Navigating the CS4 Adjustments Palette

The things you see here in dekeStuff are accessible only to registered users. Sign up for a free account.

Comments

This is interesting

Submitted by Archee on 6 December 2008 - 1:12am.

Add Mask by Default - in cs3 we could turn this off by clicking on Panel option in the layers menu. Now it's in Adjustment menu. Well, it's actually on both but in Layers menu it doesn't work the way it worked in CS3. I wonder if this is a bug.

Interesting

Submitted by fabulacious on 6 December 2008 - 6:36am.

indeed, I didn't notice they changed that behavior. I don't remember exactly how it worked in CS3 but didn't the panel options dialog say something like "use Default Mask on Adjustment Layers"? Maybe they just separated the Default Mask option for adjustments and fills and put them into their respective menus. I agree though that it is pretty confusing, I probably wouldn't look for the fill layer Default Mask checkbox in the panel options. It doesn't feel very consistent to have one option in a dropdown menu and a similar one hidden in a dialog box.

CS4 repeats the same bug like CS3

Submitted by Archee on 6 December 2008 - 9:12pm.

it seems that this came as an new dialog but the old one from CS3 is still there in layers Panel option. They also didn't fix the bug with the LAB mode, smart object emboss filter high saturation. The one you correct then if you click on the emboss filter again and it corrects to right color. Deke's know what I'm talking about, He can comment on it.

Photoshop Extended suggestion

Submitted by Rob777 on 3 December 2008 - 2:19am.

Interesting or just plain weird? You be the judge of that.

With Adobe trying to "bridge" 2D and 3D in Photoshop Extended, maybe they should take a few pages from Pixologic's book, and introduce "The Pixol" into the mix.

Yes The Pixol, or the concept of it under another name,"Ohh Noes, what is this Pixol he is talking about!? Make the strange man stop its utterance at once".

Pixols are 2.5D "pixels" with material, depth, and lighting data, and are more easily witnessed than explained with text.
Ppl can paint and "sculpt" in 2.5D on the canvas, and use several tranforms and brushes, and alphas on the pixol, so.... whats the difference you ask?

The introduction of the Z axis in a "painting program" thus making the said program more than a painting program.
If you want to see what its all about go check out an application called ZBrush, do a Google search for Pixologic ZBrush, I dont know if I can post url's here so I dont.
It uses pixols in 2.5D and 3D.... Come to think of it I guess Pixologic "invented" the Pixol....BUT....Did they really?!, I mean it was just a matter of time before someone stumbled upon the concept, perhaps "discover" is better a term than "invent" is in this case. I mean it would be like saying Colombus "invented" the new world, he discovered a place already full of ppl who discovered it wayyyy before he did, but I'm wandering away from the point

The point is, I dont think they can claim monopoly over the concept, maybe the name Pixol, but not the concept

I mean it would be cool and could serve as an "inhouse" 2.5D/ 3D generator within Photoshop Extended, I'm bringing this up in here on your page because I know you are at the foreforont of anything Adobe.
Whether its relevant to you is....your decision

Thank you

Rob

Photoshop users should be nice to everyone....Or take a picture of them and have revenge in Photoshop

links

Submitted by Archee on 3 December 2008 - 3:26pm.

LDC has ZBRUSH tutor and it's actually nice presentation. I just saw some maniac pixoling sculptures with his wacom tablet on presentation. The tablet look like a control panel to space shuttle hooked up to his mac and projector. It's amazing that many people go from 2D to 3D talk about 4D but in general completely skip 2.5D which I think in terms of animation is the best way to go. I love Toon Boom DIGITAL PRO where I hardly find similar matching product. Maybe RETAS but TBDP and the way the composition works is just without comparison. My personal preference is to take 3D out of photoshop and let adobe create similar soft with full 3D integration. 2.5D etc. Do it right, don't do it half way. It' s like video. Will I work on video in PS? NO. I can retouch few things but I rather use AE to fix segments and then to export timeline to AP and then to Encore. One of the reasons for that is that PS is going to consume more and more hardware resources and unless you keep the pace with current models the system is going to be so sloooooow. Even though that's why Adobe came with extended versions right. It should be called extended by one menu. Don't get excited.

