Weaning myself from a long-term addiction to Photoshop

[Furry]

I am using a Mac running Mojave 10.14.6 because that is the highest OS I can use without having to pay Adobe a subscription for Photoshop. That also means I am still using version 1 of the Affinity apps. Once I can shed Photoshop I will update my OS ans start using v2 of Affinity.

I have made the switch to Affinity Designer and Affinity Publisher reasonably successfully but seem to be stuck on Photoshop and find myself staring blankly at my Affinity Photo screen at a complete loss to know what to do.

Please don't refer to me to Affinity Photo for Beginners tutorials as they deal with such basic things that I am at a costant risk of being bored to death.

What I would like to do is tap the huge experience of those who inhabit these forums for help with particular tasks. That way I will get more and more experience of the app so that eventually I feel more confident with it. So I plan to propose particular tasks one at a time over a period of time.

The first task: fairly frequently I have a photo (or some other graphic) that is badly under-exposed. My Photoshop solution is (1) to create a levels adjustment layer, (2) select that layer by clicking on its thumbnail while holding down the Option key, (3) paste a copy of the photo into the adjustment layer which automatically converts it to grey, (4) invert that image using Command-I to make it a grey-scale mask with lighter shades over the darkest areas and darker shades over the lightest areas without my having to calculate it all, (5) click on the layer thumbnail in the Layers pallet to bring up the adjustment window, (6) move the right-hand triangle at the bottom of that window towards the centre while watching the image to know when I have lightened it enough. Then I simply flatten the image and save it.

That process takes a matter of seconds – perhaps 30 seconds at the most. It takes much longer to describe it!

But what is the comparable process in Affinity Photo?

I have attached a sample photo (Sample 1.jpg) and show the result of my adjustment (Sample 1 adjusted.jpg).

All help appreciated.

[Komatös]

Hi @Furry and welcome to Affinity Forum.

You can use the level adjustment in Affinity Photo too. You'll find the various adjustment layers in the Layer Menu or at the Studio Layers tab.

 

 

 

[Furry]

Thank you for your prompt reply, Komatös.

Yes, I know that adjustment layer is there. But there does not seem to any way to paste an image of the photo into the adjustment as a mask.

[Komatös]

3 minutes ago, Furry said:

Thank you for your prompt reply, Komatös.

Yes, I know that adjustment layer is there. But there does not seem to any way to paste an image of the photo into the adjustment as a mask.

If you wish you can add a mask to the adjustment layer. The little rectangle with the circle.

[RichardMH]

Try dragging a copy of the image to the layer. But drag it over the layer name, not the thumbnail.

[Komatös]

It is not necessary to drag the adjustment layer over the pixel layer if both are to be reduced. There is also no need to duplicate and invert the image/pixel layer.

In my opinion, adjusting the brightness and visual control is faster than the Photoshop method.

 

 

[Furry]

Thank you both, Komatös and RichardMH.

Please be patient with me. Yes, Komatös, I clicked on that little circle inside a rectangle and I now have a mask. When I right-click on the mask in the Layers window, there is option to edit the mask. But how do I get a negative grey image of the pohoto into that mask?

RichardMH, I tried dragging a copy onto the Levels Adjustment layer in the Layers Window but all it did was place a full colour copy as a new layer at the top of the layers window.

What have I misunderstood?

[Furry]

Komatös, perhaps it is faster, but I still don't see how.

The levels panel has five sliders and trying any of them does not seem to lead to what I want. HOW do I make the adjustment? And do I have to create a mask and can it be as easy as the Photoshop method?

[thomaso]

Apart from this mask option (afaik since APh V2) the Level Adjustments appears to have the disadvantage that it just has the gamma option to influence mid tones between black and white selectively. Note the missing tones in the white jackets of the two people (in your result, too) and the missing sky in the presented Affinity examples above.

Instead I'd prefer a Curves Adjustment with the option for individual nodes (use its picker tool if wanted). For your image it appears sufficient to edit the curve for 'Black' only (choose CMYK from the menu). Like so … (a V1 example without masking) …

Honestly I'd prefer to have more sliders than currently available in APhoto / its Develop persona. The existing options lack in focussing on "Highlights" only and a "White" slider to affect specific areas of the histogram. To me it appears a lot easier to adjust e.g. underexposure this way than with the curve/node handling in APhoto whereas I am unable to achieve the same result when using the APhoto Develop persona sliders.

