Affinity Designer 1.6.1 For Mac

Owners of Affinity Designer on Mac or Windows can download and test the beta of 1.7 now. News & Updates Affinity Photo 1.7 beta available now If you own a desktop version of Affinity Photo (Mac or Windows), you can try out the beta of version 1.7 now. Inspiration Brand and creative director Rodrigo Gianello: ‘Being organised is the key’. Nov 2, 2017 - Affinity Photo comes with around £105-worth of extras, while Affinity. Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer for Mac are available to buy from the.

• Affinity Designer 1.6.1 For Mac Torrent
• Affinity Designer 1.6 1 For Mac Crack

This morning I spend several hours on the V1.6x Trial SW. Like many others I’m looking at an Adobe replacement. Offering LR as CC only going forward has put me over the edge. After DxO, Capture One, and specialized solutions (such as Phocus) I’m looking for several things as a non-professional user: a) moderate rich functionality for ALL my RAW files, b) contained cost, and c) a solid go-forward path (not necessarily with a Digital Asset Mgmt Solution as I have a clearly structured WF and file system archive. I just developed X-Trans and Bayer files from 3 modern cameras (D850, XT-2, X1D) with very pleasing result.

Could this really be my new “grand unified solution”?! I will keep testing. Judgement is still out, but it certainly piqued my interest. People looking for a Lr replacement are everywhere these days. Was on a bigger Photographer-meeting (south Germany area, mainly non-professionals) this weekend with many small workshop-groups. An literally (really) every second group I attended some time came to the discussion about a Lr replacement. I'm currently investigating ON1 and Skylum/MacPhun.

Maybe Serif is also coming with a DAM-solution soon. DXO not interesting, since I also use Fujifilm.

Capture One has all features and lots more, but is also way more expensive and complex to learn. I've been demoing Capture One for a week after trying DxO, ON1, and Affinity. It's expensive-unless you are a Sony user. $50 is a deal.

University students get a discount. I don't find it too complex.

It's very customizable and a 30min. Video on Youtube was enough to get up to speed and set it up exactly how I want it. I like that I can use either a catalog or per/session work flow.

Interested in the Windows demo of Luminar because the interface looks smooth. LR and C1 run very smoothly on my system. C1 results have been fabulous compared with the others and has pretty much sealed the deal for me. I do miss the LR adjustment brush, but I don't like the LR DAM and happy to leave that behind. I'll never go subscription and I agree that a lot of people are feeling the same way. I'll be curious to know if that feeling sticks or if when push comes to shove they will just cave and rationalize the cost as 'inexpensive for what you get.' I want to like Affinity Photo but raw development is a problem.

For my kind of landscape photography and I suppose for most others, effective shadow / highlight control is vital. Searching online it seems others have the same problem. Serif has posted videos on workarounds but they are not very effective and certainly not intuitive. I use an image that really tests a program in this area.

Only Lightroom and Capture One do a decent job. All the others I've tried are poor in comparison. They include Luminar, DXO Photolab, One1 Photo Raw 2018, After shot Pro 3. Then again, maybe I'm not very skilled in using these programs but how hard should it be? Similar experience.

I tried On1 and Affinity. On1 crashes my system and Affinity is painfully slow. But the worst thing about Affinity is that the exposure slider and highlight/shadow recovery are like slinging oatmeal at my photo. I was appalled!

How does anyone find the results even passable? Maybe it's my A7 files and other RAW formats are better suited to the program? My 6-core AMD and 16GB of RAM were acting like a dual core and 4GB of RAM with both of these programs. LR and DxO are quite fast.

DxO does pretty decent with most of the sliders I've tried. Only edited about a dozen shots so far. Will try Capture One. I'll look into it.

What RAW have you used with ON1? Do you know how it handles Sony and Fuji? I know Fuji files can be tricky with some processors. Since posting I did try Capture One and now have less incentive to try and fix anything.

I would also lean toward the perspective that if ON1 is fussy with graphics cards, then it's ON1 that needs to be fixed.;) But Capture One is fast and the results are better than LR which I found very impressive. The program is an ace and well worth the money, especially for Sony shooters. I was looking forward to ON1 building up to release. I think it is priced well and the interface looks very nice.

