copy and nudge a pixel row

[BlenderBob]

I can't seem to find a way to copy a pixel row, copy and nudge it. Like alt-arrow in Photoshop. I need to extend a BG from the last row of pixel.

[NotMyFault]

Hi,

when copying use „copy merged“ (copy flattened). It creates a new layer which you can then move by move tool. If required you may merge down the layer.

[BlenderBob]

But I need to extend my BG for hundreds of pixels. That's really not an efficient workflow. The devs really need to implement this because it's something I use all the time. 

[NotMyFault]

Can you show us the source image, and the extended background?
we can then find a quick way to do this in Photo. There are probably faster options than copy/paste / nudging.

[BlenderBob]

Ok, so possible but different workflow. In PS the nudge option is nice as you can do it pixel per pixel 

[thomaso]

13 minutes ago, BlenderBob said:

In PS the nudge option is nice as you can do it pixel per pixel 

"nice" ? – What's the benefit of multiple copies vs. stretching, especially with such a subtle almost monochrome gradient? In more detailed images multiple copies cause multiple copies of the texture, and a 1 pixel wide selection leaves no room for feathered edges which would be able to reduce the visibility of obvious copies.

However, if you prefer multiple copies: How about creating them via "Power duplicate" or "Move Data entry"?

https://affinity.help/photo2/English.lproj/index.html?page=pages/LayerOperations/duplicate.html&title=Duplicating

[thomaso]

Depending on the image texture/structure it can be more efficient (faster, easier, less obvious) to copy a larger area and stretch/shear the copy with a blurred mask as required, + additional copies for the gaps caused by the distortion, like so:

[BlenderBob]

I'm new to Affinity so I still have a lot to learn. 30 years of Photoshop though, so lots of muscle memory.  I use nudging all the time and when I do this, antialiasing is something I don't want at all for single pixel row. 

[GarryP]

You might like to try a variant of what I show in my attached video (I only rename the layer to make it clearer what I’m doing when manipulating the Channels).

Note: The “Rasterise” step seems to be important for some reason.

There might be a quicker way to do this but it works pretty well for some requirements and it's non-destructive.

[NotMyFault]

4 hours ago, GarryP said:

The “Rasterise” step seems to be important for some reason.

So true. If you stretch the 1px wide layer to half the canvas with of ca. 1000px, it is still only 1px wide. Rasterize will create a layer of 1000px. Only rasterization before filling the alpha channel helps to get fully opaque pixels, otherwise resampling will kick in again and lead to partial alpha.