Jump to content
faflusniak

Non-destructive RAW development (all RAW adjustments in separate sidecar file)

Recommended Posts

Another +1 for having a database/sidecar option for raw adjustments.

I personally don't need sidecar files—I'm not a team player, so a database is cleaner for me. But the need for both is there, for sure. Most obvious scenario: Make many adjustments to an image. Client replies with, 'almost perfect but darks are too dark' or 'highlights are a little too blown out'.

Then you have to start from scratch, trying to remember what you did to get to almost perfect and that's just not cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concept of using a sidecar file or database is so foreign to the design of Affinity Photo that I would be very surprised if the developers ever wasted their time on trying to incorporate such a feature into Photo.

Sidecar/database is not the same thing as "non-destructive" and is almost certainly a better fit for the separate DAM software that Serif has indicated they are working on behind the scenes.

Photo simply is not the correct application for that...  a non-destructive option yes, but sidecar/database no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the very least it would be great to save a .afphoto file with a linked photo and Developer Persona settings unbaked.

The .afphoto files for raw editing would act similarly to a sidecar file and hopefully occupy next to no memory. Nothing would be embedded. Just the settings would be saved.

 

Wishful thinking perhaps. Either way, I too hope a non-destructive and memory-wise solution will come someday. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love afphoto and use it now daily for a lot of think as a freelance, but for me the Raw development module ise too far from what i need, yes the sidecard files is a usefull feature, but, simply having a full good interpreting of format is far more important to my taste. I dont use adobe product anymore but for raw i still go to any of the open source / free (rawtherapy / darktable) software, at this date they are far superior to afPhoto for raw dev.

with the same raw photo in any of the three software listed here (rawtherapy, darktable, affinity photo) try to get information from dark and light part of an image back, the affinity photo result are a lackluster... I want it to be good so i can do everything in one software, but at this date it's not the case. Working on the raw engine and raw interpretation for affinity photo is more important than having sidecar file / non destructive raw editing for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks zedrone for sharing darktable and rawtherapy!

 I knew about darktable but not Raw Therapy and prefer it more so.

I would be continuing to use Raw Therapy had there not have been a deal available for Luminar 3 today.

*EDIT Apparently the deal is actually from March 2019. So it should still work after today if it worked for me.

Luminar 3 meets all my requirements as an Adobe Camera Raw and Adobe Bridge replacement but it is slower than affinity photo. 

It doesn't use sidecar files, but instead just keeps all the saved edits in a database it seems. (Still learning my way around it).

I don't mean to deter people from using affinity photo for raw editing, it's just that I need to be able to go back and adjust my edits whenever clients would like an adjustment.

Edited by DigitalDesignDude
Improper Info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think I'll go against the tide about this idea. Considering how advanced are the RAW processing software nowadays and considering that Serif currently have no idea about how they will implement a non-destructive RAW development in the future (see above) and also that they are probably using an external RAW engine like DCRaw or LibRaw, I'd say that I neither expect nor need or wish this feature.

Lightroom/Camera RAW, DxO Photolab, Capture One are dominating the RAW Development software market and Serif will have a hard time catching up. The question is : why are so many photographers interested in Affinity Photo ? Because they need a tool that is easier to use than Photoshop, that can do enough to handle most retouching tasks and that does not force them to enter the subscription marketing model. Photographers need a tool that allows them to accomplish the retouching tasks that are not possible in their RAW development software, just because it's something totally different.

So, my opinion is that a version of Affinity Photo without any RAW processing would be certainly welcome. Just forget it and focus on the retouching features that could be enhanced or added to AP. Successful software concentrates on what it can do well and tries to do it even better.


--Patrick
Hamburg ist der wahre Grund
warum Kompassnadeln nach Norden zeigen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2019 at 11:34 PM, DigitalDesignDude said:

At the very least it would be great to save a .afphoto file with a linked photo and Developer Persona settings unbaked.

The .afphoto files for raw editing would act similarly to a sidecar file and hopefully occupy next to no memory. Nothing would be embedded. Just the settings would be saved.

