Affinity anyone?

[Geoff F]

What are the Serif sales team like now? Their regular and forceful telephone sales calls was one of the reasons why I switched to CS5 and then CC.

But that was back in the days of Photo Plus X14. Incidentally, back then I wasn't keen on their Raw converter so I did that bit of editing with Raw Therapee and finished off with Photo Plus.

Now, I wouldn't like to be without the Smart Object option of returning to the Raw editor at any time to have a second tweak of the Raw files. But most people just want a straight forward easy to use bit of software so they wouldn't want to use the Smart Object option anyway.

[Manfred M]

Now, I wouldn't like to be without the Smart Object option of returning to the Raw editor at any time to have a second tweak of the Raw files.

Agree 100%. Smart objects has the same impact on any filters - internal and external. This is the main reason I usually use ACR rather than Capture One or DxO Optics Pro as raw converters.

But most people just want a straight forward easy to use bit of software so they wouldn't want to use the Smart Object option anyway.

Also agree 100%. I would be even more blunt in suggesting many people don't understand why someone would want to use a non-destructive work flow. Smart Objects, adjustment layers, layer masks and clipping masks are something I could not work without, but I often get a blank stare when I try to explain the upsides of that approach.

[Donald]

Agree 100%. Smart objects has the same impact on any filters - internal and external. This is the main reason I usually use ACR rather than Capture One or DxO Optics Pro as raw converters.

Don't know anything about Capture One and may not be fully understanding the discussion, but what's to stop anyone going back to Raw files processed with Optics Pro and continuing to work on them?

[charly]

I started post processing at the same time as affinity beta for windows arrived. I learned a lot from the beta and although a little slow I could not wait for the release copy to arrive. I paid £29 for the release copy, and this is the best money I have spent since starting digital photography. On the first update (free) it was like fitting a turbocharger (Windows 7, I5 processor 16gb ddr3). Saved £90 on subscription cc and mine for life superb value for the likes of me (pensioner on a very tight budget) Thanks Affinity photo for windows for a great product at a great price.

[Geoff F]

Don't know anything about Capture One and may not be fully understanding the discussion, but what's to stop anyone going back to Raw files processed with Optics Pro and continuing to work on them?

Yes, Donald, that method will give you similar results, eventually. You can create as many Raw conversions as you want from the original Raw file then import them to your main editor as layers and combine with masks, etc. For example to create a HDR type of effect.

The advantage with Smart Objects is simply that you can return to the raw converter at any time during the later editing stages and do a little bit of extra tweaking. It just takes a double click on the layer thumbnail and your layer returns directly to the ACR converter for any extra work that you think may be required.

Sometimes, after I begin working on my layers I realise that my initial thoughts about the composition aren't going to work out quite as I thought; so double click and I'm back to the raw stage with that particular layer. Which can happen as many times as required.

The same thing can be done with a single Smart Object. If you think you need to go back to basics and start again with the conversion, just double click and there you are. With a fixed raw converted file you have to abandon all that you have done and start all over from the beginning.

Either method will work but smart objects save time and offer a little more flexibility. However, that comes at the expense of paying for CC so it comes down to a choice of paying the price and attempting to smile or paying less and accepting a little bit of extra frustration on those occasions when a smart object from CC would have saved you some time.

As previously stated, most people have yet to enjoy the advantages of working with either option.

[Manfred M]

+1 to what Geoff has written, but that is only half the advantage of SmartObjects.

Usually filters (including third party plug ins) are destructive in nature. If you use SmartObjects, the filters are applied in a non-destructive manner and one can go back and make tweaks to filter settings as well, rather than having to either add a filter effect upon an already used effect or deleting the effect and starting over.

Yes, there are work-arounds, but using SmartObjects is faster and more flexible.

[JohnRostron]

I have never felt the need for smart objects. Perhaps that is why I have felt so at home with Affinity.

