Considering Photo & Graphics Designer... any advice?

I’m asking again for advice to anyone who might be able to help. There are a lot of wise and experienced experts on talkgraphics, so I’m hopeful.

I use Web Designer Premium (the current version) regularly. I’m not always happy with the limitations on altering photos, but I’ve never acted to do anything about it. (The Photo Tool offers a reduced selection of options.)

Last week, I saw the post here concerning Affinity’s offer for a 90-day free trial and half price until 20 April. Taking the kind advice given in this forum, I downloaded all three of their apps and have followed a few of the tutorials. The only one that intrigues me is Photo.

Then I considered the possibility of using the Xara product instead: Photo & Graphic Designer. I’m already familiar with the interface, so the learning curve would be minimal. Why not Design Pro X?, you might ask. Well, my WDP doesn’t expire until next March. (I had an issue with incompatible features when I paid last September, and Xara generously granted me an extension of six months). So rather than lose that investment, I am thinking of supplementing WDP with the P&GD. It’s available at a very good price right now, and both apps would expire at the same time next year, and perhaps I would switch over to DPX then.

So my questions, for anyone who knows:
1) For those who do a lot of work with photos, does the Xara software offer sufficient power and precision? Correcting flaws, eliminating unwanted items in photos (e.g., power lines, photo bombers, etc.) to render natural-looking results? A true state-of-the-art photo editor.
2) I have the impression that files can be opened and saved in different Xara apps without losing functionality. Is this correct? For example, if I open a .web file in P&GD, make alterations to photos, and save it again as a .web, will the web-specific functions (e.g., mouseover layers, html placeholders, etc., etc., etc.) remain as they were, allowing me to reopen in WDP seamlessly?

As always, any knowledge and words of advice are greatly appreciated.

I believe that Photo & Graphic Designer pretty much offers all the drawing and photo editing tools found in Designer Pro X, so using this along with Web Designer Premium should have you covered. And just as with Affinity products you can always download the free trial version and try it out.

I do a fair amount of photo editing in Designer Pro X 16. The best thing about most of Xara's photo editing actions and options is they are non-destructive. That is until you convert to editable shapes or Flatten the photo, all changes can be removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcellison

... For example, if I open a .web file in P&GD, make alterations to photos, and save it again as a .web, will the web-specific functions (e.g., mouseover layers, html placeholders, etc., etc., etc.) remain as they were, allowing me to reopen in WDP seamlessly?

---

You can definitely do the PHOTO section in P&GD, and I believe you "can" open a .web file in P&GD, but be careful. P&GD does not have a web design component, so it "may" not play nice. I have Web Designer 9 Premium and P&GD 16, and together they should cover most of my needs, but it's been years since I've done any web design, so maybe take further advise.

Thanks gw.

I downloaded the free trial this morning, and I've been exploring it since. So far, so good. Still, since it will take a bit of time to learn how it works, it will take even longer before I can get down to the nitty-gritty to know how easy the real photo editing functions, and how good the results are. That's why I appreciate your advice on the topic.

I have a number of PHOTO editing programs. I always end up going back to P&GD, as I understand most of what it can do and "almost" know how to use it!

Everything else seems to have a large learning curve ... to my mind, Xara's interface has always been really intuitive (except for the stupidly hidden SMART TRANSFORM control!).

Thanks ss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ss-kalm

P&GD does not have a web design component, so it "may" not play nice.

---

I was thinking of exactly that. If it turns out that P&GD does what I want (the quality and ease), I may just do photo editing there and then import the results into WDP. As you indicate, I don't want to accidentally lose a bunch of web development inadvertently.