Topics

New Affinity Photo coming... and...

 

Yes: I know this is a very quiet group, but it's still alive!

First, my best wishes to one and all for the holidays, and the coming new year !

Second, the only viable Photoshop replacement, Affinity Photo, is being updated to version 1.5 in December. The release candidate is available now, here.

If you don't know Affinity Photo: it's $49 forever. No subscriptions. It's photography only - no wasted add-on 'stuff'. It's 32-bit workflow. It works with Photoshop plugins. The new release includes "actions" - they call them "macros."

IMHO it's not only a viable alternative, but in some ways is superior to, Photoshop. I'm actually on the verge of canceling my subscription.

(Not related, just a satisfied customer, etc. etc.  YMMV.)

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Mary Aiu
 

Hello Tracy,

Thank you for the info. I am PSCC subscriber. 

Back when Adobe changed to subscription services there was the annoying "buzz" going around that you would not be able to open new or old PSD files if you didn't jump on board. I have no idea if that was true, or how to get around it, as I didn't pursue an answer. So to set the record straight, since you posted about this new product, was that ever true? I'm assuming not since there is this other product. And...... should I save my images as a tiff rather than a PSD to avoid problems. 

Thanks,

Mary

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 22, 2016, at 8:41 AM, Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:

Yes: I know this is a very quiet group, but it's still alive!

First, my best wishes to one and all for the holidays, and the coming new year !

Second, the only viable Photoshop replacement, Affinity Photo, is being updated to version 1.5 in December. The release candidate is available now, here.

If you don't know Affinity Photo: it's $49 forever. No subscriptions. It's photography only - no wasted add-on 'stuff'. It's 32-bit workflow. It works with Photoshop plugins. The new release includes "actions" - they call them "macros."

IMHO it's not only a viable alternative, but in some ways is superior to, Photoshop. I'm actually on the verge of canceling my subscription.

(Not related, just a satisfied customer, etc. etc.  YMMV.)

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Jeff Grant
 

I use Photokit Sharpener and Mirage both of which run as Automate options in PS. AFAIK, they can’t be run with Affinity. I would be very pleased if they could. Failing that, I’m a PS user forever.


Cheers,

Jeff


 

Hi Mary

I too use the $10 PS/LR subscription. As to that old "buzz" if I recall correctly it was about backward compatibility, not forward. I do know that all my old PS files open just fine in CC, although I doubt my new CC files will open with specialized layers in, say PS6. That's normal for forward progress in software: old stuff will usually open fine for a long while, but new stuff, with new features, won't open in old software that doesn't recognize the new features.

TIFF will be good forever. That said, there are photoshop layers that won't embed in TIF file, and TIF files may be larger. I'd say that if you want to round-trip things (LR -> PS ->LR -> PS) you'd want to stay with PSD, especailly if you're using the latest-and-greatest whiz-bang layering tools. I believe Adobe's response to all that kerfuffle was the "ensure compatibility" option in prefs.

Eric Chan (at Adobe) is of the "6 of one, half-dozen of the other" school.

My choice is to keep the "working" file and/or master in PSD and file/print the flattened TIFFs. Some third-party software won't take PSDs but will take TIFs.

-----

I -loved- the Pixel Genius software... until the day that every one of their products refused to run, at all. Support at PG simply gave up trying to fix it, and now it's been, what? three years? since the last update.

Meanwhile, the PG sharpening has been incorporated into LR, so that takes of that, and I've switched to other tools in PS, such as FocusMagic, and others, and march onward...

YMMV

Tracy
www.valleau.gallery





--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Jeff Grant
 

Tracy,

I’ve avoided LR like the plague. I use either Phocus or C1f or RAW as I never liked ACR, and my tentative look at LR didn’t impress. Fortunately, PK Sharpener hasn’t failed for me, yet. Is it possible to have LR without PS? I get them together as part of my monthly payment.

Cheers,

Jeff

On 23 Nov 2016, at 11:08 AM, Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:

Hi Mary

I too use the $10 PS/LR subscription. As to that old "buzz" if I recall correctly it was about backward compatibility, not forward. I do know that all my old PS files open just fine in CC, although I doubt my new CC files will open with specialized layers in, say PS6. That's normal for forward progress in software: old stuff will usually open fine for a long while, but new stuff, with new features, won't open in old software that doesn't recognize the new features.