I can't say whether or not Serif would go for this, but this should be feasible as most of the underlying technology is already there in the form of linked images as are now supported for Publisher.  If the develop mode were supported for image layers rather than just pixel layers and you had the option to create the initial imported layer as a linked image layer instead of a pixel layer, then as long as you stayed with operations that did not require the layer to be rasterized to a pixel layer you would basically have this - you could use adjustment and live filter layers, for example, but trying to use dodge/burn or the inpainting tool would rasterize and thus embed the layer by the very nature of how they work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2019 at 3:33 PM, DigitalDesignDude said:

I would be continuing to use Raw Therapy had there not have been a deal available for Luminar 3 today.

At the moment you can get Luminar 3 for free.

It's a giveaway partnering with a german computer magazine.

Worked for me.


Windows 10 Pro x64 (1903). Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3.60GHz, 32 GB memory, NVidia RTX 2080
Affinity Photo 1.7.2.471, Affinity Designer 1.7.2.471, Affinity Publisher 1.7.2.471

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering I bought Luminar 4 and not liking everything they changed from Luminar 3 this is awesome!

Both programs need serious performance updates though. I wish other companies' software would run as well as Affinity's. 

Can't find anything that rivals Affinity Photo's Raw Editing speed on Windows.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2018 at 2:01 PM, MEB said:

Hi faflusniak,

Welcome to Affinity Forums :)

Thank you for your feedback. There's already plans to implement some sort of non-destructive workflow/system for RAWs (it's not yet clear how it will be done - if using sidecar files, a live/non-destructible layer system or something else) but this is already being considered for a future version/update (no eta for this though).

So, almost year gone. Is there any news?

p.s. XMP core support will be a solution.

Share this post


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

So, almost year gone. Is there any news?

p.s. XMP core support will be a solution.

Any news will be in the form of a beta release that supports the function. So watch the beta announcements and you will know all the news that there is.


-- Walt

Windows 10 Home, version 1909 (183623.476),
   Desktop: 16GB memory, Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz, GeForce GTX 970
   Laptop:  8GB memory, Intel Core i7-3625QM @ 2.30GHz, Intel HD Graphics 4000 or NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
Affinity Photo 1.8.3.641 and 1.8.4.650 Beta   / Affinity Designer 1.8.3.641 and 1.8.4.650 Beta  / Affinity Publisher 1.8.3.641 and 1.8.4.651 Beta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2019 at 7:22 PM, DigitalDesignDude said:

Considering I bought Luminar 4 and not liking everything they changed from Luminar 3 this is awesome!

Both programs need serious performance updates though. I wish other companies' software would run as well as Affinity's. 

Can't find anything that rivals Affinity Photo's Raw Editing speed on Windows.

 

Agree Luminar renders slow.
But Affinity might be fast, but the Raw renders are horrible.
Still using Nikon Capture NX-D / DXO for Raw rendering and export the Tiff file to Affinity. Then it works ok.
Made some night shots where I have shows how bad it renders Raw.
Sent already more than a year ago some examples they can test, but still not fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully agree, Camera-RAW like sidecar files would be an immediate huge feature! especially if combined with media browser (which for some reason appears to have been removed in the current version 1.7)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2020 at 9:50 PM, WMax70 said:

Agree Luminar renders slow.
But Affinity might be fast, but the Raw renders are horrible.
Still using Nikon Capture NX-D / DXO for Raw rendering and export the Tiff file to Affinity. Then it works ok.
Made some night shots where I have shows how bad it renders Raw.
Sent already more than a year ago some examples they can test, but still not fixed.

You did it right, @WMax70 - using a real RAW converter is the best solution.

Grab a copy of DxO Photolab when it is discounted fx. Or if you are a Sony or Fuji user, get the FREE Capture One Express... These two programs have state of the art algorithms and ditto camera sensor / lens support. And of course you can re-open and adjust the image later from where you left it during the previous conversion - image settings are remembered.

Budget software like Affinity Photo just cant compete at all with these specialized tools from companies with lots of advanced in-house development and acclaimed algorithms.

