Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi,

When you choose to "Save As" for a new document, Affinity Photo defaults to ".afphoto", its native file format. If I wish to "Save As" to a different format, I have to "Export" instead. There may be numerous reasons why this is the default way Affinity Photo works, but it is really annoying. Why can't we choose which method to "Save As" when we, select "Save As", without having to resort to exporting instead? Users complained about this in Gimp for many years.

As an artist I save the largest majority of my images, like many do I expect as .jpg, or .png. perhaps even .PSD to be compatible with other people. Occasionally I will use .aphoto, but I have to consider future archival options too. Other software doesn't open .afphoto files either, at least, not yet.

Instinctively you head over to "Save As", intending to save your work, then think, "Damn!" and then have to cancel, then select the "Export" option from the menu instead.

You might say that I'll get used to it eventually, but I've been using Affinity Photo since it came out and I still fall into the trap.

I know that Affinity Photo's native file format is best for Affinity Photo, so it includes all your Adjustments etc, but can't we have the choice? Just a drop down menu like other software like Photoshop where Affinity chooses by default it's propitiatory format, but allows you to select an alternative if necessary?

The "Export" option is so unnecessary, not just for me, but everyone I've talked to who uses Affinity Photo.

Can we have the option please? Even if it's a option to tick in the Preferences?

Thanks, Jay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JayH said:

intending to save your work

 

But saving "your work" is possible only in native Affinity format, where store all layers, filters, adjusts, etc.

Other formats only export the result of your work, that can not be continued anymore. Therefore "Export".


Affinity Store: Designer 1.7.2.471, Photo 1.7.2.471, Publisher 1.7.2.471.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1903, Build 18362.295.
Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Psenda,

I think you misunderstand, maybe you don't know Photoshop or other Photo editing software as much as AP?

You should just be able to choose the desired format you want when selecting "Save As", if of course there are layers or adjustments the user could be warned with a message that .jpeg, png., tiff etc is destructive, perhaps be asked "...Would you like to flatten all layers?".

There's no need for an export option, it could all be done from the same place, saving the user having to remember whether it's "Export" or "Save As" they require. The current method isn't very intuitive or clever - at least in my opinion and that is why I mentioned Open Source software Gimp, this was something users requested for many years to be changed, but it never was. If Photoshop can handle this freedom and users are familiar with this method, then why not Affinity Photo?

Share this post


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

I think you misunderstand, maybe you don't know Photoshop or other Photo editing software as much as AP?

 

So what do you think? How does it relate to my message?

 

In most applications, and not just for image editing, SaveAs will switch the workspace to this saved file. And because this file can not reasonably continue at work, the original work file must be reopened.

System, which divides files to worked and exported, suits me more. At least the exported files are not in Recent history, where only work files remain.


Affinity Store: Designer 1.7.2.471, Photo 1.7.2.471, Publisher 1.7.2.471.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1903, Build 18362.295.
Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Psenda,


Sorry I think there may be something lost in translation.

Anyway, it seems you are happy with how AP works.

Just some of us disagree with the set up as it is in AP - Photoshop's method is more straightforward ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually if a file is saved as a psd within Affinity Photo the layers are preserved and when opened in Photoshop the similar layers are there and can be edited. I have just done that with a curves layer and a black and white layer. Exported and saved image as a psd, reopened in Photoshop and the two layers were there and could be further edited. So it would be handy to have a "Save as" for multiple file formats which would be a smoother way of working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we could ‘Save As...’ to non-native formats, I think it would be reasonable to expect the result to be completely editable in the target application. As things stand, this is going to lead to disappointment for Photoshop users when they find that there is no editable text in PSD files exported from the Affinity apps.

 

Having to go down the export route provides the user with the strongest possible hint that something may be ‘lost in translation’.


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.2.471 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.2.153 • Designer for iPad 1.7.2.6 • iOS 12.4.1 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I wrote in this and in similar topic (https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/54114-affinity-photo-save-as/&do=findComment&comment=274538),

Affinity philosophy (SaveAs - native format, Export - other formats) is good for me, and I do not have a problem with it.

But I understand, that for many users with different practices it can be a unnecessary complications.

 

This can be solved very simply.

In preferences, place a selection option:

- SaveAs, only native format.

- SaveAs, all formats (native and exported).

Depending on this option, SaveAs processing is different - either an existing service, or an Export dialog with added native format.

 


Affinity Store: Designer 1.7.2.471, Photo 1.7.2.471, Publisher 1.7.2.471.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1903, Build 18362.295.
Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


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

In preferences, place a selection option:

 

I don't think preferences option would help any. If save as to other format is included in future release, default behaviour would still be that save as would offer affinity format like before (or original format if there are no edits that demand affinity format... though there are some questions about this behaviour). Other formats would be an option.

People who want old behaviour (affinity format only) can just ignore format selection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big advantage of Export dialog is, that you can choose basic export parameters directly when you select the output file format.

For a conventional combobox format selection in SaveAs, you need another dialog to specify these parameters, which is an unnecessary step.

Of course, this could be done by completely re-formatting dialogue forms (like Export), but it will not be easy, so I suggest the simplest solution for Affinity.


Affinity Store: Designer 1.7.2.471, Photo 1.7.2.471, Publisher 1.7.2.471.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 1903, Build 18362.295.
Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JayH Bear in mind, your feature request will get along with this forum and their participants as long as your request is what they want it to be. In other words, you may as well give up.

 

P.S. Now I realize I should have sent you a PM, some moderators will probably delete my post :)


Andrew
-
Win10 x64 AMD Threadripper 1950x, 64GB, 512GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD + 2TB, dual GTX 1080ti
Dual Monitor Dell Ultra HD 4k P2715Q 27-Inch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realy had high hopes with the Affinity products, I really thought Serif would challege the establishment anf have learnt from previous incarnations, i.e. But its not far from the issues dealing with Serif and their old software.

Serif don't listen to their customers enough, if at all. I know I'll be picked up on that comment by either fanboys or mods. The amount of bugs I listed for Serif Photo and other software was crazy, software that had been around for years and either users hadn't noticed, or just excepted the querks and said that Serif never listen.

They release software and expect the users to bug test for them for free. Whilst still of course you pay for the incomplete said software in the first place.

Serif spread themselves too thin, not enough devs for numerous products constantly growing. Recently Ipad, now a DTP Program.

Then there's the issue with getting the basics working right, before addong all the bells and whistles that most users don't care about. How about getting the crop too to work well first for example? or croppong with a Marquee. Floating Selections.. too many to list. I'm sure we've all submitted simple stuff here.

Most compitent amateurs and pros want Photoshop without the subscription, being able to buy a piece of software and feel they own it in they're hand, Instead of using CS6 or CC with amtlib.

Not everyone wants to rip off software companies, even if it is Adobe.

I know Serif aren't listening, least no one with any influence. I just wish they did thats all.

There are basic features that users have been asking for since day one and it's just a waste of time here thinking you have a voice, it's all just marketing bull.

Designer is no different, how long have users wanted a "Convert to Curve" option that actually works, without loads of unnecessary nodes? It's a massive requirement. Even Inkscape can do it well.

If a company wants to be comptetive with the competition, they need to work with what is already there. Not try to reinvent the wheel.

It's a shame, a real shame and a wasted opportunity, one that could have made Serif a fortune.

Now fanboys etc, take your best shot, I'm sure you're itching with antic...i... pation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

e...maybe you don't know Photoshop or other Photo editing software as much as AP?

I can't speak for Psenda, but I certainly do "know Photoshop and other Photo editing software." Frankly, it sounds more to me like Photoshop is the only program with which you are very familiar.

One of the most annoying things that too many software vendors do is mix what should be the clear and normal meanings of saving a file versus exporting a file. And Adobe is one of the worst offenders in this regard. It leads to endless confusion among beginners about a very fundamental concept.

The "Save" word should only be associated with the program's native file format. Whenever a program converts one of its native files to some other file format--be it an exchange format or the proprietary format of another application--that is by definition exporting it.

Similarly, "Open" should only be associated with the program's native file format. Whenever a program converts a foreign file format--be it an exchange format or the proprietary format of another application--to its own native format, that is by definition importing it.

Importing and exporting requires translating parts of the file or its syntax to conform to the standards of the incoming or outgoing format--in other words, altering the file. Failure to understand this is why so many users of any given graphics program continually beat up on their pet program's vendors. Blurring the terminology just creates confusion and frustration among the users.

Illustrator users complain to Adobe because the marketing bullet point claims it can "open" .cdr files. They try to do so and become upset when their Conical Grads and Dimension objects disappear. So they scream "Illustrator is crap! I'm switching to Draw!."

Inversely, Draw users complain to Corel because the marketing bullet point claims it can "open" .ai files. They try to do so and their Brush objects become dumbed-down to groups of simple path objects with no live behaviors. So they scream "Corel Draw is crap! I'm switching to Illustrator!"

