"Rasterize" an image?

[Jeremy Bohn]

Something I can't wrap my head around... there are certain graphics that I open in Affinity Photo, say a JPEG or something that I downloaded off the internet, and I'm trying to use the Flood Select tool but every attempted click yields no selection. I even checked the online tutorials to figure out what I was doing wrong, and it looked like I was doing it right. It just wasn't working.

Completely at random, I right-clicked on the image in the Layers panel and wondered what Rasterize did (didn't make sense to me). The layer now said (pixel) after the name. Now when I tried Flood Select again, it worked.

So my question is, 1) why won't the Flood Select tool just work right off the bat and 2) why do I have to "rasterize" an image that is already raster? Perhaps they've used the wrong term here?

Just another confusing Affinity element... slowly learning here. 

[ianrb]

doesn't seem to be any dramas or differences with the flood section tool on my computer . I have been caught out in the past with tolerance too low 
Rasterizing: I will leave that for experts 

[Jeremy Bohn]

Yes, I played with the tolerance level. It has no effect until after I choose "rasterize".

[Ron P.]

@Jeremy Bohn,

While images are raster images, when they are placed into AP, by using the File>Place command or Drag and Drop, they can not be altered until they are Rasterized to a Pixel layer. I really don't know why, but it's how they designed the program. One reason for this is an image layer will retain the native resolution. You can scale an image layer down and back up and not suffer a loss in resolution. To see this, place an image, scale it way down so it's very small. Then right-click on it in the layer's panel and rasterize it while it's small. Now scale it up. So long as the image remains an image Layer this doesn't happen, but you can not alter the pixels  Here's the AP on-line Help for Placing an Image.

The Flood Select tool is very sensitive. When you click-drag with it, the tolerance is automatically adjusted. Watch the tolerance box while dragging to see this. It took me a while to be able to use it. I'll drag a little then stop, then drag a little more. Also, it makes a difference on what you're needing to be selected if contiguous needs checked. 

[HVDB Photography]

More info in  this thread ...
4 - Regarding the labels after the layer's name in the Layers panel ......

 

[Petar Petrenko]

2 hours ago, Ron P. said:

The Flood Select tool is very sensitive. When you click-drag with it

You should not click-drag it. Only click.

[Ron P.]

7 minutes ago, Petar Petrenko said:

You should not click-drag it. Only click.

According to the Help file,

Quote

The Flood Select Tool enables you to select pixels of a similar color.

Pixels added to a selection are determined by the color of the pixel or adjacent pixels under the tool when you click or drag across the page, respectively. The dragging operation controls the selection tolerance, i.e. how much the selection will grow to encompass pixels of similar color values under the cursor.

4

Just noticed, according to the tooltip in the bottom left corner states to RightMouse Click to Add. This is not working for me.

[Petar Petrenko]

When you just click you use the tolerance which is aleready set on the Context toolbar.

[walt.farrell]

10 hours ago, Jeremy Bohn said:

there are certain graphics that I open in Affinity Photo, say a JPEG or something that I downloaded off the internet, and I'm trying to use the Flood Select tool but every attempted click yields no selection.

Did you Open them, or did you copy/paste or drag onto an already opened document?

It makes a difference.

[Jeremy Bohn]

8 hours ago, Ron P. said:

@Jeremy Bohn,

While images are raster images, when they are placed into AP, by using the File>Place command or Drag and Drop, they can not be altered until they are Rasterized to a Pixel layer. I really don't know why, but it's how they designed the program. One reason for this is an image layer will retain the native resolution. You can scale an image layer down and back up and not suffer a loss in resolution. To see this, place an image, scale it way down so it's very small. Then right-click on it in the layer's panel and rasterize it while it's small. Now scale it up. So long as the image remains an image Layer this doesn't happen, but you can not alter the pixels  Here's the AP on-line Help for Placing an Image.

The Flood Select tool is very sensitive. When you click-drag with it, the tolerance is automatically adjusted. Watch the tolerance box while dragging to see this. It took me a while to be able to use it. I'll drag a little then stop, then drag a little more. Also, it makes a difference on what you're needing to be selected if contiguous needs checked. 

Thanks Ron. Once I get the Flood Select actually working, I've figured out how to use it. I just don't get that first extra step when I open a non-Affinity image. This last time that it happened, I knew there was something I did to get it working in the past and I could not figure it out for awhile. I guess I just don't get it - why bring an image into Photo if not to edit it, so why not "raster" it automatically or maybe even just ask me. I newbie might just give up and think it's broken. And I still think raster is the wrong word.

[Jeremy Bohn]

21 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Did you Open them, or did you copy/paste or drag onto an already opened document?