Not remembering the image settings is an amazing oversight... I have re-developed images hours, days or months later many, many times making better adjustments fx after learning how to sharpen and apply noise reduction with smarter settings. I would never do this if I had to start all over again. It is ludicrous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jowday said:

Not remembering the image settings is an amazing oversight...

Baffles me too.


MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 10.14.5

Affinity Designer 1.8.3 | Affinity Photo 1.8.3 | Affinity Publisher 1.8.3 | Affinity Designer Beta 1.8.3.2 | Affinity Photo Beta 1.8.3.180 | Affinity Publisher Beta 1.8.3.651

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2020 at 9:50 PM, WMax70 said:

But Affinity might be fast, but the Raw renders are horrible.
Still using Nikon Capture NX-D / DXO for Raw rendering and export the Tiff file to Affinity. Then it works ok.
Made some night shots where I have shows how bad it renders Raw.

I'm fairly new to AP. I would love to see some non-destructive raw development, too. It would be great to be able to go back to make changes.

When it comes to the rendering quality, could you kindly expand on your argument? Maybe share those pictures. Where are the differences? Is this noticable in amateur editing, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2020 at 10:48 PM, peanutbutter said:

I'm fairly new to AP. I would love to see some non-destructive raw development, too. It would be great to be able to go back to make changes.

When it comes to the rendering quality, could you kindly expand on your argument? Maybe share those pictures. Where are the differences? Is this noticable in amateur editing, too?

Hi @peanutbutter

All of these RAW converters and Affinity Photo are available in trial editions - I suggest you shoot some RAW images that represent the type of images you care about and make some tests. Seeing is believing.

DxO Photolab, Capture One Pro and Photoshop are the top contenders. They do not simple "convert" RAW data to an image from a common equation or algorithm. They intepret and render the image data using own algorithms and aesthetic goals. 

Results are very different. I have licenses for all of them and I have converted tens of thousands of RAW images from Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony and Olympus cameras using them all.

  • Capture One has the most beautiful and organic rendering. Many prefer it - but it is expensive. Results are close to Fujifilm rendering of details, surfaces, lines and curves. With a Sony or Fujifilm camera you can download a feature limited - but with same awesome rendering - version called Capture One Express. Highly recommended. Great highlight and shadow recovery and natural clarity enhancement. Rather good noise reduction. Interesting colour manipulation tools.
  • Photoshop (as possibly Photoshop Elements) has the most clinical, neutral rendering. Mostly for studio photographers I presume. It aims at resolving as many details as possible resulting in boring, digital images. It is feature rich though with several state of the art algorithms though so you can easily adjust and enhance the image. Outstanding highlight and shadow recovery plus texture, clarity and dehaze enhancement features. Often also supports camera colour profiles (portrait, standard, vivid fx) also for Fujifilm cameras. Okay noise reduction.
  • DxO Photolab lies in between the two. It has outstanding support for cameras and lenses. It is almost like an upgrade of your camera when it is best. Affordable too. Has industry leading noise reduction (PRIME) for noisy very images. Has partly organic rendering, partly detail oriented. Great highlight and shadow recovery plus clarity and dehaze enhancement features. Also U-point technology from NIK plugins for local editing.
  • Affinity Photo falls behind everything above. Especially in resolving details. Rendering is dull with far less details or clarity and colors are dull as well. Photography is about the dynamics of light, contours and shadows - and they are badly rendered in Affinity Photo. Flat. Highlight and shadow recovery is the worst I have ever seen and none of the features have any positive characteristics worth mentioning. On top of it when you press develop it takes forever to process the image. Image rendering of Windows version is the worst - it is based on an open source component. Mac version utilizes some built in OSX libraries and results should be better. But the RAW module in Photo still lies on top of those libraries. Once you are in the main program though Photo is an okay program - minus highlight and shadow recovery.

I have a feeling Photo is build on many open source components - and it shows in the RAW development module. 

You could also try open source RAW converters - there are quite a few. But please check out at least DxO Photolab. You will save hours and hours of trial and error and get consistent excellent results. Well worth the money.