Those are just particulars among many, many more examples that are affected in conversions in either direction.

But all that blustery know-it-all nonsense stems from failure to understand that .ai and .cdr are proprietary formats each of which include proprietary constructs that the other doesn't understand (or have rights to). Like Illustrator, Draw has a "Brushes" feature. But that doesn't mean it is anything like an Illustrator Pattern Brush. Like Draw, Illustrator has Grad Fills. But Illustrator only provides the two most basic types: Linear and Radial. And to this day, Illustrator still fails to provide even basic dimension objects.

Inkscape catches a lot of grief from users of other drawing programs who don't understand that it is primarily all about compliance with an open standard  (SVG), even though Inkscape tries to provide clear documentation and alerts to make the user who pays attention aware when an operation or feature is not yet part of the standard.

So my "vote" is: Leave Serif alone in this matter. I strongly applaud its trying to adhere to the meaningful difference between Save and Export, and between Open and Import. I, for one, want to know when I'm actually invoking a conversion filter, and not just "opening" or "saving" a file as-is.

JET

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jay
I can truthfully say, from my own experiences with other software companies, that you are WAAAAAY  off base and really don't seem to have a clue. Serif is absolutely verbose in their communication by comparison with other developers. Their willingness to openly interact with their typical users was the first positive thing I noticed. They listen and then choose to act, delay response or ignore based on a predetermined development plan.  Amazingly, they've been willing to share their future road map publicly. What they don't do is bow down to a single user's self proclaimed priorities when they have plenty of their own to sort through. I've used graphics software where the company introduced new versions with no user input at all. Trust me....you REALLY don't want to live there.

You complain about beta testing for free. Serif doesn't "expect" anyone to test, but they do allow everyone who has a vested interest to participate, without limiting it to a small elite group of testers. Huge difference there. Your $50.00 certainly did not make you a shareholder. You can make polite suggestions, but you don't get to vote on any finally decisions. Bottom line... this is not a benevolent democracy. 


Yes... I have several graphics programs that allow to you choose all available formats from a single drop menu. I'll admit I like it that way too, but its no huge deal to have a separate function for a proprietary format. I can tell you that I haven't recently lost any working files due to clicking the wrong format. It makes you stop and confirm your intent, it's no big deal and no....it's not broken, it's just a tad different. Suck it up cupcake, it's probably not going to change anytime soon.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Suck it up cupcake"? Now really sir. Keep the insults coming please! Yawn.

Users are allowed oppinions, aren't they? Or do they all have to share the same ones as yours? What is the point of a "Feature Requests" section otherwise?

Why do people in these forums get so defensive with a piece of software? I've not critasising anyones loved ones. Software is just a tool to get a job done, hopefully as painlessly as possible.

This reminds me of the Linux forums. Forums are pointless.

There's plenty of people out there who are disappointed with how the Affinity products have pretty much stalled and missed basic features - features that people requested over 2 years ago and just badic ones as that. But sensibly many people take it on the chin, forget the wasted money they spent on the brand and go back to Adobe. Additionally they avoid this forum.

Things are just the same as they were when the other older Serif products were around - fanboys worshiping software whether good or bad. But be careful, don't critasise, no, never complain. You might as well of poked someone in the eye with a rather large pointy stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just calls them as I sees them. Your reply begs the simple question "Why are you still using Affinity?"  I'm not a fan boi of any software. I use and enjoy a pretty broad spectrum of graphics tools here. I just tire of watching people abuse the folks who work at the pointy end of the stick. They collect a paycheck for doing a job their managers tell them how to get done, not for meeting your personal demands. Some of them love what they do and for others it's a just job. A job made no easier by ignorant diatribes about how badly they do it. Your abusive tone doesn't add anything to their check. A bit of honey goes a lot further than the sour grapes approach. Maybe, give it a try.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for a normal Save As command.
I would like to repeat my current save as-export problems regarding intense workflows with thousands of images:

 

- The native image format isn't appropriate, since no other software supports it. It's a waste of disk space to keep edited images in the native format and then export those to another lossless format

- The export isn't setting the saved flag, therefore the user is bugged to save the file upon closing

- The export doesn't follow the opened file path nor doesn't change the file name being edited after export.

 

Please take a look at other software, how good and easy is the life with a standard "Save as" command. - CorelDRAW, Corel Photo Paint, Photoshop, Illustrator, and those other countless image editing software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't forget the very underused software, that some may not be aware of "Microsoft Word". How does "Save As" work here, remind me?