John

[Donald]

I take the point made by Geoff and Manfred that use of ACR allows you to use Smart Objects and you can go right back to the raw file whilst retaining other work. I cannot do that with DxO. However, once I've created my TIFF, I can then, in Elements with the Elements XXL plug-in, (standard tool in Photoshop) use the NIK suite of tools as Smart Objects. That, to me, is invaluable, particularly in the realm of printing.

When I create a finished work, I may be very happy with it on screen. But when that image is printed I may (and sometimes do) see something that would make it a better print if I went back in and made an adjustment. By having, say, Silver Efex Pro as a Smart Object, I can go back to it and all my original settings (control points, etc ) are there and can be adjusted as I wish. The it's a case of just saving it again.

This facility is as I say, to me, invaluable.

[Manfred M]

I take the point made by Geoff and Manfred that use of ACR allows you to use Smart Objects and you can go right back to the raw file whilst retaining other work. I cannot do that with DxO. However, once I've created my TIFF, I can then, in Elements with the Elements XXL plug-in, (standard tool in Photoshop) use the NIK suite of tools as Smart Objects. That, to me, is invaluable, particularly in the realm of printing.

When I create a finished work, I may be very happy with it on screen. But when that image is printed I may (and sometimes do) see something that would make it a better print if I went back in and made an adjustment. By having, say, Silver Efex Pro as a Smart Object, I can go back to it and all my original settings (control points, etc ) are there and can be adjusted as I wish. The it's a case of just saving it again.

This facility is as I say, to me, invaluable.

Exactly right Donald - while there are work-arounds, they all take time and SmartObjects effectively gives one the benefits that we see in a parametric editor like DxO Optics Pro and apply that approach to a raster editor like Photoshop.

I had a large job to do for a commercial client earlier this month that involved about 3 hours worth of work in PP. After a final review, they wanted what seemed to them to be a minor change. Because I use SmartObjects and a non-destructive workflow, it took me just a couple of minutes to make the changes that they wanted. Without that functionality, I would have had to pretty well start from scratch.

[Cantab]

Does anyone know of a way to use smartobjects as discussed above if one does the RAW conversion with LR rather than ACR within Photoshop?
I was working on a photo several weeks ago where smartobjects would have been useful but I use LR before exporting the image to CS6 (if I need to use layers, etc.).

[Manfred M]

Does anyone know of a way to use smartobjects as discussed above if one does the RAW conversion with LR rather than ACR within Photoshop?
I was working on a photo several weeks ago where smartobjects would have been useful but I use LR before exporting the image to CS6 (if I need to use layers, etc.).

In the Develop module; <Photo> <Edit in> <Open as SmartObject in Photoshop>

[Cantab]

Manfred, thank you. Once you pointed it out, the way of doing it seems obvious!

[Manfred M]

Manfred, thank you. Once you pointed it out, the way of doing it seems obvious!

Somehow that always seems to be the case once one has figured it out. Before that, utter confusion.

[Donald]

Somehow that always seems to be the case once one has figured it out. Before that, utter confusion.

Who was it that said, 'The more I practice, the luckier I get'?

[billtils]

Who was it that said, 'The more I practice, the luckier I get'?

This is more than likely a rhetorical question Donald, but in case it isn't, it was Gary Player.

[Manfred M]

This is more than likely a rhetorical question Donald, but in case it isn't, it was Gary Player.

Or maybe not...

http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/07/14/luck/

[billtils]

Gary P may (or may not) have invented it, but I do recall seeing a video clip in which he used that expression. Either way, it's a good one.

[Acorn]

I downloaded the trial version of Affinity yesterday and, frankly, found it overwhelming and my logic did not correspond with that of its developers. I've never used any of Serif's photo PP packages before, only its DTP software that I like. Affinity, like PagePlus, its DTP software will struggle against Adobe's offering, but I commend anyone who can develop packages that will dent Adobe's present position in the marketplace.