  -

[Furry]

Already my head is spinning!

Why do I need to specify CMYK when, almost without exception, the graphics I deal with are RGB?

How do I know what to do with the Curves dialog box? It remains a mystery to me.

At this stage I cannot use v2 of APh because it will not work on my existing OS. That is for the future.

Thomaso, what do the dashed pink circles and lines mean (and the yellow ones) in your illustration. I am beginning to suffer from information overload and understanding underload!

[Komatös]

22 minutes ago, Furry said:

Why do I need to specify CMYK when, almost without exception, the graphics I deal with are RGB?

CMYK offers the option of specifically reducing the amount of black in the image, which brightens the image. This is not possible with RGB, as here the black value, simply put, is generated from the "saturated" values (100%) of red, green and blue.

43 minutes ago, Furry said:

Komatös, perhaps it is faster, but I still don't see how.

The levels panel has five sliders and trying any of them does not seem to lead to what I want. HOW do I make the adjustment? And do I have to create a mask and can it be as easy as the Photoshop method?

With the level adjustment you only need the White Level to adjust. For me, it look ok with a value of 40%. Masking is only needed if you would have not the whole image brightened.

[Furry]

Thanks, Komatös, for the explanation re CMYK.

I will need to sit quietly and experiment with the levels adjustment of white. But it is rapidly approaching midnight where I am (you people all appear to be in Europe) and so I am going to bed. I will consider my incoming messages when I look at this in the morning.

[thomaso]

32 minutes ago, Furry said:

Why do I need to specify CMYK when, almost without exception, the graphics I deal with are RGB?

While RGB offers rgb sliders only you get the Black option via the CMYK menu only. It doesn't mean to convert to cmyk but just edit with different aspects.

The Curves Adjustment allows to affect/edit certain areas of the histogram selectively (while the Levels interface forces you to adjust the entire range from either side (dark or light) and also its gamma option affects an entire range. I recommend to watch tutorials for a.) Histogram and b.) Curves Adjustment, or "just play" with them to experience their affects.

Note, if you switch in the Curves Adjustment panel an option in its left menu (RGB, CMYK, LAB) then your curve settings possibly done already will get reset (lost), while the right menu (red or alpha or black etc.) allows you to add/combine several curve adjustments. Plus note, in APhoto's Histogram panel you need to click the yellow warning triangle once it occurs, unfortunately APhoto doesn't auto-update its diagram continuously (and shows a static histogram in the Curves Adjustment panel).

The pink circles above mark the areas in your photo that need to get maintained if you correct the underexposure. Compare the jackets in your result (on the left in my screenshot) with the pink area + the back of the olderly woman behind the pole. The yellow markers indicate my done settings (just because of unfortunately quite low contrast in the Affinity interface and the subtle position of the used nodes in the upper right corner of the panel).

If you are in macOS you could also experience the Preview.app with its simple image editing options just to get more familiar with the meaning of Histogram and these separate Highlights/Shadow sliders (that work different to those in APhoto) + the centred slider(s) below Preview's Histogram.

[RichardMH]

We also have Live Luminosity Range Masks that do what you are trying to do but with more control.

 

[smadell]

Hi, @Furry. What you are doing in Photoshop is creating a luminosity mask inside the Levels adjustment. To replicate this in Affinity Photo, first make a luminosity-based selection on the photo layer. Either choose “Selection from Layer Intensity” from the Select menu, or click on the photo layer’s thumbnail (in the Layers panel) while holding the Command and Option keys. With the luminosity selection active, add the Levels adjustment. The luma mask will be incorporated into the adjustment layer. If you need to invert the mask, simply choose “Invert” from the Layer menu or type Command-I with the adjustment layer selected. This should give you the same result that you got in Photoshop.

The difference comes down to how Affinity allows for editing Alpha channels. Photoshop allows alpha channels to be edited as if they were monochrome pixels layers; Affinity does not.

[thomaso]

3 hours ago, RichardMH said:

We also have Live Luminosity Range Masks

It is V2 only, right? While the OP wrote in the last response "At this stage I cannot use v2 of APh because it will not work on my existing OS."