By the way I do have a softspot for the actual monkey devs that get paid peanuts to work long, long ours and probably have good ideas that get ignored too just like the users. It's more typically the management and bosses that are the issue i.e. Serif the company.

I've attempted to retry the Affinity products on numerous occasions, but as I've stated, the basic features are missing that would make the software spot on. I was even told recently that a bug wasn't fixable as they didn't know how to fix it.

I last week gave things a go again with AP, but it totally reminded me how nothing predominantly has changed since its first release.

This 'Cupcake' is back with Adobe as there's no other choice to get jobs done well and finished on time.

I loathe subsciption software, but I hate more incomplete software. Even Photoshop/Illustrator CS2 still with much of their outdated features still have the barebones of perfect pieces of software, I only wish they still worked properly with Windows 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Icefront said:

- The native image format isn't appropriate, since no other software supports it. It's a waste of disk space to keep edited images in the native format and then export those to another lossless format

- The export isn't setting the saved flag, therefore the user is bugged to save the file upon closing

- The export doesn't follow the opened file path nor doesn't change the file name being edited after export.

 

- Keeping the edited images in native format is only a waste of disk space if you know you’re never going to want to tweak the things that get flattened on export.

- It would be incorrect for the export to set the ‘saved’ flag. See above.

- The handling of export file names and folder paths is crying out for improvement.


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.2.471 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.2.153 • Designer for iPad 1.7.2.6 • iOS 12.4.1 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing users here might wish to be made aware of, is that the previous Serif PhotoPlus & Draw software, (the predecessors to Affinity Photo & Designer), had proprietary file formats and Serif didn't see fit to allow users to be able to import these files into the Affinity products. Would you wish to archive years of work in an editable format with Affinity Photo or Designer only to find out that when Serif sees fit to drop these products, or make something new - which may easily happen, what are you going to do with those .afphoto files then?

I doubt Adobe is going to disappear in the same way. Archiving for the future, please consider what format you choose. Presently Adobe say they have 12 Million subscribers to the Creative Cloud. Then there are those that own previous versions, which must be very large. Additionally, a huge amount of users have hacked versions. Adobe products are the standard and used by nearly all creatives across the world and have done since design was possible on PCs and Macs.

Who would you place your money on for the future? Especially in light that Serif can't even add basic features that have been requested for years. These things aren't even on the Road Map.

I know this post began with several other posts regarding basic feature suggestions from myself, such as this, "Save AS" vs "Export" feature, which by the way I've found out since I'm not the only one requesting this basic feature and the others too, there are other posts and topics on them.

This post has rambled onto Affinity products and Serif in general too in my frustration. Unless you're a halfwit, you'll know that it's unlikely any software company will take a users point of view on board, unless there is enough moans and complaints that effects profits/reputation, even then though, companies already have their own agendas and what they think users need more than you. When have "Suggestion Boxes" ever changed anything in life? They're there just to imply a company appears to care - it's just marketing hype - if you don't know that, then your a bit of a nitwit.

We're led to believe that Serif reads our posts, but is that just forum moderators, or people that actually can influence what happens? It would be nice if someone with the power to change things was transparent enough to inform us all realistically what Serif is attempting to do with the Affinity range.

Are they actually trying to compete with Adobe, or are they just cashing in on a part of the market when many users don't like the idea of Subscription Services with Adobe? But in doing so, they're never going to make one particular piece of great software, instead are they just going to use the same business model as they did previously and release one piece of unfinished software after another and not have the resources to manage them all?

How many updates have you got excited about, thinking that finally that feature you and other's requested months, if not years ago have finally made it to this version. To be immediately disappointed that the update has things you've never cared about and would probably never use? As a bonus you get some freebies of brushes, graphic templates or similar, stuff you'll again download, but still probably never use either.

We've spent our money on your products Serif, some have bought both Mac and Windows versions too like myself expecting so much more due to the advertising and hype. But several years on, users are curious and feeling let down, is anyone out there willing to comment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JayH said:

[...]

This post has rambled onto Affinity products and Serif in general too in my frustration. Unless you're a halfwit, you'll know that it's unlikely any software company will take a users point of view on board, unless there is enough moans and complaints that effects profits/reputation, even then though, companies already have their own agendas and what they think users need more than you. When have "Suggestion Boxes" ever changed anything in life? They're there just to imply a company appears to care - it's just marketing hype - if you don't know that, then your a bit of a nitwit.

