Jump to content
Steps

Rasterisation discard original rotation information

Recommended Posts

If I have a Image layer rotated by 5° and rasterise it to a Pixel Layer the rotation is shown a 0°.

To reset the rotation to what it was before I have to rotate the Pixel Layer to -5°.

As a workaround I currently rotate my Image Layers to 0°, rasterise them and rotate them back to not loose that rotation information.

Please fix that this workaround is not necessary and the information of rotation is not lost on rasterisation.


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
1 hour ago, Steps said:

If I have a Image layer rotated by 5° and rasterise it to a Pixel Layer the rotation is shown a 0°.

When I rasterize an image layer, I would expect such vector information to be lost because it creates a pixel layer.
So also cropping information or information about picture frames will be lost after rasterizing.

I didn't quite understand your workaround. You rotate the image to 0° and then you rotate it back?


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Michail said:

When I rasterize an image layer, I would expect such vector information to be lost because it creates a pixel layer.
So also cropping information or information about picture frames will be lost after rasterizing.

In my view the rotation of a layer is a metadata of the layer itself, not of the image inside. The image inside regardless if vector, image or pixel should now nothing about how it is presented.

Regarding the cropping information I'm with you. I would expect rasterisation to downsample the visible part of the image (so with crop) to the documents resolution and save this as a bitmap. I just don't see the rotation information should be with the bitmap.

1 hour ago, Michail said:

I didn't quite understand your workaround. You rotate the image to 0° and then you rotate it back?

Yes, but before I rotate it back I do the rasterisation.

---

This is my starting point:

rasterise_before.thumb.png.53d79ff0f781e1fa7b4ae19751a844a1.png

This is what actually happens on rasterisation:

rasterise_actual.thumb.png.1778799091c5b0e1636d01e0c07d1460.png

This is what I would have expected:

rasterise_expected.thumb.png.0024572eb613a02a19292a28a41d4994.png

If this is intentional (= not a bug) I really don't see the value in discarding that information since PDFs (as an example output) can handle that without problems.

Edited by Steps
extended answer regarding cropping

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

Just out of interest: Why do you rasterize the image layer after you have rotated it?


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


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

Just out of interest: Why do you rasterize the image layer after you have rotated it?

My photobook project has reached 30 pages of images with many Image layers and linked images in it. Most of the photos are 4500x3000 pixels and placed at 900+ DPI in an 301 DPI document.

I reported in another topic that Publisher is really unstable now and crashes all the time. I think it must have to do with the heavy usage of Image Layers.

So I went trough my document rasterise all Image layers to reduce the memory usage and make the application better handle the project.

I may want to rotate some of my photos to another angle or move them a bit afterwards in the last fine-tuning step but will not change their size anymore. So I decided it's okay do downsample everything to the documents 301 DPI at this step so I can continue to work with Publisher.

EDIT: Also I'm not entirely sure if Publisher was really made for this and I just use it wrong. For some reason there must be the rasterisation option. Maybe it's part of a normal workflow that Image Layers should be rasterized when they have their final size. I don't know how professionals work. I can imagine that Serif may answer something like "Yeah, you are doing it wrong. We can't optimize the application for this. It's just too demanding having 120 linked images in one document with that resolution."

---

I already gave feedback on the crashing issue here:

 

 

Edited by Steps

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
On 12/26/2018 at 5:13 PM, Steps said:

EDIT: Also I'm not entirely sure if Publisher was really made for this and I just use it wrong. For some reason there must be the rasterisation option. Maybe it's part of a normal workflow that Image Layers should be rasterized when they have their final size. I don't know how professionals work. I can imagine that Serif may answer something like "Yeah, you are doing it wrong. We can't optimize the application for this. It's just too demanding having 120 linked images in one document with that resolution."

No, if it would not be possible to integrate 120 high-resolution images, you would not be able to produce a catalogue later with APub. Maybe it has something to do with the current problem APub has with linking or embedding files.

In practice (if it would work) I would always keep the image layers. Otherwise you won't be able to access hidden image areas later. You only need to rasterize objects (especially vectors) that have such complex edits (e.g. effects) that they are difficult to export or print.


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 11:48 AM, Michail said:

No, if it would not be possible to integrate 120 high-resolution images, you would not be able to produce a catalogue later with APub.