Open them. In one case, opened it, selected the layer and copied then pasted into an Affinity Photo file, and still needed to "rasterize" it.

[Jeremy Bohn]

Another helpful idea: instead of letting me click on the Image layer with an unsupported tool over and over like and idiot, wondering why it's not working, the app could just throw up a warning saying the selected tool is not supported with that type of layer and to convert to a Pixel layer?

[RosomakPL]

Exactly the same question bothers me. I do not understand what's the point  to import of bitmaps as objects (image) by default. What's sense it is? By default, it should be imported as (pixel).

[fde101]

1 hour ago, RosomakPL said:

Exactly the same question bothers me. I do not understand what's the point  to import of bitmaps as objects (image) by default. What's sense it is? By default, it should be imported as (pixel).

Image layers in Publisher can be embedded or linked, and they preserve many of the details of the original files.  Many people prefer to link their images instead of embedding them, but that is not possible with pixel layers.  Image layers also support a "non-destructive" workflow and allow re-developing RAW data in Photo when working with RAW images.

Pixel layers are more like the layers in Photoshop or other traditional photo programs.  They contain a copy of the raster image data in a format that can be edited.  They lose the connection back to the original file.

[Jeremy Bohn]

I think the point is that for a new user there is no indication of the layer difference and what they actually are. This is especially true for the Photo app, especially people who are coming from Photoshop and are expecting a Photoshop-like experience. I'd wage most Photoshop users would have little use for the default behaviour or be aware of the format differences (since Affinity files can be exchanged between the apps). Like myself, they'd find it confusing, assume it's a broken, buggy program and stop using it in frustration. This is exactly what I did last year.

This is why Photo needs to be more clear of the layer type difference or per my suggestion, explain why a certain tool is having no affect. Or maybe have an option to convert a non-Affinity graphic to a pixel layer once opened?

[hifred]

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

Image layers in Publisher can be embedded or linked, and they preserve many of the details of the original files.  Many people prefer to link their images instead of embedding them, but that is not possible with pixel layers.  Image layers also support a "non-destructive" workflow and allow re-developing RAW data in Photo when working with RAW images.

Pixel layers are more like the layers in Photoshop or other traditional photo programs.  They contain a copy of the raster image data in a format that can be edited.  They lose the connection back to the original file.

Photoshop has a similar concept to Image Layers and one may also link or embed files. One still may create selections, duplicate portions or sample colours from this sort of content. The Image Layer implementation is a needless trap as partial rasterization could take place on the fly.

[martifingers]

Totally agree with Jeremy.  Really quite simple things are made frustrating nightmares by such confusions. It's the lack of feedback that is the problem.  But Affinity's pluses ("forcing" you to work with adjustment layers , the preview features, general efficiency etc.) mean it's worth  persevering.  

[R C-R]

10 hours ago, martifingers said:

Totally agree with Jeremy.  Really quite simple things are made frustrating nightmares by such confusions.

Much of the confusion comes from the assumption that Affinity Photo is going to provide more of a "Photoshop-like experience" than it actually does. Avoid making that false assumption, take a little time to learn how it differs from PS (& why), & most of the frustrations should vanish.

[ahnay]

I have to agree with the author.  Rasterizing something that comes in rasterized is so confusing, makes no sense, and seeing this happen made me think i was on the wrong layer.  So backing it out and checking, yep on the correct layer and trying again to paint, and what?  Crazy.  Just one more thing to add to affinity designer's growing list of incompetency's.  I wonder if serif does this to load images more quickly? Reading the docs it just says :

For images, the placed image is added as an image layer rather than a pixel layer. This allows the original image data (e.g., the native resolution, color space and color profile) to be kept. On export to PDF, this data is re-embedded into the PDF file.

Why cant that info be kept, and the image 'rasterized' at the same time? I dont think most people bought designer to create pdf files first, rather than designing.

This is a small annoyance, but consider that every person purchasing this software and using it for the first few times, is running into this, along with all the other inconsistencies found in designer and designer for different devices.  I think it would be great if Serif, actually paid attention and created a document explaining the differences between the designer on different devices, and listed the many different struggles found in the forum and their answers, or workarounds, fully indexed.  That should be on their ad pages, first thing.   

Its like Gordan Ramsey walking out into a dinning room and asking all the customers if they knew they were paying for and eating frozen foods from the grocery store would the come back.

[Petar Petrenko]

IMO, until the image is not rasterized, it acts like a "smart object" in Photoshop.

[Alfred]

1 hour ago, NNN said:

until the image is not rasterized

*not not rasterized

[Petar Petrenko]

14 minutes ago, Alfred said:

*not not rasterized

Sorry for my Indian English. I hope it is better than your Macedonian?