I had intended to post another response in this thread much earlier but due to a death in the family and being on the road for three weeks I was unable to do so. I hope it isn't too late to do this.

Ysarex posted:

"The experts are all going to tell you that with access to the raw data you have the best opportunity to get the most from you data and you should do as much as possible with the raw data before converting to RGB and applying further processing. They're right about that."

There is an saying in this field of endeavor from way back that states the opposite and it's still used as I saw it online quite recently. It goes something like: "Very much processing of a RAW file can lead to damage to the integrity of the file and should be avoided". This is a paraphrase (it's often seen worded a bit differently) but captures the meaning. I have no idea of how this originated, what damage is meant, or how it does it. I only know this belief has been around a long time. Obviously Ysarex's view is very different.

AP has just released a major upgrade available free on their website to current users, as is their policy. It's version 1.10.0.1127.

Also regarding Affinity Photo I ran across an article on PetaPixel on the subject of best alternatives to Photo Shop and the choice in the best overall category was AP (there were seveal other categorie with different bests). The review is at https://petapixel.com/2021/05/27/the-best-adobe-photoshop-alternatives/. Unlike some of the posts on AP on this forum in the past there was very high praise for this app.

This is a reference to the possibility of overcooking or just plain bad post processing (as stated above, raw files can't be corrupted). All files are susceptible to bad PP because it depends on who is doing the PP. The answer is to learn to process properly, and part of that is learning to not overcook.

Since you mention damage, jpegs are far more prone to unwanted artefacts when editing, not to mention the fact that conversion to jpeg involves a reduction in image data (the worst kind of damage).

This is a reference to the possibility of overcooking or just plain bad post processing (as stated above, raw files can't be corrupted). All files are susceptible to bad PP because it depends on who is doing the PP. The answer is to learn to process properly, and part of that is learning to not overcook.

Since you mention damage, jpegs are far more prone to unwanted artefacts when editing, not to mention the fact that conversion to jpeg involves a reduction in image data (the worst kind of damage).

The raw file remains unaltered in a raw editor. Whether the words used were "integrity" or "damage" or whatever, they can't refer to the raw file so they must refer to the processing.

Over-processing can result in damage to what may be referred to as the integrity of the data (not the file). Raw files are a much better starting point in that sense and they're also far less likely to produce unwanted artefacts when compared to using jpegs as a starting point.

Perhaps I should have said "over-processing" rather than "overcooking", and perhaps you should have said "integrity of the data" rather than "integrity of the file".

The saying stated "file integrity" or "integrity of the file" and it referred to processing of a RAW file.

So does what you are saying about this agree or disagree with the statement in the earlier post "Any amount of processing of a raw file has no affect on the integrity of the raw data nor is any damage done?" I was not involved in digital photography early in it's beginnings (I very reluctantly gave up film) so some of this is unknown to me and this is a question, not an attempt to argue with anyone.

Thanks for the info.

A lot of performance improvements with this latest release. AP remains the best alternative to Photoshop as a raster editor and the price makes it the best deal in photo software hands down.

Unfortunately the current release does not address a number of long-standing deficiencies in the raw develop module. For raw conversion Affinity's Develop module is an overall poor choice. If you need a raster editor the solution is simple; just convert raw files with a better raw converter and pass a 16 bit TIFF to AP for further processing.

There used to be something in internet forums called "Hi-jacking a thread" that was frowned on back then. If anyone wants to see a current example of that just take a look at this thread. But, doing that (hi-jacking) doesn't have the negative value it once did - no one cares now. Just another example in the great decline in civility we have experienced in public discourse.

What was supposed to be a simple notification of a software upgrade to people on the forum using that software (and not meant for anyone else) instead inspired an avalanche of words disparaging the software and myself. The author of the thread, me, was accused of having a distorted view and misrepresenting the issue. I deeply resent that. I have never intentionally misrepresented any thing or distored any issue, anywhere, anytime. Having difference of opinion on a thread leading to a disagreement is not distorting or misrepresenting, especially when the opinions being disagreed with were not asked for.

So apparently no thread about Affinity Photo, no matter how simple and unrelated to it's functioning, is safe from Ysarex inserting his perceptions of a fatal flaw in the Develop Persona of that software, one so severe that the program is so inadequate for RAW photo processing that another program is necessary for that processing to be adequately done. And it is not an excuse to say the criticisms were only about that one Persona - who wants to purchase a processsing program only to have to then buy a second one? Not many, especially for people who are just starting out in photo processing. I know of at least one person who decided not to purchase AP based on these exact claims and am sure there are others also.

