Emboss quality bug

[Herbert123]

Please compare the below embossed circles. I am aware that Photoshop handles this particular example even (far!) worse, but Affinity Designer also suffers from rendering issues when the embossing effect is set to no softening at all. The left version is done in Photoline, the right in Affinity.

 

Also notice how Affinity Designer fades the overall saturation of the fill colour.

 

These rendering artefacts occur when a custom curve is applied. Softening is not an option, since that would also soften the edges in the center.

 

In short, unacceptable for real-world usage. I am unsure whether the Mac version suffers from the same problems?

 

[OneByOne]

Yes I have noticed this also. 1 thing about it too, is that the subdivision / resolution of the graphic is dependant on zoom level in the view port. Zooming in will improve the appearance, but yes softening without effecting the edges, not sure its possible.

 

 ​SAME SHAPE AT DIFFERENT ZOOM

 

 

Have tried looking at preferences but can't find anything that will increase resolution. Maybe someone with more experience with AD can help.

 

Have said that, it is still possible to soften and then add a circle over the top in the centre to keep the sharp edge of the centre, but granted, it is more steps and there is still some desaturation of the bevel.

[MikeW]

Herbert, what color model, depth, and settings? Mind uploading a sample file?

[Herbert123]

The colour mode does not seem to matter. I tested this in 8bpc and 16bpc. OneByOne is correct in stating that it depends on the zoom level as well - a higher zoom level increases the mesh division. But it never goes away completely.

 

I have included a sample file.

bevel.afdesign

[Chris B]

Hi guys,

 

I'll get this logged and see what development can do about it. I think this could probably be done better. It is no better on the Mac version either...

[TonyB]

The colour mode does not seem to matter. I tested this in 8bpc and 16bpc. OneByOne is correct in stating that it depends on the zoom level as well - a higher zoom level increases the mesh division. But it never goes away completely.

 

I have included a sample file.

 

Can you post the Photoline document as I can't seem to replicate the result you are showing.

[TonyB]

Please compare the below embossed circles. I am aware that Photoshop handles this particular example even (far!) worse, but Affinity Designer also suffers from rendering issues when the embossing effect is set to no softening at all. The left version is done in Photoline, the right in Affinity.

 

Also notice how Affinity Designer fades the overall saturation of the fill colour.

 

These rendering artefacts occur when a custom curve is applied. Softening is not an option, since that would also soften the edges in the center.

 

In short, unacceptable for real-world usage. I am unsure whether the Mac version suffers from the same problems?

 

 

Have you tried the 3D effect in Layer Effects? It uses a real lighting model so should produce more saturated results. The emboss just blends convolution based overlays with the layer to maintain bit planes.

[OneByOne]

Yes, 3d looks good colour wise.

Have to say 3d effect is a very nice tool after having a closer look at all the options and tweak's. :)

[Herbert123]

Have you tried the 3D effect in Layer Effects? It uses a real lighting model so should produce more saturated results. The emboss just blends convolution based overlays with the layer to maintain bit planes.

 

The 3d effect results in the same obvious stepping "mesh". The zoom factor again has bearing on the number of divisions.

 

I have attached the PLD version, albeit with an additional 3d effect. I also tend to create virtual layers (instanced layers of the original which update in real-time in Photoline) of the original if I see any artefacting, and create an original which is fairly large, after which I scale down the virtual copy.

 

One more option, which would be nice to have, is the ability to adjust the lighting and shadows with a custom curve. Photoline includes that option, which is pretty cool:

 

 

And, as you can tell, Photoline does offer more layer effects to play with.

 

The attached version looks like this:

 

circles.zip

[TonyB]

The lighting properties in Affinity give the same flexibility as a curve but hopefully should be easier to understand.

 

Thanks for the Photoline files. I was seeing similar or sometimes worse artefacts in Photoline but now I know you resize a larger version to hide the artefacts then it makes more sense.  

 

We will continue to improve the layer effects in Affinity but all apps seem to show issues at the extremes of their bevels.

[Herbert123]

The lighting properties in Affinity give the same flexibility as a curve but hopefully should be easier to understand.

 

Thanks for the Photoline files. I was seeing similar or sometimes worse artefacts in Photoline but now I know you resize a larger version to hide the artefacts then it makes more sense.  

 

We will continue to improve the layer effects in Affinity but all apps seem to show issues at the extremes of their bevels.

 

True, and Photoshop is the worst of them all. To be honest, if I need excellent quality, I create actual 3d objects in Blender, and render the objects at a far higher quality than is possible with the effects in any 2d image editor.

 

But even if I try, I cannot recreate the Photoline workflow in Designer: a large version is often not possible due to the radius limit. And Designer lacks a function to clone a layer, while keeping it live. And then there is the bug of the mesh resolution changing depending on the zoom level.

 

I do hope these things will be resolved at some point.

 

As for the lighting properties: I am not sure I would agree with you on that point, but I guess it isn't that important. As long as the artefacts are reduced to a workable level, it's fine.