May still try and see why it doesn't like me. I tried it just now.

First impressions are very negative. I first tried opening 36 raw files from a shoot. OK, this is not how the use the program. I had to restart my machine cold boot. Took a very long time to open just 1 RAW from my A7. First tried to bring up shadows.

What the heck, it looks horrible!? What is going on with this? It's pegging my 6-core CPU and 16GB of ram with Win10 at nearly 100%. I also tried a trial of ON1 PhotoRAW and it kept crashing my machine. (Same as last year when I tried v.2017.

Hope Luminar is better because I don't want to do LR CC. Interesting and good feedback. To clarify, only ON1 is crashing my system.

Affinity is just really slow for me and produces results that look like I tossed a bucket of oatmeal on my photos. If exposure and shadow recovery produces such results, it's just not going to work. I've used LR 5.1 for a long time and it has never crashed or even seemed to tax the system much although I'd like to see previews faster, it's totally manageable.

Are you guys running high end graphics cards too? I have a non-gaming regular old graphics card that I think is 1GB. Is that why my processor is running at 99% just to open a photo in Affinity? My RAM was never over 50% usage. SirSeth - That tends to suggest that there is either a fault in your computer, or a conflict between Affinity and ON1 and/or some other application that is installed. Try uninstalling any applications that you don't use anymore. If that fails, backup all your images and other personal files, then reformat the hard disk and reinstall your operating system and applications.

If that is something you don't want to attempt, best to call in a computer expert to take a look at your system. These things tend to be quite easy to fix. Entoman - Thanks for the suggestion.

If Affinity or ON1, while not running, cause conflicts with other programs that try to run, then they are definitely not worth consideration. I think this is very highly unlikely. I can reimage my machines but it's a hassle when I don't believe that is the problem. It would be easier to test on a different machine with different hardware.

(And of course it is easy to suggest that other people re-format). I've been a system admin and worked with hardware a lot.

Affinity's results look horrible with Sony RAW and that is not my machine. ON1 crashing on machines that runs everything else and have specs high above system requirements is not a straightforward easy fix. Programming in compatibility across all hardware is complex. Last year I bought Lightroom 6 and was happy with it. But because of the CC stuff I partially moved on to DxO, by replacing the develop module usage by DxO photo lab.

Tried Photo Supreme v3? I am evaluating it and it does a great job in associating versions of files with the originals as long as you keep the naming in sync (for example DATEimagenameSEQ-DxO.TIFF will be associated with DATEimagenameSEQ.NEF). My problem with it is that $99 for a single user license is expensive for DAM functionality but I find their features work well, also great auto-tagging functionality where you map certain keywords to GPS coordinates or other metadata fields.

DxO PhotoLab (Optics Pro) is also the core of my photography workflow but I do miss some DAM functionality like simple keywords and batch rename functionality (my main gripe). This means I need a second application and I am trying to figure out my options. It is hard to beat the DxO Lightroom integration but I am not sure if it is worth $100/year to me since I use Affinity Photo and DxO PhotoLab and they also will require priced upgrades down the line. There is a lot of movement in this space since competitors no Adobe has branding and performance problems. So I will either subscribe for 1 year with the idea of moving on later on, or just manage without DAM for another year until something better comes along. I also think that many of the things that you do in a DAM could be done by artificial intelligence and Lightroom CC seems to move that way, just like Apple and Google. I rather spend time out shooting instead of tagging images with 'tree', 'dog', 'person A', 'portrait' or 'cloudy day'.

Affinity is a prosumer product in its infancy., while Photoshop is a highly advanced professional product for the graphic arts, photography and publishing industries. Better to compare Affinity with Elements or Paintshop Pro. They are all about the same quality, but interfaces are different. I have Photoshop CC and Affinity as Lightroom Classic plugins. 99 times out of 100, I prefer to use Affinity for the very small number of things that can't be handled by Lightroom, mainy because Affinity is much faster and has (for me) a nicer interface than Photoshop.Serif have made several other photo applications before Affinity, but all were very much aimed at amateurs.

