Plugins 1.7

[Raymondo]

Further to my last topic I have managed to insta2ll Filterforge7 and that works fine. However, Nik collection is a different matter. I have managed to install the plugin but only 3 work (Pro Sharpener, Viveza and Define. All the rest don't work. When you click on any of the others you get a red window with a message saying updating fonts!! See attachments

[fde101]

The DXO ViewPoint 3 plugin crashes the 1.7.0.100 beta.

I tried demo versions of Neat Image and FilmConvert that I happened to have installed; Neat Image appears to work, but FilmConvert crashes the beta.

I have a few others I will test when time allows.

[fde101]

LandscapePro Studio 2.7.1, PortraitPro Body Studio 3.1.1, and PortraitPro Studio 18.3.1: with the 1.7.0.101 beta: I am seeing two entries for each of these in the menu, one with dots after it, and one without.

The ones with the dots crash Photo.  The ones without the dots seem to be working, but I started with a photo in portrait orientation and it is showing up in landscape in the plugins.

[Chris_K]

This is a known issue we have logged but this may be something for DxO to address as this is more due to compatiabilty with apple's new technologies that we are using

Thanks

[Raymondo]

I don’t see how it’s down to DxO as both DxO and Google’s versions don’t work and manifest the same issue. As the Google version works fine in version 1.6 and now doesn’t in 1.7 Beta version I see it as a problem having come about as a result of re-writing the code under the hood which Serif say they have been actively doing for a while to open up more potential for the software. 

I believe it’s down to Serif to sort out, clearly something in the code structure is causing a problem with plugins. Just as well Nik will work as a stand-alone until they get things sorted, so can still use but a bit of a hassle that’s all. 

[wtwolf]

17 hours ago, Raymondo said:

I don’t see how it’s down to DxO as both DxO and Google’s versions don’t work and manifest the same issue. As the Google version works fine in version 1.6 and now doesn’t in 1.7 Beta version I see it as a problem having come about as a result of re-writing the code under the hood which Serif say they have been actively doing for a while to open up more potential for the software. 

I believe it’s down to Serif to sort out, clearly something in the code structure is causing a problem with plugins. Just as well Nik will work as a stand-alone until they get things sorted, so can still use but a bit of a hassle that’s all. 

What I believe, Chris_K is saying is that the Affinity Photo beta versions are exploiting changes made in OS X.  The fact that Nik plug-ins behave differently under Affinity Photo beta code could very well be related to compatibility issues between Google (DXO) and OS X.  

I'm experiencing the same issues, where the Nik Collection behaves correctly with Affinity Photo 1.6.7, but with Affinity Photo Beta 1.7, several of the plug-ins display the "Updating Fonts" window and requires a Force Quit to recover.  In my case, this is using High Sierra, as I've not yet implemented Mojave.

It might be as simple as recompiling the Nik Collection using the latest Apple OSX macros, for lack of more accurate terminology.  Which, is probably not going to happen with the free Google Nik Collection.  If in fact, it's a defect in Nik code, I wouldn't expect Serif to regress Affinity Photo to accommodate obsolete program code.  From what I see, Serif has taken this report for further investigation.

[Raymondo]

Hi Wtwolf

just to say firstly I’m running OS Mojave on 27 inch iMac and I’ve got both Google version and DxO’s version. I’ve installed both versions (one at a time) and both work absolutely fine in AP 1.6.7. Both Nik versions in beta AP version don’t work. That to me says if both versions work fine in Mojave then it can’t be down to any fault of either DXO or Apples operating system. I still say the problem lays in the re-coding that’s been going on under the hood which I believe has somehow interfered with the plugin module.

[wtwolf]

Hi Raymondo,

There's no doubt that the beta version of Affinity Photo "broke" several of the Nik plug-ins, but it may not necessarily be the fault of Serif.  Also, I'm not ruling out that it is possible the defect could be in Affinity Photo code.  Like you, the Nik Collection works fine with AP 1.6.7, though it was quite obvious to me that downloading the trial version of the Nik Collection from the DxO site would have the same result.  (I'm using the Google free Nik Collection).  I might add that I'm not convinced the problem lies with the Nik Collection, I'm saying it's a definite possibility, and it may not actually be a coding problem, but a simple recompile of the source may result in correcting the problem.  

[Earlio]

Have the same issues with Nik - have only tried the Google version - do not see the point of paying for the DxO version if it does not work...

[billtils]

On 11/28/2018 at 1:40 PM, Earlio said:

Have the same issues with Nik - have only tried the Google version - do not see the point of paying for the DxO version if it does not work...

Or even if it did work, Earlio.  I have DxO PhotoLab and it's the biggest waste of money I have ever spent on editing software.   There's nothing in it that I use and can't do with AP and the original free NIK collection.

 

[v_kyr]

Well DxO PhotoLab looks to me just like a more modern and general (in terms of cam support and RAW processing) version of what Nikon Capture NX2 offered for Nikonians before here, due to the help of the bought and used NIK U-Point technologie. Add to that the NIK Collection and you have a bunch of powerful image manipulation capabilities. - Though personally I still prefer Nikon Capture NX2 for certain Nikon cams and their NEF RAW processing here over DxO or APhoto, since the resulting quality of processed NEF image and overall handling goes far beyond of those.

[fde101]

DxO PhotoLab is not an editor.  It is a RAW processor and one of the best I've worked with.  The results of the raw processing engine are normally better than what I would expect to get from the engines built-in to most of the editors around, including the APh engine - though APh isn't bad by any means.  Use a high-end RAW developer such as PhotoLab or Capture One to develop the RAW files when you want the best starting point before going into Affinity Photo or other editor.

There are all kinds of comparisons around, but a typical theme is that Capture One and PhotoLab tend to produce the best image quality at the expense of being a bit slower than working with some of the other software that is out there - example: https://petapixel.com/2017/12/15/tested-10-photoshop-alternatives/