If there is a RAW converter from your camera manufacturer available also give it a try. It mimics the rendering of the camera - often a little slower - but delivers same results. User interface is rarely great but image output is.

But... RAW is not for everyone. Many good JPGs can be improved with good results. YMMV.

🙂

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/3/2020 at 1:15 AM, Jowday said:

Hi @peanutbutter

 

  • Photoshop (as possibly Photoshop Elements) has the most clinical, neutral rendering. Mostly for studio photographers I presume. It aims at resolving as many details as possible resulting in boring, digital images. It is feature rich though with several state of the art algorithms though so you can easily adjust and enhance the image. Outstanding highlight and shadow recovery plus texture, clarity and

You could also try open source RAW converters - there are quite a few. But please check out at least DxO Photolab. You will save hours and hours of trial and error and get consistent excellent results. Well worth the money.

 

🙂

 

 

It's not correct that Photoshop is editing RAW files. It will send the RAW file to ACR ( It's the same as Affinity will send a RAW file to Develop Persona)

 

I agree that he should check out DxO. I have both latest ACR/Lightroom and DxO , and I like them both , but often DxO is just outclassing ACR/Lightroom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jon1 said:

It's not correct that Photoshop is editing RAW files. It will send the RAW file to ACR ( It's the same as Affinity will send a RAW file to Develop Person

True softwarewise but what difference does it make? It is features purchased in a single product divided into two modules working together seamlessly. In Photoshop you can use the ACR as a plug-in later though. That is brilliant. Many cool features can be used on JPGs.

Share this post


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

True softwarewise but what difference does it make? It is features purchased in a single product divided into two modules working together seamlessly. In Photoshop you can use the ACR as a plug-in later though.

In Photoshop, if the image processed with ACR has been opened as a smart object from ACR, you can go back to the ACR settings and change them. In all cases your settings are stored in an XMP file and if you re-open the RAW file, your previous settings will be there.

In AP, unless I missed something, once you have developed the image in the Develop Persona, you have no way to go back. If you reload the RAW file, your settings are lost and you have to start again from scratch.

That's a huge difference, indeed. Not talking about the development quality. For me, the Develop Persona is superfluous. See my post above.


--Patrick
Hamburg ist der wahre Grund
warum Kompassnadeln nach Norden zeigen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jowday said:

True softwarewise but what difference does it make?

Nothing for you , since you already know it 😄

But what if a person has CS6 and try to open a RAW file from a new camera ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Samoreen said:

In AP, unless I missed something, once you have developed the image in the Develop Persona, you have no way to go back. If you reload the RAW file, your settings are lost and you have to start again from scratch.

That's a huge difference, indeed. Not talking about the development quality. For me, the Develop Persona is superfluous. See my post above.

Unless I'm wrong , I think it's called destructive editing. Many times I try to edit a RAW file  in Affinity , i'm getting a pink tint which is almost impossible to get rid of.

Share this post


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

In Photoshop, if the image processed with ACR has been opened as a smart object from ACR, you can go back to the ACR settings and change them. In all cases your settings are stored in an XMP file and if you re-open the RAW file, your previous settings will be there.

In AP, unless I missed something, once you have developed the image in the Develop Persona, you have no way to go back. If you reload the RAW file, your settings are lost and you have to start again from scratch.

That's a huge difference, indeed. Not talking about the development quality. For me, the Develop Persona is superfluous. See my post above.

Yep, I know, but that is simply just about the software savning image dev settings somewhere... not what I answered. 😁

... and that little but leads to another but 😢 .. Photo doesn’t.

Anyway if one has a good camera there is no point in using a bad RAW development solution. And they simply dont make bad cameras anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jowday said:

they simply dont make bad cameras anymore.

They make good, very good and great cameras. I doubt I could find a new camera which is bad.


MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 10.14.5

Affinity Designer 1.8.3 | Affinity Photo 1.8.3 | Affinity Publisher 1.8.3 | Affinity Designer Beta 1.8.3.2 | Affinity Photo Beta 1.8.3.180 | Affinity Publisher Beta 1.8.3.651

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.