Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What are everyone's thoughts on how Affinity processes RAW files (v 1.6.6). Are you happy with the output?

 

I continue to be challenged with the perfect software for my needs so I thought I would start with highlight recovery and create a comparison file using the same photo in a number of different applications. Note that this is far from a scientific study.

 

What are you all thoughts on which is best? Again, this is only the highlight recovery and I know there are other factors involded in development.

RawDevelopmentComparison_highlightRecovery.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are 4 more programs for you:

  • DXO Optics 10
  • DXO Optics 11
  • Luminar 2018 beta
  • Luminar 2018 (final)

All I did with these was load the image in and drag the highlights down to the minimum. I pulled the highlights all the way back which I wouldn't do normally but I wanted to see what would happen.

RawSamples.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic. I'm going to have to sit down and look at all of these side by side. So, what are you thoughts overall?

 

Luminar 2018 beta, being a later version, yoiui would think it would be the same or better, but it kind of scary looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, befehr said:

Fantastic. I'm going to have to sit down and look at all of these side by side. So, what are you thoughts overall?

 

Luminar 2018 beta, being a later version, yoiui would think it would be the same or better, but it kind of scary looking.

 

Sorry, when I said beta I meant the pre-release version. This isn't like affinity where they have a beta version that is actually a later version being tested. This was the release BEFORE the final release was put out so it is actually older. If I didn't push the highlights all the way down then it wasn't quite so scary. They introduced a Raw Develop 'filter' in the release version that helps the highlight recovery a lot (among other things).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get very poor results with Affinity’s RAW development module, especially for highlights and shadows adjustments. Lightroom and Luminar are waaaay better for RAW development.

 

However, it seems like I get superior results with Affinity Photo for iPad compared to the desktop version! Anybody experiencing the same? And if so, why is that? Is the iPad version using a different/better algorithm?


Check out my site: https://five.photos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can not retrieve something that is not there !  255 is pure white !

What you need to start with is a bracketing of 3 exposures or more so you can merge them via "File > New HDR Merge"  or by using external HDR-software  (e.g. Photomatix PRO (like I'm using)).

 

 


Affinity Photo  1.7.2.471 

Windows 10 Home  1903 (build 18362.175) - 64 bit processor - AMD A4-5000 APU with Radeon HD Graphics  1.50GHz - RAM 8,00 GB
Calibrated Monitor (Datacolor Spyder5 Pro)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@HVDB Fotografie True, clipped highlights are not recoverable – not with any program. However, @befehr's concerns are justified and I think it's no secret that Affinity's RAW development module lacks the quality of the rest of the app.

 

I did a comparison myself (see attached file). The original photo has both, overexposed and underexposed parts. I simply pushed the shadows slider all the way up (+100) and pulled the highlights slider all the way down (–100) in Lightroom, Luminar, and Affinity Photo. I'm aware that, in a normal post-processing workflow, one probably wouldn't go all the way with those sliders. But... the results in this little test still speak for themselves. 

RAW.pdf


Check out my site: https://five.photos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi befehr and all,

The shadows and Highlights algorithm (in Develop Persona) was revised in the latest Affinity Photo Beta 1.6.7 which can be downloaded from here. The shadows recovery is now considerably better than the release version, the highlights recovery not so much but it can always be further improved. I advise you to check with the latest Beta rather than the retail version as the results are now quite different.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MEB said:

Hi befehr and all,

The shadows and Highlights algorithm (in Develop Persona) was revised in the latest Affinity Photo Beta 1.6.7 which can be downloaded from here. The shadows recovery is now considerably better than the release version, the highlights recovery not so much but it can always be further improved. I advise you to check with the latest Beta rather than the retail version as the results are now quite different.

 

 

 

Interesting... I just tested it with the beta (see attached file) and indeed, shadows recovery works better. Thanks!

 

Still not as good as Luminar or Lightroom, though (compare to PDF I submitted above – same test).

Affinity Beta.jpg


Check out my site: https://five.photos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, just thought I'd attach a result as well using Affinity Photo - not sure if the aim here was just to try and claw back the highlights but I've boosted the shadow detail too. There's not much precision there, as expected, but taking the tone curve off, sliding highlights all the way down and using a custom tone curve to boost the shadows/mid-tones produces a flat result that you can then do further work with.

 

I've attached the flat version straight from Develop and then the edited version (a couple of adjustments, local contrast enhancement, etc). I've found that changing your mindset enables you to get the most out of Photo's RAW editing - I use it to get a flat result with no clipping, perhaps add some light noise reduction, then build the tones back up in the Photo persona where you have the entire toolset (and to be honest, that's where Photo's strengths lie).

raw_original.thumb.jpg.465d9bc0999608c90de0600f0ae0e333.jpg

raw_edited.thumb.jpg.022e84be7a78661b6d74fa7c3fdd6519.jpg

 

Quote

However, it seems like I get superior results with Affinity Photo for iPad compared to the desktop version! Anybody experiencing the same? And if so, why is that? Is the iPad version using a different/better algorithm?

 

This could be because the iPad version uses Apple's Core Image RAW exclusively - on desktop, SerifLabs is used by default, but you can switch over to Core Image if you prefer the results.

 

[Edit] Are you running the latest TestFlight beta by chance? The new shadows and highlights functionality is in that version too.


Affinity Photo Video Tutorials - Affinity Photo for iPad Tutorials

Looking for a manual/documentation? Check affinity.help for online help!

@JamesR_Affinity for tutorial sneak peeks and more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Like It has already been said before, you just cannot bring to life something that doesn't exist. No software could do that.

 

In lightroom, I think that the highlights and shadows sliders work probably on more than just the shadows and highlights adjustments, but on local exposure and contrast as well. Lightroom do the job for you, Luminar tries to do so, in Affinity, you will have to work a little more. 

