any document object at all.

[NotMyFault]

22 minutes ago, lepr said:

Correct, and so we should be able to use all of the pixel selection tools/commands to create a pixel selection from any document object at all.

Would love to get this. In the meantime I use merge visible to do your selection, then delete the superfluous pixel layer.

For selection purposes, I often create temp pixel layers and treat them with tone map persona, channels panel etc to tune them in a way that selections tools work in the way I want them.

[SaaMosD]

Thank you! 
So many tips. That was a huge package of Christmas presents. 
I have many things to try for now. But that takes some time. 
As I wrote before, I am NOT an experienced user of Affinity. 

First I unwrapped Walt's Christmas present: 
The note on raw development via macro.

Works! Great.

And Affinty was probably busy: 
the development time for Raw, which was criticized, has now shrunk significantly. 
For me, the development of 5 Raw (Sony ARW 20MPixel) 
only took a total of 1-2 minutes on a 12 year old PC i7, 16GB, at least Nvidia RTX 2060super). 
I will report new results.
 
Thanks again everyone!