I used PSE too for a while and it was ridiculously crippled compared the full suite. I am not a post-processing professional by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't feel that limitation with Affinity. I am certain there are people who need PS, but for me Affinity works very well, whereas PSE absolutely did not. how can they compete Catching up to an already developed technology is easier than inventing it from the scratch. It's the same reason why something like Korea could go from the least developed country in Pacific Asia to something like number #14 in terms of GDP. You copy until you make it.

It's a good strategy. It's still slow. I don't see any significant boost from 1.5 to 1.6. It still takes about 5-10s for every raw file, and I'm not talking about 100MB from D850, mine are only 20MB from 6D. DPP opens them without ANY delay and I can immediately work with them. It's not an issue if I edit one or two images, but when you have to edit like 100-300 photos at a time, it still takes waaay too long.

I tested it with LR/PS too and those open the files very fast as well, so not sure what's wrong with Affinity. Also don't forget Affinity still doesn't support nondestructive develop step, so good luck if you need to redo some steps differently. I want to like the software, I really do, because I despise Adobe's business model, but at the moment it's problematic to say the least.

'Keep in mind that Affinity has no DAM or Browse features (yet),' IMHO DAM is really, really, really overrated. I understand its necessity for professionals, but for enthusiasts? After several years of using LR I noticed that my catalog wound down to a pure reflection of directory structure: / and all collections, tags, and other DAMn features went the way of dodo. I agree though, that an ability to recursively browse all photos in sub-directories is a useful feature. That's the only thing I'm missing in DxO PhotoLab comparing to LR. Malikknows - Do you realise that if you abandon LR, all the data files that hold the information about your edits, will be incompatible with any other brand of editor? This means that if you want to carry out further edits of existing photos, you'll have to go all the way back to the original RAW or JPEG files, and edit them again from scratch.

All of the finished edits that you made while using LR will need to be exported if you want to do further work on them in another program. Is it really worth changing from LR just as a 'protest' at their subscription? Be honest, it's peanuts compared to what you paid for your camera and lenses.

Also consider that you'll also have to completely change your workflow, and there's a possibility (likelihood?) that your replacement program will not be as good as LR. I was one of the first to criticise Adobe for their subscription policy, but after thinking about it longer, I decided to stay with LR, and I think many others will do the same thing. Entoman: 'This means that if you want to carry out further edits of existing photos, you'll have to go all the way back to the original RAW or JPEG files, and edit them again from scratch.' If I were, say, a wedding photog, this would be devastating. As a retired guy selling the odd landscape shots, It wouldn't be such a hardship.

I never liked the Lightroom interface (particularly the DAM) but it is second nature, now, and everything else is a steep learning curve, at my age. I'm not averse to the subscription policy, and never was -I understand Adobe's need for it (and other companies in the future). Thing is -I only want Lightroom, and have no interest in the cloud-based end of things, so I will continue to evaluate other software (C1pro, and a couple others) while I see how things shake out. @ Entoman 'Malikknows - Do you realise that if you abandon LR, all the data files that hold the information about your edits, will be incompatible with any other brand of editor?' That should be a strong warning against becoming dependent on any catalog/database system that's incompatible with other software titles. Similarly, a fair warning against being held hostage by a particular program or software maker due to proprietary files types or DAM systems.

Anyone who doesn't head the warning. Well, eventually it's going to bite them. All the more that I'd like to see someone come up with a DAM that's independent of any photo editing software. OK, maybe such a program wouldn't be able to keep track of your edits all in one place, but at least you could jump around to different editors and not lose your library, keywords, metadata, etc. As I said in another post somewhere, if only there was a standardized database format for DAM systems, then software companies would be competing on a tougher level because if they knew you could dump their product so quickly, the would work harder to keep you as a customer. But since they can lock you into a system now (with no standard) i feel it means that you're stuck, and they know it and pray on that (like Adobe does, they know people have invested countless hours in LR, and can't just simply walk-away unless they wanted to lose weeks, months, or years worth of work).