32 minutes ago, smadell said:

click on the photo layer’s thumbnail (in the Layers panel) while holding the Command and Option keys

Do you know what area is selected with a cmd-opt thumbnail-click? It seems to result in a quite transparent selection (with highlights excepted). If I fill the black person in the centre with pink I get this:

What is causing transparency in this selection method? – Filled with max. tolerance it still has transparency (and now affects the entire image, highlights included, while I would expect they remain excluded, independent of the fill tool tolerance):

Whereas "Select > Tonal Range > Shadows" (“Selection from Layer Intensity” seems to be V2 only) causes this:

... and filled with pink in 8% tolerance is not transparent but locally limited as expected:

[RichardMH]

In the olden days we had Blend Options which are like the luminosity masks.

 

 

[Furry]

Hmmm...

After a good night's sleep I have investigated a couple of Youtube videos which I found quite informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Uml_RuSlQ&t=2s and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAYKacUL86U. I don't know if there is any problem with giving these videos free publicity here but I have no connection with either of them.

I must admit that some of the replies that have come in overnight (well, it's overnight for me) have only confused me more. Thomaso, I have no idea what you were doing when you created transparent sections in the image. But I gather that only applies in v2 of APh so I will not worry about it for the time being.

Yes, thomaso, I am restricted to v1 at this stage. Thanks for pointing that out to other contributors.

RichardMH and smadell, my understanding of what others have been saying about the curves adjustment is that I do not need to worry about the luminosity range. This became clear when I watched those two videos.

I played around a bit with APh and the original photo and was able, fairly quickly, to get the result shown here. I have also included a screenshot of the curves dialog box, about which some may wish to comment. My first adjustment was of a particularly dark area, then I pulled the top RH area down a bit to retain the details of the white jacket on the lady on the left and the white cardigan on the lady behind the post. Finally, I pulled the centre up a little to retain a lighter picture overall.

Maybe it's time to pose another task?

Edited January 20 by Furry
corrected typos

[RichardMH]

Rather than complicate things more I'll just say its good you have found a workable solution. If you use the Develop Persona for raw files there is a RGB curve there and you can set tones there.   I think some of us were trying to make your levels approach work. 

[R C-R]

7 hours ago, Furry said:

I don't know if there is any problem with giving these videos free publicity here...

It is no problem at all. Users often mention videos by Olivio Sarikas in the forum.

[thomaso]

10 hours ago, Furry said:

Thomaso, I have no idea what you were doing when you created transparent sections in the image. But I gather that only applies in v2 of APh so I will not worry about it for the time being.

Like you I use V1 only. The transparency is a result from @smadell's hint to get an auto-selection created by a CMD-OPT-click on the image layer thumbnail (“Selection from Layer Intensity”). I used a fill (pink) color to make the transparency visible that occurred with this selection method. My examples were not meant as a hint for your topic's task but rather as a question to @smadell.

The second example (the pink fill without transparency) shows a standard menu command to auto-create the selection depending on luminosity. – Both this methods are available in V1.

But for both I still wonder in what situations they are useful while the exact definition of their selected colour ranges alias "Layer Intensity" appear unclear to me and creates a hard-edged selection.

[smadell]

Hi, @Furry and @thomaso.  A couple of comments, especially regarding the questions posed by thomaso.

First, my suggestion (as posed above) was meant to suggest a way to effectively duplicate the method that Furry was using in Photoshop. In copying the original image into the Levels adjustment, he is effectively masking the adjustment to work more in the highlights and less in the shadows. Inverting that will cause the adjustment to affect the shadows more than the highlights. Because Affinity Photo cannot "paste" into the Levels adjustment directly, I suggested a way to mask the Levels adjustment by first creating a luminosity-based selection of the original image. (As I will note below, I think there are far more elegant ways to do this.)

Second, thomaso's question regarding the apparent transparency created with the Cmd-Opt-Click method of selection is best understood as follows. Cmd-Opt-Clicking the thumbnail of the Background layer selects the entire layer, but does so based on the luminosity of each of the layer's pixels. So, a pixel that is 100% luminous - white (255,255,255) will be selected at 100% strength; a pixel that is 0% lumninous - black (0,0,0) will be selected at 0% strength. A pixel that is 50% luminous - middle grey (128,128,128) will be selected at 50% strength. Because the photo provided by the OP is very dark, most of the pixels are selected at very low strength. Because of this, they will appear transparent. Actually, many of them are not completely transparent, but are so nearly transparent that they look that way.