We're led to believe that Serif reads our posts, but is that just forum moderators, or people that actually can influence what happens? It would be nice if someone with the power to change things was transparent enough to inform us all realistically what Serif is attempting to do with the Affinity range.

Are they actually trying to compete with Adobe, or are they just cashing in on a part of the market when many users don't like the idea of Subscription Services with Adobe? But in doing so, they're never going to make one particular piece of great software, instead are they just going to use the same business model as they did previously and release one piece of unfinished software after another and not have the resources to manage them all?

How many updates have you got excited about, thinking that finally that feature you and other's requested months, if not years ago have finally made it to this version. To be immediately disappointed that the update has things you've never cared about and would probably never use? As a bonus you get some freebies of brushes, graphic templates or similar, stuff you'll again download, but still probably never use either.

We've spent our money on your products Serif, some have bought both Mac and Windows versions too like myself expecting so much more due to the advertising and hype. But several years on, users are curious and feeling let down, is anyone out there willing to comment?

6

 

You nailed it. That's exactly the situation.

Here are a few more thoughts.

 

The cost. I was trapped in the same logic when I started using Affinity. I couldn't get why people were complaining about a piece of software that costs the equivalent of a dinner. I was profoundly, utterly wrong. When I first saw the price and what they were promising I thought "How they can sell such a powerful software for that ridiculous price?" Then of course, given the price, I bought it as "worst case scenario I wouldn't waste a fortune".

Well, here's how actually works. Someone decides to pack a car with all the best optional and sell it for little money. It's a market, and if the seller is willing to market a product at a cheap price, is his decision, period. How he gets there, what he needs to do in order to fulfill the promise and maintain the costs, is his problem. No one is forcing the seller to market the product at such a low price. In fact, they said on more than one occasion on this very forum, that money is not an issue. I would expect everyone would understand this point, it's pretty basic. So, rather than going with the mantra "what do you expect for 50 bucks?" I say "I expect what they promised" (there's another good one, "if you are not happy what are you still doing here?" If you still don't guess why am I wasting my time...).

Now, if the seller promises the product with all the bell and whistles, he has to deliver. I don't care I spent 50 bucks, I didn't ask for such a price, is the seller that went that route. But here's the surprise: I bought the car and I find out that despite the body looks great, it has an awesome painting, great tires, I can only drive it for a mile, then the car stops. "Sorry, we are not there yet". Fine, but you should have told me upfront what was the deal. It's a promise that the seller didn't keep. And is not that I want my money back, that's not the point. I feel frustrated because I believed in this product. Do you people get this? Because every time someone raises a critique it really seems it's like an elementary school here, bad guys vs good guys.

But then there's another fun part. Let's give the seller the benefit of the doubt, they didn't think the whole thing through. I'm fine with that, only when those customers who wanted to make long rides (and not only take the car to the grocery shop as all you happy users do) they then come back here and tell the seller "Look, it's OK, the car can't go past the block where I live, just give me a sign you are doing your best to keep your promises", then the seller ignores these customers because the seller has his own agenda and he doesn't care.
In all honesty, if this car struggles it's also because of those users who are happy with it as is. They are actually contributing to slowing it down. Well, after all, I'm sure from Serif's standpoint, they are the real target, so perhaps it all makes sense. It's important to understand, though, that even if people are able to create nice works with Affinity products, that's again not the point. The whole point is a product marketed for a professional environment, and I'm aware of the fact that this detail requires a whole another post itself, so I'll skip it (this post is getting already too long and I myself don't like long posts).

A few of the broken/missing things: 32bit editing, broken. Selective Color, broken. Multiple layer selections, missing. Performance, struggling. Lens Blur, incomplete, etcetera. It is not a matter of finding workarounds, which I already did in many occasions, it's a matter of an incomplete product compared to what was promised, and is not ready for a professional work environment.

So, to JayH's point, yes: Affinity products are what they are and we (the customers who want to make long rides) won't get what we expect because that's the way they market their products. It's understandable that some users feel annoyed by these posts because for them and for their expectations, what they got is more than enough. But those users need to understand that they are only a part of the bucket and the reasons that moved them to buy Affinity are not the same as ours.

 


Andrew
-
Win10 x64 AMD Threadripper 1950x, 64GB, 512GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD + 2TB, dual GTX 1080ti
Dual Monitor Dell Ultra HD 4k P2715Q 27-Inch

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

×