Heads Up - Affinity Photo 2 free for 6 months

[Robert Watcher]

I do use Affinity Photo (version 1) for compositing, mesh warping, Inpainting, and a few other features when needed. With the introduction of Version 2, I have been considering taking advantage of the 50% savings currently available. And I particularly like the idea of purchasing the Bundle that includes Photo, Designer and Publisher. That bundle included the applications for all platforms - Windows, Mac and iPad - on as many computers/devices as I own under the Personal license.

Well —— yesterday Serif announced that they are extending the Free trial from 2 weeks, to 6 MONTHS. The motivation is to allow creatives to use the products for an extended period of time to truly get used to it and see if it holds value to their workflow. This is great for someone like me, who likes to tryout software on a project to see if it benefits me, but because of normal trial time constraints or limitations seldom make use of them.

In the case of Affinity Photo, I don’t necessarily need version 2 (that I know of) as I already own the version 1 app on both my desktop and iPad. However I am doing more and more page layout and publication design work with my free time, and this offers a perfect opportunity for me to dig in and learn all of the softwares and benefit from the integration of them all —— for a period long enough that I can complete a few projects as well. The only downside that I see so far, is having to put up with a easily dismissed nag screen when opening the app. allowing me to continue on with the trial.

I do make good use of Affinity Photo on my iPad (using the Apple Pen when available) and here are a couple of screenshots showing the improvements in the Interface between version 1 and version 2 on my iPad


A much improved main screen interface in version 2 (top) compared to version 1 (bottom)

One feature that I noticed right away, were the easily accessible and easy to use slider controls for settings like pen size, opacity, hardness depending of the tool selected, in version 2 (top) compared to version 1 (bottom)

——-

———

The Nag Screen when opening the apps. (Prices are in Canadian dollars)

 

[Robert Watcher]

Something kind of cool is the built in functionality in all the apps, to generate QR codes. So this isn’t something that can’t be done by going to websites that generate them and then allowing you to save the downloaded file and add to your photo or project.

But this built in feature is much more functional to me because the QR code is created as a Shape that can be resized without losing quality, colours changed, etc. With more focus on touchless, QR codes are making a comeback I notice https://www.takeflyte.com/blog/50-creative-uses-of-qr-codes


Aiming your phone’s camera at the QR code that I added to this pic, takes you to my webpage as an example. It could go to a large size of the pic on my website, could be easily added to a promo piece for any number of purposes. So much simpler and more secure adding it in my own software.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Yes that built in QR code generator is by itself a winner.

I really appreciate your discussion of the new version!

But since you know the programs, what else is unique like that which is absent from PS, LR Classic & On1 24 RAW Max.

Asher

[BTW, I purchased ON1 and was horrified with the novice-childish explanations in the provided tutorials. Painstakingly slow for an expert photographer and I had to give up 1/3 of the way through, LOL]

 

[Robert Watcher]

Thanks for your input Asher

I can’t speak for comparing different products. I’m not a reviewer and definitely not a promoter of products. Just like being able to post the odd time about some addition that I have made to my workflow that I enjoy. I really don’t care about any specific app or brand and am not spending time looking for what is best, just what works for me and I am satisfied.

I’ve mentioned several times that Affinity Photo and Photoshop serve different purposes for me than do Lightroom and ON1. So there is no comparison except that I find that ON1 is crossing over into providing some of the features that used to require Affinity Photo or Photoshop.

Sorry that ON1 didn’t work with your needs or expectations. I have to say that I hardly ever read a manual or watch tutorials on how to do things 😊. I just work away at trying to figure out how to get where I need to by trial and error. The speed thing has always been an issue with ON1, but with my setup (MacMini M1 base model) I’ve found quite an improvement with version 2024.5 over the previous version. The speed is working for my needs. It may well not for someone with higher demands. The nice thing with pretty well all software nowadays is that we can download a fully functioning trial version and see if it works for us before purchase. Maybe you can reach out to ON1 and let them know what you are experiencing.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Robert,

I love the ads for ON1! I become so enthusiastic. It’s just that I wanted a guide to where I find things and their workflow and I made a mistake in suffering through an annoying presentation.