[TonyB]

. And Designer lacks a function to clone a layer, while keeping it live. 

 

 

Symbols in Designer will give you this ability and so much more.

[Herbert123]

Symbols in Designer will give you this ability and so much more.

 

Unfortunately, when I use a symbol the artefacting remains, since Designer recalculates the live effect for each symbol - including when scaling down. Photoline uses a cached bitmap version of the high resolution one instead, which allows for a reduction or complete removal of artefacts.

 

While symbols are excellent, the code for the 3d and bevel/emboss effect, when custom curves are in use, just has to be given a little bit more attention by the developers. It's almost there.

[Herbert123]

The lighting properties in Affinity give the same flexibility as a curve but hopefully should be easier to understand.

 

Thanks for the Photoline files. I was seeing similar or sometimes worse artefacts in Photoline but now I know you resize a larger version to hide the artefacts then it makes more sense.  

 

We will continue to improve the layer effects in Affinity but all apps seem to show issues at the extremes of their bevels.

 

In the latest beta applying a custom curve still results in the same stepping.

 

@TonyB: I made a stupid mistake when I sent you that demo file - in that other application the stroke, when set to zero pixels (coloured hairline) will cause strong rendering issues when applied with a embossing layer effect. Either turn off the hairline colour altogether, or increase the stroke width to at least 3~5px. The quality is very good in that case - arguably much of an improvement over Designer's custom curve embossing. It may still require a bit of smoothing - but not much.

 

Often the basic quality is good enough to continue to work with in the other application, but sometimes I will put a larger version in a placeholder ("smart object") or a cloned layer, and then scale down to remove the final small quality issues.

 

The odd thing is that the quality in Designer keeps shifting when the user zooms in and out - zoom in, and Designer will increase the number of steps (which are still quite visible). Zoom out, and the number of steps are reduced.

 

I also tried creating a large rasterized version in Designer, and scaling it down - but the steps are still quite visible, unfortunately. The only method I found that mitigates this is by creating a mask of the bevel only, and smoothing it manually.

 

I hope some kind of option will be added to reduce the stepping (increasing the number of steps?) and smoothly interpolate between them at some point.

[Herbert123]

I've tested this in the latest beta, and the problem still persists - any indication when (or if) the emboss effect stepping will be resolved?

 

Performance is also an issue: duplicating a circle a couple of times that has a 3d custom curve emboss effect applied to it causes Designer to slow down, and dragging these objects causes a ~0.5seconds lag before dragging, and while dragging the screen update is quite slow. Document resolution does not seem to affect performance in these cases - whether I work in a web document, or a print document: very laggy performance is the result.

 

Grouping neither works: the screen update becomes a cacophony of parts, and it is difficult to see what is happening on the screen.

 

I believe the laggy performance is caused by the continuous screen updates of these effects - perhaps rendering them to a static bitmap instead would be improve performance? In other applications one work-around is to place complex (groups of) objects that affect performance in a placeholder or smart object. These are then no longer updated in real-time, and performance becomes very snappy.

 

But aside from this, Designer just seems really slow with certain layer effects - much slower compared to other applications. There is definitely room for (code) performance improvements here.

[Herbert123]

I mentioned this before when I tested Designer, and unfortunately the same problem persists in Photo: the 3d emboss layer effect with a custom profile yields unsatisfactory results - quite visible banding spoils the effect, and it becomes unusable.

 

Here is a comparison between Photo and a competing product (bottom one is Affinity Photo):

 

No tricks are used, similar settings. No scaling of assets. A smoothing of 1 is used in the competing product (which is negligible) - applying any kind of smoothing in Affinity Photo produces a too soft look, and still does not remove the banding. Both files were produced at 1024x1024px. The only difference: Affinity Photo's file is 16bpc, while the other file is 8bpc. If anything, I would expect better results because I created the file at a higher bit-depth in Affinity Photo.

 

Here the 3d emboss is applied to a letter (different profile, because Photo crashes the instant I press "linear"):

Last time I mentioned this the developers came to believe I had used tricks in the other application, and that is just not true.

 

I hope this will be resolved in a future update.

[Chris_K]

Hi Herbert 123

 

The layer effects are basically the same code between apps so if it affects one it will most likely be the same in the other app too. This is still something that is still unresolved in our database. I've move this to this thread which has a lot more information on it so we can keep this all together 

[rubs]

Hi, any news on this matter?

[Tourmaline]

On 7-7-2016 at 9:34 AM, TonyB said:

The lighting properties in Affinity give the same flexibility as a curve but hopefully should be easier to understand.

 

Thanks for the Photoline files. I was seeing similar or sometimes worse artefacts in Photoline but now I know you resize a larger version to hide the artefacts then it makes more sense.  

 

We will continue to improve the layer effects in Affinity but all apps seem to show issues at the extremes of their bevels.

"but all apps seem to show issues at the extremes of their bevels."

 

Not this one:

http://www.shinycore.com/products/pathstyler/whatitdoes.htm