When a luminosity-based selection is in place, any operation that takes place next is applied to the selected area at a strength proportionate to the strength of the selection. So, applying a magenta color to pixels that are 100% selected will be applied at 100% strength (or, stated more appropriately, with an alpha level of 255 (100%). Applying a magenta color to pixels that are 0% selected will apply that color with an alpha level of 0, and the color will effectively be invisible. Applying magenta to a pixel that is 50% selected will apply that color with an alpha level of 128, and will appear 50% transparent.

In the image below, I have added a blank pixel layer above the Background layer, Cmd-Opt-Clicked on the Background layer, and (with the blank pixel layer active) filled the selection with magenta. (See below for notes on the best method to fill a selection.) Hiding the Background layer reveals the magenta fill, which reflects the luminosity selection – opaque where the Background is white; transparent where the Background is black. Actually the entire pixel layer has RGB values of 300,100,50. But, the alpha channel values are different which causes the higher or lower measures of transparency.

Lastly, the method that thomaso has used to fill the luminosity selection with magenta is flawed. Using the Flood Fill tool to fill any pixel layer (with or without an active selection) will always take into account the color directly under the point that is clicked on. Therefore, if I use the flood fill tool and click on the white coat of the woman on the left, only the areas of white are filled. It is only when I bump the tolerance to 100% that AP will allow any color to be affected by the Flood Fill. The better way to do a "fill" with a specific color is to use the Fill… command (in the Edit menu) and specify a "Custom Color". Performing the fill with this command avoids the need to worry about what color you're clicking on.

As far as the Select Midtones, Select Shadows, and Select Highlights commands (in the Select menu) are concerned, I have always found them to be lacking in enough specificity for me. And, they tend to create hard-edged selections (or nearly so) that are difficult to control.

I played with a couple of methods to accomplish the goal that Furry set out, and I think I got the best solution by increasing the Exposure, applying Blend Options to the adjustment (such that the adjustment is preferentially applied to the blacks and shadows).

[NotMyFault]

I can only confirm than the method described by smadel is the best suited (fast, easy, effective) in this specific case to replicate the PS workflow.

There are official V1 tutorials describing this method.

All other methods may work or have additional benefits, but make it more complicated (in this specific case).

[Furry]

Thank you all for those additional comments since last I posted. My biggest danger now is information overload. That official v1 video looks interesting and I may come back to it.

But I think this discussion has gone far enough for now (at least for me; if others want to take it further, that is up to them). I will now think about the next Photoshop tecnique I use and how it can be translated to APh. Stay tuned!

[thomaso]

17 hours ago, smadell said:

the Cmd-Opt-Click method of selection is best understood as follows

Thank you! for your explanations, they made it more clear to me than just screenshots or recipes … while even experiencing this myself failed in the interpretation of visual results. I think I was mainly mislead by a.) my expectation that dark areas would be selected as more opaque / less transparent and b.) by the visible "marching ants" for the Luminance Selection via Opt-Cmd-Thumbnail-Click which made me think these light parts would be definitely (100%) excluded from the selection.

Do I assume right that Opt-Cmd thumbnail-click displays the ants marquee for pixels (areas) with less than 50% luminosity (<-> alpha below 128)?

Affinity UI also may confuse by imprecise rendering of "marching ants" at the canvas edges, which is also visible in James Ritson's video where the selection at the edges gets displayed only at the left and very subtle, while top, right, bottom edge don't show the marquee. – Did this improve in V2?

Flood Fill Tool: while I was aware of the influence of the click position + tolerance setting I appreciate your hint to the Fill option via menu command which would have been more useful for my examples to visualize the selection's transparency. (shame I did not consider this myself). Thank you again!

Finally it appears that your workflow with Exposure Adjustment + Blend Range Curve achieves the best results, whereas the Level Adjustment + Luminance Mask meets the OP's known/used workflow quick & easy but – without an additional e.g. blend range curve setting – seems to affect the bright areas more than possibly wanted or required.