I care enough that I wrote to them to sit through their own lackluster tutorial that was way below Biden’s worst Debate memory clouded moments, 😂

Doubtless there must be tutorials meant for pro photographers!

Where I am having an issue with bright surf, dark shadows that are important, special colors, sometimes I find that one of these programs might get closer to the result I am looking for more readily.

So I would like to have ON1 and Affinity Photo editing as extra options.

While you are not a reviewer, as a real user, your thoughts have very practical value to us, just the same.

So thanks for sharing as you discover new things.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

I am not sure we should rejoice about Affinity being "free". Canva bought Affinity in March and the obvious plan is to integrate the software into their subscription based model.

 

[Robert Watcher]

I am not sure we should rejoice about Affinity being "free". Canva bought Affinity in March and the obvious plan is to integrate the software into their subscription based model.

Well it isn’t free, it’s a purchased license. But I get what you mean in that getting many people hooked with the free trial over the next 6 months could lead to the potential of changes to a subscription license after everyone is time invested into their products. Of course that is possible, but I wouldn’t say it is obvious. There is always lots of speculation and presumption saturating the web and causing people to panic.

We can never be sure that minds won’t change down the road, but all we can go on right now is this statement:

https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/press/newsroom/affinity-and-canva-pledge/#:~:text=We know this model has,for those who prefer it.



For my needs, I am not interested only in Affinity Photo. I do graphic design work as well as am starting to spend time again in my retirement years, creating books. Affinity Designer and Affinity Publisher and the integration of all three products with each other, may provide great value to me I am hoping. I don’t mind the model that most applications of adopting where there is an option of a perpetual licence as well as a value added subscription model, and as a coder/developer I understand the need for a steady stream of income from subscriptions for long term sustainability of a product.


As things are right now each one of Adobe’s 3 comparable (and no doubt superior) products are $30 / month each —— or I would require a bundle. I am not able to justify that cost every month forever.

 

[Jerome Marot]

I used Photoshop, Indesign and Illustrator before Adobe changed to a subscription model and then changed to the 3 programs from Affinity when the mac stopped supporting CS6. I don't want a subscription either. BTW, maybe I was right considering that the FTC found Adobe's subscriptions to be deceptive: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/new...g-fees-preventing-consumers-easily-cancelling

As to Affinity, they indeed got a large proportion of their customers because their software could be had for a one time fee. But the fact is that they were bought by https://www.canva.com and that company offers graphical tools on a subscription based fee only. We will see how their promise holds, but they would not be the first company to break a promise.

And, quite frankly, the realities of the market have changed considerably. I am not even sure that there is enough of a market to support stand-alone products.

 

[Asher Kelman]

……..And, quite frankly, the realities of the market have changed considerably. I am not even sure that there is enough of a market to support stand-alone products.

Look at Apple, a massive company: even considered mainly a software company!

They have trouble not being distracted by physical products, (the iPhone especially)!

So a small goal-driven group start a brilliant software company, they are successful and get bought and digested!

Perhaps that leads to opening up that space again for new entrepreneurs?

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Apple is a good example of the changes in photography. They had a product for photographers: Aperture. It had features to build a small web site, books, compare pictures to be displayed in an exhibition, etc...

They discontinued it in 2015 and only kept "Photos", which is basically designed to manage pictures taken on an iPhone and uploads to social networks.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Apple is a good example of the changes in photography. They had a product for photographers: Aperture. It had features to build a small web site, books, compare pictures to be displayed in an exhibition, etc...

They discontinued it in 2015 and only kept "Photos", which is basically designed to manage pictures taken on an iPhone and uploads to social networks.