Regarding the 120: This was a wild guess and I was wrong.

I just created a clean copy of my project for Serif to investigate. The project already had 200 high-resoulution images as Publisher got unrelieable.


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
10 hours ago, Steps said:

The project already had 200 high-resoulution images as Publisher got unrelieable.

As I said, publishing software must be able to handle it. But a working referencing is a prerequisite (linking).


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rotation being set back to 0 is intended. When rasterising you are effectively creating a brand new layer so it has new attributes. A number of other apps  do the same thing

Cheers


Serif Europe Ltd - Check the latest news at www.affinity.serif.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Chris_K Can you name a few of them  please?


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
2 minutes ago, Steps said:

@Chris_K Can you name a few of them  please?

Why?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Win10(1903)Home / Photo / Designer / Publisher & latest (beta) versions

Share this post


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

Why?

Out of curiousity and a bit disbelief.

I still think it's a bug.

What do you think? Is the current behaviour correct? What is the benefit of that? Why should it not work as I expected?

I found the answer a bit too short.


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

You need to see it this way;

Rasterizing is nothing more than creating a bitmap copy of the current selection(and optional deleting the vector/raster mix)
And that means it's just a new image file (don't know what internal type it uses)
Maybe if the copy/paste attributes comes into the range it may well be it can set the original orientation.
But if it doesn't ,the current behavior is how way it works,nothing more.nothing less.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Win10(1903)Home / Photo / Designer / Publisher & latest (beta) versions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the Bitmap creation process, but rasterazing a layer (which can be a group) should take that rotation information rather than discard it.

I'm fine if I have a layer that is a group with one rotated child that this is lost. Since different children could have different rotations I would expect that.

But how it's now is in my view a somewhat cheap / lazy implementation.

What does InDesign and QXPress do in the same situation as described above? I don't have these tools to compare. Can someone verify that? Is it actually equal behaviour?


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

They may have a format painter or copy/paste attributes script handling this.
Like I said it may well be implemented in a future release.
But for now you have to deal with the way it works and don't call this a bug because it is (currently) intentional


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Win10(1903)Home / Photo / Designer / Publisher & latest (beta) versions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, haakoo said:

 don't call this a bug because it is (currently) intentional

Yes, but I did not know that as I created that issue. It looked like a obvious bug.

Now I want to understand how other Apps handle that and which @Chris_K was refering to.

By the time I got all info I need I will open up a suggestion topic to improve that behaviour here.

How does the Tool you work with handle this?


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

 

13 minutes ago, Steps said:

How does the Tool you work with handle this?

It works just like the affinity range.
Because it is a bitmap which is rectangular no matter what.
 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Win10(1903)Home / Photo / Designer / Publisher & latest (beta) versions

Share this post


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

It works just like the affinity range.
Because it is a bitmap which is rectangular no matter what.

I have to disagree here.

As far as I can see Xara Designer Pro X does not work just like that because you have to explicitly create a new Bitmap layer on top of the other layers. It can be compared to "merge visible" from Photo. But it pops up a new dialog asking you a few things how you want your bitmap to be.

Yes, I see that Affinity does a better job here since it's a few clicks less. The new bitmap layer ("pixel layer" in affinity speak) here replaces the old one.

But there also comes a usability problem with it as this procedure is not really transparent to the user. It just looks like as if the layer actually is converted rather than replaced with a whole new layer of a different kind. That's why I did not think this is intentional to throw away information.

I think this seems to be a bit typical for Affinity apps not to call actions after that what really happens. It reminds me how a "Convert to Picture Frame" on an Image Layer does not actually convert it, but it wraps a new Picture Frame Layer around the Image Layer.

---

And in InDesign it seems not be possible.

I just looked into the trial version of InDesign CC 2019 and googled a bit, but I cannot find a similar function to rasterize an object.

All people asking for it are recommended to flatten images on PDF export.


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
On 1/3/2019 at 10:41 AM, Chris_K said:

The rotation being set back to 0 is intended. When rasterising you are effectively creating a brand new layer so it has new attributes. A number of other apps  do the same thing

Cheers

I trialed several apps by now I don't see which you reference.

I understand that this is intentional, but I still think It's wrong and can be improved.

I will create a suggestion topic on this.


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

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

×

Important Information

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.