The import functions of some programs is a start and is helpful to combat the issue. Eric Hensel - 'I only want Lightroom, and have no interest in the cloud-based end of things' There seems to be a general misconception here. If you subscribe to LR Classic, you do NOT have to store your images on the 'cloud'. You CHOOSE where you store them - either on your hard disc, on an external drive, or the cloud. It's YOUR choice. I use LR Classic and I store my images and data files on my hard drive, I also store real-time backups on two separate portable drives, one of which is kept off-site when I'm not at home.

Turretless - DAMs are only really necessary if you have a very large number of images and a need to be able to organise and locate them rapidly. For a working photographer who stores many thousands of images, this is absolutely essential. But for people who only have a few hundred photos, a well organised system of folders, and logical file names, should be perfectly adequate. The main reason why LR is (was?) so popular is that it is a fully integrated all-in-one package that combines organisational tools with a non-destructive image editor that is more than adequate for most people, and far easier to use than Photoshop. Eric - If you want an all-in-one package that includes file management as well as image editing, then as far as I'm aware Lightroom is the only choice (although McPhun, Serif and AlienSkin all have all-in-ones under development). If you want just an image editor, and don't care about file management, then there are dozens of programs ranging from free software to high end products like Photoshop. To a large extent you get what you pay for.

If you like Lightroom but don't want to pay a subscription, than LR6 will do fine and will work for as long as it is supported by Windows and Mac. The only snag is that if/when you buy a new model of camera body, the RAW files from that body will not be recognised by LR. You can of course shot JPEGs on a new camera, and use LR6 for many years to come. Just download with the software supplied by your camera manufacturer, and then import the JPEGs into LR.

Sohus - That's a valid argument but personally I don't think the Adobe subscription is excessive for either professional or serious amateur use. And of course there is absolutely no guarantee that other brands won't adopt the subscription model in a couple of years time. I think it's wiser to adhere to a tried and proven fully integrated package from a longstanding brand. But I certainly won't dispute that some other brands are seemingly better value or better at specific tasks. For what it's worth, I've used Affinity, DXO, PaintshopPro, Micrografx, Gimp, PS Elements, PS CS6, LR5 and LR Classic. After a lot of experimentation I've settled on LR Classic as my DAM and primary image editor.

Affinity Designer 1.6.1 For Mac Torrent

I have Affinity, DXO and PS as LR plugins, but tend to use Affinity most for difficult edits, simply because it is much faster and has a nicer interface than PS. I'm thinking that in the future (year or two) they will separate the two, which would be nice since (as I've said before) 80% of my work (At least) is in PS. And Even if they dropped PS from the Photography package, I'd still keep it regardless. In fact, I'm a bit surprised they havn't completely tried to anger their userbase by splitting the two into two separate packages (LR for $10/mo, PS for $10/mo, or $15-18 for both per month, something like that). If they did that, I personally would just go with PS for $10 and come up with my own DAM (and I'm considering writing a simple one for myself as I want to move away from LR at some point in the near future-I'll keep PS around).

The other options for people sticking with LR6 is to download the RAW converter from Adobe to generate your DNGs, then import those into LR6 (for those who buy newer cameras after the end of the year update from Adobe). It seems that the RAW converter will continue to be updated as new cameras come out, so I'm thinking thats an option too, also as long as the DNG format doesn't change, which I don't think it will as it is essentially a standard now (despite being created by Adobe itself). It's an extra step, but might buy some people a few extra years out of their existing LR6 purchases.

Affinity Designer 1.6 1 For Mac Crack

I have not tested this myself as I currently use CC and am not upgrading my D750 for another year or two, but maybe someone who buys the next newly released camera from Sony, Nikon, Canon, etc, can test this idea out and let us all know.

And, two of the best creative-minded applications available on the Mac, are receiving major updates today to increase performance and add new features. The apps, which are beloved by creative designers due to their no-compromise feature set and subscription-free pricing model, both receive performance improvements, which include a Metal 2 accelerated view and macOS High Sierra optimization. There’s also a new light UI option for users to select from. For a limited time until November 16th, app developer Serif is providing buyers with bonus content for both apps, which include new textures for Affinity Photo, and a pro brush pack for Affinity Designer. Both Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer have been updated to version 1.6.6/1.6.