greigfla

Excellent program. Does many things well, but for one example, try a panorama with it using multiple photos. Then the same thing with the same pictures on an Adobe product -- or any other pan program I'm familiar with. Affinity beats them all. And they don't even taut that tool!

PlymouthWoodworker Loc: Plymouth, MA

I agree with most of the comments. I use Photoshop Elements most of the time, but Affinity Photo has a better focus stacker than Elements.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

I can help with that. Affinity's raw develop module has a number of weaknesses when compared with other raw converters. Some of those weaknesses are glaringly big.

Most critically the raw develop module does not save your work. Affinity stands alone in this as the only raw converter I know that doesn't save your work. For me that's a show stopper. For example if you open a raw file in Affinity and process the file to a finished photo, save it, and return later and decide you want to reconsider for example white balance and make a tweak you can't do that. You literally have to start from scratch and do all your raw processing work over. That is a destructive raw workflow and it sucks. Again worth noting that no other raw conversion software does this to you.

When processing a raw file an input profile is required. Most of the raw converters will at least attempt to provide input profiles that match what's provided by the camera. If they don't they may allow you to create and save an input profile and/or at least bring your own input profile from another source and use it. It's pretty much standard for raw converters to at least support either DCP or ICC input profiles or both. What support does Affinity provide for camera input profiles? None. For many users another show stopper.

If you want to get best results from your raw files you're going to occasionally need some kind of HSL adjustment function that you can use before the raw file is converted to and RGB image. It's an essential tool and Affinity's develop module doesn't have it. I photograph a lot of my wife's flowers as she's a major gardener and I simply couldn't do an appropriate job without that tool. This is another case of go ahead and try to find any other raw converter that doesn't provide an HSL tool. I only know of one and that's Affinity Photo.

A common function found in raw converters is the ability to perform highlight reconstruction. Even the free raw converters at least attempt it. RawTherapee does an excellent job of it in fact. Affinity doesn't even try -- not even a poor attempt.

That is not a complete list, but it's enough for me to warn people to stay clear of Affinity's raw processing module. I always praise Affinity as an excellent raster image processor and a great bargain and I recommend it to my students. But it's raw develop module is indeed weak (that's generous) compared with the alternatives.

redlegfrog

What do you like to convert to the best, TIFF?

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

I convert to whatever I need for the intended use of the photo. If I'm making a print I'll convert to a TIFF. If I'm posting the image on the Internet I'll convert to a JPEG.

I think you may have been asking what I convert raw files to for further editing. I rarely ever do that -- one photo in thousands. I want my raw workflow to be 100% non-destructive and non-linearly re-editable so I keep all my editing in one parametric editor and don't do additional editing in a raster editor.

ClarkG Loc: Southern Indiana USA

I am a professional photographer and use And love Affinity Photo! If you download their latest FREE upgrade, it handles RAW files much better than before. It does everything that I need it to do for me. I think it’s better than Photoshop! I was upset when Photoshop started their BS subscription service! You can’t beat Affinity’s one time $49 with free upgrades! Plenty of instructional videos out there too. I swear be Affinty Photo now. No, I am not a paid spokesman for them , either! Hahaha!

mffox Loc: Avon, CT

Go For It!! I have been using Affinity for 4-5 years and find it a solid replacement for PS/LR. It's a quality product, has a large library of tutorials and online support/help when you need it. So far I have no complaints.
Mark

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

The comments I made about Affinity's raw file handling apply to the most recent version.

Crichmond Loc: Loveland, CO

Crichmond Loc: Loveland, CO

henryf Loc: Florida

I bought AF last year for $25 on sale.

Best $$ I ever spent

Use Raw Therapee for NEF

JhnMhn

I make my living from photography, and have since the 1980s. Started out with PS in late 1990s. Switched to Affinity Photo several years ago and prefer it to PS. There is nothing I need in PS that isn’t done as well, or better in AF. The develop module does a decent job, but I have several RAW converters and use them depending on the needs of the image. The Raw converter I would choose if I could only have one is Irridient Developer...outstanding quality of conversions and meets the concerns of revisiting RAW files without starting over.

Dennis833 Loc: Australia

I used Photoshop for twenty years before replacing it with Affinity Photo. I recently purchased two extra copies and gave them away.

redlegfrog

Thanks,

Tom

Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara

I could use some help here in as your response makes me feel there are differences in raw processors that I’m not aware of. Why are you talking about pixel vs RGB raster? All digital images are pixel based (not vector) and RGB is a color space ?