Can Affinity Beat Photoshop?

Switching away from Photoshop sounds tempting until you hit the parts of editing that punish you for being slow or slightly sloppy. If you shoot in rough light, push exposure hard, or do regular cleanup work, the gap between “good enough” and “clean” shows up fast.

Coming to you from Unmesh Dinda of PiXimperfect, this blunt video puts Photoshop and Affinity Photo side by side in the places where you either save time or lose it. Dinda starts with a raw file opened in Adobe Camera Raw, cranks exposure, and uses the Denoise control to pull noise down while keeping fine detail looking intact. The point is not that noise reduction exists in both apps. The point is what happens to edges, texture, and tiny patterns when you push the settings beyond polite use. You end up deciding whether you can live with a smoother, softer look, or whether you want detail to survive aggressive fixes.

The video then moves into selections, and this is where the comparison gets uncomfortable if you rely on fast cutouts. In Photoshop, “Select Subject” and “Remove Background” are treated like everyday tools, not special occasions, and the demo focuses on tricky shapes and busy backgrounds. Affinity Photo can select objects too, but the difference shows up in the missed bits, thin gaps, and fussy areas you do not want to rebuild by hand. Dinda also points out how Photoshop’s people-based selections can isolate specific features, and how sky selection can be used for quick targeted adjustments. If your workflow includes masking hair, clothing, or skies on a deadline, this section forces an honest cost check.

Cleanup is the next pressure test, especially removing complex distractions. Affinity’s inpainting can work, but the demo is aimed at the kind of scene that breaks simple fill tools: layered backgrounds, repeating patterns, and objects crossing in front of other objects. Photoshop’s Remove Tool gets compared directly, including a “find distractions” approach for things like wires and cables, which is the kind of job that can chew up an evening if you do it stroke by stroke. There is also a segment on removing groups of people quickly, framed as time saved rather than a magic trick. If you do travel, event, or location work, this part should make you a little uneasy about how many hours you have normalized losing.

After that, Dinda stacks up the quieter differences that usually decide whether you feel relaxed or irritated while editing. Raw sliders and highlight and shadow recovery get a direct comparison, with the emphasis on how the controls behave when you push them to extremes. Reflection removal comes up as a specific example of a feature you might not think about until you need it, then you wonder how you lived without it. Masking is treated like a real-world task, not a feature list, including how quickly you can target water, vegetation, or clothing without painting everything by hand. The video also touches newer generative tools, including Generative Expand in Photoshop Beta and the quality difference Dinda sees when trying similar options elsewhere. Later, he brings up model choice inside Photoshop’s generative features, including Google’s Gemini 3 Nano Banana Pro, and shows why “editing” and “replacing” are not the same thing when you want a precise change. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Dinda.

Alex Cooke is a Cleveland-based photographer and meteorologist. He teaches music and enjoys time with horses and his rescue dogs.

Related Articles

6 Comments

Do you think Adobe paid Unmesh Dinda to release this?

for me there's really not much Photoshop does that affinity doesn't do. I don't really need Photoshop anymore since affinity photo covers like 90% of the work I do and it's now FREE. Now if they could just port it to Linux that would be 1 of 2 steps i need to never have to touch that heaping pile called windows ever again.

The other issue with Affinity, is what it does do the same as Photoshop, it fails a lot of the time to do as well. It's also riddled with bugs. Lots of those bugs were just brought over from Affinity 2 and now they have had some new bugs added. Affinity's track record of fixing bugs is appalling.

Affinity has worked for me for a couple of years now. I don't recall any bugs in using it. Coupled with DXO PureRaw, I've found it to be a robust PP tool.

It is very well documented for having bugs. People keep on reporting them and nothing gets done. This has been going on for years. They have also now admitted there is an issue at the very core of the software which will stop it ever totally competing with Photoshop as it is the reason it cannot support a lot of different languages. It would need to be resigned from the ground up to fix the issue.

I've never encountered these bugs my self. I'm not saying they don't exist though. Affinity is still relatively new for the type of software that it is so i expect it to have some kind of bugs. What i don't find acceptable is how Photoshop has been around for about 3.5 decades and yet it's introducing bugs, not fixing long standing bugs, and reducing performance of not just the software but my computer system as a whole with their unnecessary bloatware hogging my systems resources for data collection and AI training. Adobe has STILL not fixed the polygonal lasso tool. It has been bugged for almost a decade in that you can't pan the work area or back space a set point unless you restart your selection over and over until it finally works. Then if you mess up your selection after you finally get the lasso to work the way it was designed to you have to start that whole process over again. I don't have to deal with that in affinity photo.