It is apparent that Ysarex wants to do a great deal of processing of RAW files before they are converted to another file format. I do not believe that is how Serif intended for the software they created to be used. It is stated somewhere in Serif's description of AP and it's workings that the main role of the Develop Persona is to prepare the
file for processing elsewhere in the program, especially the Photo Persona. It further states in the AP Workbook that "For image editing, the majority of your time will be spent in this Persona" (the Photo Persona), p. 17. It further states there "Photo Persona is where you'll be doing the bulk of your image editing work, it's the default Persona where you'll find your brush selection, fill, healing, gradient, and vector tools." p.19.

Incidentally, Ysarex lists 35 tools as being in the Develop Persona. The Workbook only lists 7 and 3 of those are listed in the Photo Persona also. Where did those other 28 come from? My workbook is edition 1.0 (and is tattered and taped together by so much use), have those 28 been added at some time?

Given the above, the way I almost always use AP for RAW files is to import them into AP and allow the program to do it's automatic file conversion and nothing more (with the occasional exception of a crop), then use the Photo Persona for some of the processing it does, then another Persona if needed, and then export the file (which uses another Persona, the Export Persona), and save it in one of the 12 for so file formats AP has for this, usually as a tiff file. This is an easy to learn process and I have had none of the problems that Ysarex describes in such detail, and have processed several thousand RAW files in AP that way with really excellent results. To repeat, please note that I do almost no processing in the Develop Persona, except what the program does automatically, in converting the file. Therein lies one of the differences in how Ysarex and I use AP, and, I believe, why we have such different opinions about the Develop Persona. Also, almost all of the images I process are landscapes and thus I may not have the need for as many tools as Ysarex does (I have no idea what sort of images he processes).

For anyone reading this who may be considering purchase of AP please do not decide based on what I say or what Ysarex says. Use the free trial available (fully refundable) and determine how the program works for you - all of it, including the Develop Persona.

A few months ago I was so upset by these arguments and claims about a program I valued, that I decided to never participate in a thread on AP again in UHH, and did not do since then until this thread. I thought surely something so seemingly innocent as providing a notice of an upgrade and an online review would not provoke the same arguments. Obviously I was wrong and I hope I can resist ever participating in a forum, here or elsewhere, on Affinity Photo again (except the excellent Affinity Photo Forum of course).

"For all intents and purposes, it appears you don't actually edit your raw files before demosaicing. You seem to be doing all your edits directly to the exported raster image in the Photo persona."

Yes, that is exactly what I do. All, or nearly all, of the tools available in the Develp Persona (according to Ysarex, that is about 40) are available in the other Personas, especially the Photo Persona. So I see no need to use the Develp AP for other than conversion of Raw files. Also, in the AP Workbook, the bible on AP formany of us using the program, and produced by the developers of the program, it states in at least two locations that most processing will be done in the Photo Persona (I have quoted those in the past), and somewhere it states that the primary purpose of the Develop Persona is to prepare RAW files for processing in the other Personas.

It does not seem fair to me to use the Develop Persona in a different way than it was developed and intended for and then make these severe criticisms of it, supposedly in an attempt to warn individuals considering a purchase of it from doing so. It (the entire program) has worked very well for me in the way I use it and I get excellent end results in the Tiff files I export after processing is complete, and I have successfully processed about 3000 RAW files in this way.

I wonder how those of you making these criticisms acquired your knowledge base for AP - did you watch the tutorials, read the Workbook or other manuals available, visit the Affinity Photo Forum, or did you simply assume that your outstanding knowledge of Photoshop, etc. would enable you to properly use AP? And I have no doubts that you, Ysarex, and some others making these criticisms have world class knowledge of Photoshop or whatever processing program(s) you routinely use (I suspect it's mostly Photoshop), but believe, and it's only belief, your knowledge of AP is at a lesser level.

If this annoys you or makes you angry I apologize, but keep in mind that some of the things posted about me in this and past discussions are much worse and made me upset and angry then. We are all entitled to our opinions, vastly different and at odds that they may be but we are all also entitled to disagree and express it. I would shrug and let it all pass without comment but I dislike the damage being done to Affinity Photo which I value and would like to see stay in business.