 

But, going too far to retrieve a bad eposed picture will lead to poor image quality.
One of the best RAW developer I know, is certainly Iridient Developer. This software focuses on high quality results, in term of definition for instance. It doesn't go as far as lightroom to correct a bad exposed picture (maybe, though...), but it will preserve the overall quality of the picture. I have used Lightroom since the fourth version, and Camera Raw wich is the same engine, and of course the results are quickly appealing and easy to carry out (Adobe are good products, obviously. The problem with that brand is elsewhere...). Now I use Iridient for the basic RAW conversion before Affinity Photo. A way longer, but particulary for large prints, I think that the results are infinitly better.

 

Anyway, this is not the software that makes the picture. Not more than the camera or the lens ... :)

 

Regards,

Fx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, James Ritson said:

.... attached the flat version straight from Develop and then the edited version (a couple of adjustments, local contrast enhancement, etc). I've found that changing your mindset enables you to get the most out of Photo's RAW editing - I use it to get a flat result with no clipping, perhaps add some light noise reduction, then build the tones back up in the Photo persona where you have the entire toolset (and to be honest, that's where Photo's strengths lie)....

I guess that's one of the big misunderstanding using a raw converter between most of the users and Serif.

I've realized that after watching the latest video tutorials recovering the hightlights e.g.https://vimeo.com/channels/affinityphoto/244842191

While most of the users expect to do the main work regarding exposure (incl. shadows and highlight recovery),

white balance, colours and even details in a raw converter (reasons why to shoot in raw and benefit of its capabilities at all),

for Serif it is just a step or even the half way to the final image (regarding exposure). And that's a huge difference in editing philosophy and how to use raw. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, IndigoMoon said:

for Serif it is just a step or even the half way to the final image (regarding exposure). And that's a huge difference in editing philosophy and how to use raw. Correct me if I'm wrong

 

+1

 


Affinity Photo  1.7.2.471 

Windows 10 Home  1903 (build 18362.175) - 64 bit processor - AMD A4-5000 APU with Radeon HD Graphics  1.50GHz - RAM 8,00 GB
Calibrated Monitor (Datacolor Spyder5 Pro)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you, indigoMoon. 
To make an analogy, I will say that develloping a raw file is the first step to achieve a good negative, and a good negative is the necessary step before going trough the enlarger...

 

Fx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HVDB Fotografie said:

One can not retrieve something that is not there !  255 is pure white !

What you need to start with is a bracketing of 3 exposures or more so you can merge them via "File > New HDR Merge"  or by using external HDR-software  (e.g. Photomatix PRO (like I'm using)).

 

 

Agreed, but I purposely picked this image because of it's poor quality. This is an experiment to see what is possible in the recovery process and comparing it to other software. AF does not quite compare to others I have tried.

 

I see the same issue with recovery of shadows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MEB said:

Hi befehr and all,

The shadows and Highlights algorithm (in Develop Persona) was revised in the latest Affinity Photo Beta 1.6.7 which can be downloaded from here. The shadows recovery is now considerably better than the release version, the highlights recovery not so much but it can always be further improved. I advise you to check with the latest Beta rather than the retail version as the results are now quite different.

 

 

Thank meb but don't you guys usually not want us to use the beta version for production work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MEB said:

Hi befehr and all,

The shadows and Highlights algorithm (in Develop Persona) was revised in the latest Affinity Photo Beta 1.6.7 which can be downloaded from here. The shadows recovery is now considerably better than the release version, the highlights recovery not so much but it can always be further improved. I advise you to check with the latest Beta rather than the retail version as the results are now quite different.

 

 

Thank meb but don't you guys usually not want us to use the beta version for production work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not indended to be a direct hit on Affinity, but I am looking for the best alternative to Lightroom and Photoshop. The best way that I can do this is make a side-by-side comparisons, then get validation from the field. I know that it is all somewhat subjective but the reason I posted this here it to you all justify what I am seeing as truth. 

 

I have spent enough mony on alternatives to Lightroom and Photoshop that I probably could have bought a two year subscription with Adobe. This needs to stop. I am having the same problem with Illustration software. No one out there has something that can fully replace Illustrator for my needs, which primarily is the ability to output a full vector eps file (no rasterizing of objects) for upload to stock. For now I will continue with the month ransom to Adobe for illustration purposes. 

 

Thank you all for your input and insite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, we advise to NOT use the Beta for commercial/critical work as it's intended for testing purposes only. But that doesn't stop anyone to try it for comparison purposes on non-critical/production work. I suggested it because i do believe the results are quite better now in particular in shadows recovery and since you were comparing it with other software it would be nice to know how these improvements stand and how or if they could be improved based on the latest code we have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, befehr said:

This is not indended to be a direct hit on Affinity, but I am looking for the best alternative to Lightroom and Photoshop.

 

I currently use Luminar as a Lightroom replacement and Affinity Photo instead of Photoshop. Very happy with that solution. 

 

Luminar for all the basic work from developing the RAW to exposure and color corrections. Affinity for all the more complex work like compositions, sky replacements, panorama stitching, and stacks. 

 

That said, my setup only works for image editing. I still use Lightroom as my DAM because there’s no good alternative to it. 


Check out my site: https://five.photos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Five said:

 

I currently use Luminar as a Lightroom replacement and Affinity Photo instead of Photoshop. Very happy with that solution. 

 

Luminar for all the basic work from developing the RAW to exposure and color corrections. Affinity for all the more complex work like compositions, sky replacements, panorama stitching, and stacks. 

 

That said, my setup only works for image editing. I still use Lightroom as my DAM because there’s no good alternative to it. 

Lately I have been using ON1 2018 and so far pretty happy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×