cmd+1 and the real view????

[Polygonius]

I have a retina display (meanwhile with the standard 2560x14440 resolution).

 

If i create a 1000 x 800 pixel / 72 dpi "picture"  - i got exact this picture in this size (on my screen).

If i hit in AP cmd+1 this picture is (shown or real???) very smaller. But if i export i get the "right"  size!

 

Even working with forms and svg a higher DPI seems to be "sharper". The cmd++ has not this effect????

(no pixel, just forms and fonts).

 

I guess i have a really big knot in my brain, but where?

1.

A form is a form and font (based) of forms is also a form... (same for curves)

 

2.

I believe the WSYWIG for DPI and the cmd+1...

Buts not what i get????

 

 

[Lee D]

Hi Polygonius,

You may want to have a read of this existing forum post as another user posted a similar question and Photos lead developer confirmed how the app is setup.

[toltec]

2 hours ago, Lee D said:

Hi Polygonius,

You may want to have a read of this existing forum post as another user posted a similar question and Photos lead developer confirmed how the app is setup.

 

"I think the extra confusion comes from what "zoom to 100%" means - Affinity will show the same thing on both retina / non-retina screens - because that's how retina stuff should work. Some other apps would show the document at 1/2 the size when zoomed to 100% on a retina display.

 

If you want to see your document at "native" pixel size, and your document unit is pixels, Hit Command-9 (Zoom to "Print" size - it should probably be called "Physical" size..) - and you then see it at half the size."

 

From Affinity help files.

 

• Zoom to 100% using 1 or double-click the Zoom Tool icon, where document pixels map directly to screen pixels. (if Affinity shows the same thing on different resolution screens, that is not mapping directly!) is it ?
• Actual Size using 8.
• Pixel Size using 9.

 

Something must be wrong here !

 

On my Windows 7 pc, the two zooms are different. I have reported it as a bug.

 

At what zoom level does 600 pixels of image data map to 600 pixels on the screen?. That is very important to know when it comes to evaluating images.

 

From the post and the help files it is not clear.

 

 

 

 

[carl123]

11 hours ago, toltec said:

Something must be wrong here !

On my Windows 7 pc, the two zooms are different. I have reported it as a bug.

 

 

I am on Windows 8, but check the equivalent setting (below) on your Windows 7 PC.

If this setting is not set to 100% you will see a difference in CTRL+1 and CTRL+9, like you are currently seeing

 

[toltec]

Thanks for the info, it gave me something to look at.

 

Windows, 7  1920 x 1080 monitor, text size set to 100% as you suggested

 

I made a document in Designer. Set as A4, 300 dpi  with a square box, 600 pixels (about 50 mm or 2 inches)

I rasterized it so that it was 600 pixels, not a vector, although that made no difference. 

 

This is 100% view Ctrl + 1

 

This is Pixel size Ctrl + 9

 

The Pixel size is what I would expect. On a 1920 pixel wide screen it seems to 600 pixels wide.

 

 

That means this from Affinity help files.

 

• Zoom to 100% using 1 or double-click the Zoom Tool icon, where document pixels map directly to screen pixels. 

 

Is wrong.

 

It has something to do with DPI not pixels.

 

Interestingly. If I load it into Photo. both zooms are the same. 

 

I just tried it in Photo with the text set to 125%. There was a difference in the views too. At a guess, 600 pixels occupied 805 pixels on the screen. 

 

However, in this case, the 100% view was closer than the pixel size.

 

 

It is all very flaky and unreliable

 

 

[Polygonius]

On 9. November 2017 at 7:00 PM, toltec said:

 

"I think the extra confusion comes from what "zoom to 100%" means - Affinity will show the same thing on both retina / non-retina screens - because that's how retina stuff should work. Some other apps would show the document at 1/2 the size when zoomed to 100% on a retina display.

 

If you want to see your document at "native" pixel size, and your document unit is pixels, Hit Command-9 (Zoom to "Print" size - it should probably be called "Physical" size..) - and you then see it at half the size."

Nope cmd+9 is the same as cmd+1, but cmd+2 sets it to correct size.i guess its like other members said here:  Its the OSX-retina-native (144 dpi) and my 72 file-settings. 

(And yeah, it will be not more as much detailed if i scale-down;-) that was my knot

 

Thank you all!

On 9. November 2017 at 7:00 PM, toltec said:

 

 

 

[lepr]

.

[toltec]

1 hour ago, owenr said:

 

Not much use when the current apps do not behave as described in that post.

 

 

I think both "pixel size" and "100% zoom" should be changed to "Random size" 

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, toltec said:

I think both "pixel size" and "100% zoom" should be changed to "Random size" 

I think "random" is your word-of-the-day today. 

[toltec]

11 minutes ago, R C-R said:

I think "random" is your word-of-the-day today. 

 

Yes, a different word every day. Picked at random 

[R C-R]

3 hours ago, owenr said:

Not much use when the current apps do not behave as described in that post.

That @Andy Somerfield post from 2014 is confusing in several respects, not the least of which is this:

Quote

If you want to see your document at "native" pixel size, and your document unit is pixels, Hit Command-9 (Zoom to "Print" size - it should probably be called "Physical" size..) - and you then see it at half the size.

??? CMD-9 is currently called "Pixel Size" in both AD & AP. I don't see either "Print" or "Physical" size listed anywhere on the View menu.

[toltec]

19 minutes ago, R C-R said:

That @Andy Somerfield post from 2014 is confusing in several respects, not the least of which is this:

??? CMD-9 is currently called "Pixel Size" in both AD & AP. I don't see either "Print" or "Physical" size listed anywhere on the View menu.

 

Pixel, Print or Physical. Sounds very "Random" to me 

 

To make things worse, it is not always right. I have been trying different variations and in a few instances, pixel size is not 1 to 1 pixels. So it just does not work properly at all.

 

I actually think this is the very worst and most serious bug in Affinity. How can you accurately judge artefacts and so forth in things like unsharp mask if you can't view at 1 to 1 pixel size?

 

At the moment, how do we know what the hell is what?

 

[lepr]

.

[lepr]

.

[R C-R]

16 minutes ago, owenr said:

Deleted again because zooming behaviour seems to vary for different sizes of documents. What a mess.

In terms of pixel dimensions, DPI settings, or both?

[lepr]

.

 

 

[toltec]

20 minutes ago, owenr said:

 

I'll post again after thoroughly retesting. Maybe this evening.

 

I have found differences in behaviour between Windows 7 and 10, Photo and Designer.

 

I have upgraded the word "Random" to "Haphazard" 

[Alfred]

50 minutes ago, owenr said:

I'll post again after thoroughly retesting. Maybe this evening.

 

Is that @R C-R's evening, or yours?

 

26 minutes ago, toltec said:

I have upgraded the word "Random" to "Haphazard" 

 

I'm not convinced that that is an upgrade rather than a sidegrade or even a downgrade!

 

[lepr]

.

[toltec]

21 hours ago, owenr said:

 

UKGBNI evening.

 

 

Funny. I didn't realise UKGBNI time was so far behind UKGB time