Why do they do this? Is it for them merely pruning a fruit tree: “we still give our devoted followers a lot to enrich their life aSo we can trim without loosing our followers!”

 

[Jerome Marot]

Why do they do this?

That is a good question.

The official answer is that Aperture did not bring in the return on investment they were expecting.

A possibility is that they were only interesting in customers who ditched their SLRs for iPhones, thereby creating a constant revenue as they would replace their iPhone for the new one with an improved camera every year.

 

[Asher Kelman]

That is a good question.

The official answer is that Aperture did not bring in the return on investment they were expecting.

A possibility is that they were only interesting in customers who ditched their SLRs for iPhones, thereby creating a constant revenue as they would replace their iPhone for the new one with an improved camera every year.

The EU often watches out for behavior of powerful companies who’s products construct the markets choices.

Apple seems to have gotten away with this.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Now this is interesting.

Laws against abuse of monopoly position can only act when a company does something, but not when it simply abandons a whole segment of the market. Which is what happened here: Apple simply stopped developing that line of software. Anyone is free to step in, but only Adobe is interested (and only mildly so, Lightroom is not their top priority). Oh, and there is also Capture One and Phocus. Blame me.

I don't think that the software industry is interested any more.

Classical market theory states that no vacuum is possible. If there are customers with unfulfilled needs, someone will step in to make a profit. But that is not true. In a former life, I had some management courses which explain that maximizing profits imply not serving the bottom x% of your customers, the one who do not bring in enough revenue.

It seems we reached that point as far as photography is concerned.

 

[Asher Kelman]

So smart phones have such ann enormous market base, enough that the latest electronic, optical and software is simply included for free in the high price.

Soon the smart phone will consist of 100 million single sensel cameras, each with layers able to build measures of RGB and each with its own A-D converter and each with separate shut off when enough charge has accumulated for needed count accuracy according to AI expectations!

There will be only need for new separate programs for photogrammetry and the like!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

There is a limit imposed by quantum mechanics on what can be done in the volume of a smart phone.

Besides: where is the market for a 100 millions whatever camera, when all pictures bringing in money are to be seen on a smartphone screen?

 

[Asher Kelman]

I said 100MP as my camera has that and it’s very useful. The iPhone 15 Max already has something approaching 50MP.

Remember they are making millions so when they do it foe todays camera, it’s no big step to double that sooner or later!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

I am aware that 48 MP sensors are available for cell phones, but you were talking about a sensor twice that resolution and 3 layers, etc... That is more difficult.
As to the limits of quantum mechanics: shot noise (i.e. the noise due to the granularity of light coming in as individual photons) is already a problem for 48 MP sensors, which are only usable outside by fair weather. The manufacturers hide that by limiting resolution when there is less light. And nobody really notices, because the bulk of the market is people sharing pictures on the tiny screen of their phones.

You may be interested in using 100 MP, but you are ready to pay to have these printed huge. The other 6 billions smartphone users never print anything.

 

[Asher Kelman]

…..You may be interested in using 100 MP, but you are ready to pay to have these printed huge. The other 6 billions smartphone users never print anything.

True,

But by having individually addressable pixels with A-D converters behind them, each pixel is allowed to collect photons, ie voltage) until the numbers reach above shot noise.

The competition between giants is taking us to brilliant ways around what have been limits in our cameras because thr giants, like Apple and Samsung, can spend tens of millions to research solutions that otherwise have been beyond the economic reaches of like of Canon, Olympus and Nikon.

The don’t need perfection, it just needs to be accurate enough, (and optimally internet connection), for built in AI, and online advanced AI), to assemble the individual pixel results, recognize scenes and objects and use look up tables to make corrections.

Grandma or a child will get fabulous results in low light or a bird in flight!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

But we have already had AI in phone cameras for a few years: https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/13/23637401/samsung-fake-moon-photos-ai-galaxy-s21-s23-ultra