TIFF will be good forever. That said, there are photoshop layers that won't embed in TIF file, and TIF files may be larger. I'd say that if you want to round-trip things (LR -> PS ->LR -> PS) you'd want to stay with PSD, especailly if you're using the latest-and-greatest whiz-bang layering tools. I believe Adobe's response to all that kerfuffle was the "ensure compatibility" option in prefs.

Eric Chan (at Adobe) is of the "6 of one, half-dozen of the other" school.

My choice is to keep the "working" file and/or master in PSD and file/print the flattened TIFFs. Some third-party software won't take PSDs but will take TIFs.

-----

I -loved- the Pixel Genius software... until the day that every one of their products refused to run, at all. Support at PG simply gave up trying to fix it, and now it's been, what? three years? since the last update.

Meanwhile, the PG sharpening has been incorporated into LR, so that takes of that, and I've switched to other tools in PS, such as FocusMagic, and others, and march onward...

YMMV

Tracy
www.valleau.gallery





--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery


 

HIi Jeff.

I'll admit your reply leaves me a bit confused, but I'll respond as best I can. You "avoided LR like the plague" and "LR didn't impress" but you want to buy a copy anyway? "Is it possible to have LR without PS?" OK... :-}

Yes: you can buy LR all by itself, and own it outright. Although, since you cannot buy PS anymore, but only pay the monthly fee for it, and since it comes with LR, I am, as I said, a bit confused.

People have lots of various preferences in a raw converter. I happen to like DxO and/or AccuRaw. I was unimpressed with CameraOne Raw, unlike most of the rest of the known universe. But then I'm not as offended by LR's converter as you may be. (I did calibrate it for my camera, so that might make a difference.) My main use for LR is it's database and indexing. Phocus might be nice if I still had my Hassie, but I'm perfectly happy with my D800.

There is a wealth of digital photo processing out there, including On1's immanent release and the recent Exposure X.  It's great to have all the possible tools - almost too much to choose from without a year of study.  And then, is the range of difference, once you run an image thru post, really worth the effort?  (Of course, maybe at 70 I'm just getting lazy...  ;-)

Thanks for all your input, Jeff. You make this an ever better group!

Happy Thanksgiving.

_Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Jeff Grant
 

Hi Tracy,

Happy to provide input, I wish there was more but it works well for me. Also at 70, I hear you loud and clear. Sorry for the confusion, what I was saying is that I get LR as part of my monthly payment to Adobe, so, if I stopped paying that how would I still get LR without PS. At 70, I am starting to resist change to what I have been doing for years so Affinity looks like it would require me to use LR to replace some of my old PS favourites such as Mirage and PK sharpener. I dread to think that PK may stop one day.

As for ACR, I have never liked Adobe’s idea of colour from the very first release. It just never looked right.

I hope this clarifies my previous confusion.

Cheers,

Jeff

On 23 Nov 2016, at 12:42 PM, Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:

HIi Jeff.

I'll admit your reply leaves me a bit confused, but I'll respond as best I can. You "avoided LR like the plague" and "LR didn't impress" but you want to buy a copy anyway? "Is it possible to have LR without PS?" OK... :-}

Yes: you can buy LR all by itself, and own it outright. Although, since you cannot buy PS anymore, but only pay the monthly fee for it, and since it comes with LR, I am, as I said, a bit confused.

People have lots of various preferences in a raw converter. I happen to like DxO and/or AccuRaw. I was unimpressed with CameraOne Raw, unlike most of the rest of the known universe. But then I'm not as offended by LR's converter as you may be. (I did calibrate it for my camera, so that might make a difference.) My main use for LR is it's database and indexing. Phocus might be nice if I still had my Hassie, but I'm perfectly happy with my D800.

There is a wealth of digital photo processing out there, including On1's immanent release and the recent Exposure X.  It's great to have all the possible tools - almost too much to choose from without a year of study.  And then, is the range of difference, once you run an image thru post, really worth the effort?  (Of course, maybe at 70 I'm just getting lazy...  ;-)

Thanks for all your input, Jeff. You make this an ever better group!

Happy Thanksgiving.

_Tracy Valleau, moderator


Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery