Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Nothing happens when you try to load the plugin. You can see a plugin entry in the protocol. That is all.

In version 1.6.5.135 it was possible to create a single shot HDR with Aurora 2019.

It is a very useful plugin because it is very easy to get great results with Aurora.

Regards, dke

 
Posted

Well I've not experience any problems with my plugins, Nik (Google Free), Particle Shop and Pic-to-Painting. I've read a lot of the problems posted and so far I've not found one issue from updating to 1.7. I'm a happy camper :)

Affinity Photo 2.6..; Affinity Designer 2.6..; Affinity Publisher 2.6..; Affinity2 Beta versions. Affinity Photo,Designer 1.10.6.1605 Win11 Home Version:24H2, Build: 26100.1742: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-5820K CPU @ 3.30GHz, 3301 Mhz, 6 Core(s), 12 Logical Processor(s);32GB Ram, Nvidia GTX 3070, 3-Internal HDD (1 Crucial MX5000 1TB, 1-Crucial MX5000 500GB, 1-WD 1 TB), 4 External HDD; Wacom Intuos 3 PTZ-431W

Posted
4 hours ago, Chris B said:

It looks like quite a few users are experiencing an issue with plugins that would load in 1.6 but are failing in 1.7. Please see this reply from Mark who has stated that we will attempt to reach out to the plugin developers to see if we can reach a solution.

They had a solution in the last version. Something has changed in 1.7 to stop plugins that worked in 1.6 from working. So it is something for the Affinity team to fix.

  • Staff
Posted
17 minutes ago, Scott Williams said:

They had a solution in the last version. Something has changed in 1.7 to stop plugins that worked in 1.6 from working. So it is something for the Affinity team to fix.

That something is an ICC profile that we now deliver. Did you see the reply from Mark that I linked to? - 'The only thing that has changed is that we now provide an ICC profile to the plugins, in order to ensure that images are correctly colour converted. None of the plugins mentioned are officially supported, so we'll have to speak to their developers to find out how they handle the ICC profile that we deliver, and see if we can reach a solution.'

 

 

Posted
46 minutes ago, Chris B said:

That something is an ICC profile that we now deliver. Did you see the reply from Mark that I linked to? - 'The only thing that has changed is that we now provide an ICC profile to the plugins, in order to ensure that images are correctly colour converted. None of the plugins mentioned are officially supported, so we'll have to speak to their developers to find out how they handle the ICC profile that we deliver, and see if we can reach a solution.'

 

 

Fair enough. Didn't see that :)

 

  • Staff
Posted
16 hours ago, Scott Williams said:

Fair enough. Didn't see that :)

 

No worries. All I am saying is that as far as I know, that is the only thing that has changed regarding plugins. There may be something else that has affected it (which is our problem to figure out) but if it is a case of these plugins seeing this ICC profile and going 'what do I do with this' then we need to work with the plugin developers to find a solution :) 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Chris B said:

No worries. All I am saying is that as far as I know, that is the only thing that has changed regarding plugins. There may be something else that has affected it (which is our problem to figure out) but if it is a case of these plugins seeing this ICC profile and going 'what do I do with this' then we need to work with the plugin developers to find a solution :) 

I'm not sure how you are passing the data to the plugin but it does make sense. If the profile is embedded within the data passed to the plugin then maybe some plugins are not coded to cope with the unexpected data.

Anyway, I'm sure it will be sorted. Affinity products are all superb. They are rescuing thousands of people from the evil clutches of Adobe.

Posted

If it does turn out to be the profile passed to the plugins then could there  be an option in the preferences for the plugins to not pass it? At least we would be able to use the plugins we have been using. And it would also stop us having to rely on the plugin developers creating a compatible version.

  • Staff
Posted
16 hours ago, Scott Williams said:

If it does turn out to be the profile passed to the plugins then could there  be an option in the preferences for the plugins to not pass it? At least we would be able to use the plugins we have been using. And it would also stop us having to rely on the plugin developers creating a compatible version.

I'm not sure what we are planning on doing. Development are obviously very aware about this and how many users it has affected. 

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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.