Yes Archee a standalone app would be the way to go

Submitted by Rob777 on 3 December 2008 - 5:19pm.

I used PS Extended as an example to get the ball rolling, I could have used AE as well, the point was to get the ball rolling, I used PS Extended because at first "it" claimed to bridge the gap between 2D and 3D, but a rope "however well intended" across a canyon, does not a bridge make

If Adobe claims they want to tackle the market, they should come out with all they can dish out, without declaring war on other contenders, but rather coming up with an innovative product with innovatives "out of left field" revolutionary concepts, and put 3D and 2.5D in the hands of different crowd than Mr voted most likely to become a astrophysician or Algebra teacher

Of course, a standalone app would be the way to go, some sort of app that would include the workflow between PS and a 3D modeler that is based on a "non parametric" way of doing things, by non parametric I mean, an interface that would be geared towards modelling with a painting and artistic manner, as opposed to the parametric input boxes where you type values and hope you calculated it right and press enter, kind of like ZBrush and Mudbox, you know, the "heres a ball of clay, now go nuts using tools that makes you feel like your hands are actually touching the thing". Of course the thing would need a GOOD render engine, not some half assed "shut up and use this" kind of thing.
Ppl could bring the models in PS or access PS with and edit in PS function and texture the heck out of it with painting tools using bitmaps and alphas for polypainting and surface deformations based on grayscale of bitmaps, and so on

All tied in with an Adobe workflow, e.g : Compatibility with PS, AE, Flash, and the likes

Adobe, its time to get in the ring, I mean with Autodesk buying almost every 3D program that stood in the way of 3DS Max....These programs were bought to "put the breaks" on their developpment,or to be carefully examined and have their features redistributed across each other.... A market share with no competition means users will stand in front of a stagnant pool of price ranges and nonexistent variety, no real innovation at the profit of monopoly....Ok I digress

Photoshop users should be nice to everyone....Or take a picture of them and have revenge in Photoshop

Correct

Submitted by Archee on 3 December 2008 - 6:44pm.

Yep, that's the way to go or integrate a plug in that would bring all functions of PS to that specific soft. Funny part that any rendering engine would need quadro cards. If you look at Maya 2009, 3dSM, XSI, Lightwave or Solidworks all need high end cards and that cost like the pc itself. I just built up my dream pc on dell site. Built it not purchased. Quad Xeon 2 chips with quadro 4 GB and 16 GB RAM , ouuups 12K. Ouuuu. So no thank you. But in general PS 3D would work. I don't need it and you hardly get people using Maya go with PS but it's the same politics with autodesk. They bought Maya because of one fact. People either prefer Maya or 3DSM. Same way Adobe secured themselves with MX and Corel with all other garbarge. Nuance Omnipage and Paperport etc. So the discussion is very open

You didn't tell us

Submitted by deke on 3 December 2008 - 3:01am.

What you were listening to, man.

How can we make a decision without that?

This post created while listening to: David Byrne & Brian Eno, "Strange Overtones"

Keyboarding through the Adjustments Pal

Submitted by track_40 on 1 December 2008 - 10:16pm.

Deke,

Is there a way to "activate" the adjustments palette once you envoke an adjustment layer? Basically, if you choose "hue/sat" is there a way to get to the first field (hue) to become active by using the keyboard, instead of having to drag the bloody mouse down to click on it?

If not, this mouse stuff is really puttin' the hurt on what once was a super fast keyboard-based workflow.

PS - If you have multiple documents loaded in tabs, do you know of a way to flip between the document tabs using the keyboard?

PPS - If it weren't for all of your awesome videos (yes, I own them all), I wouldn't be so mouse-averse.

Just got word from John Nack

Submitted by deke on 2 December 2008 - 12:15pm.

PM for Photoshop and all around great guy. After confirming that there is currently no way to activate a numerical field in the Adjustments palette from the keyboard, he wrote:

I'm not sure how we could accomplish what you're requesting. If the numerical fields of an adjustment layer took focus when you created or selected the layer, you'd lose the ability to set brush or layer opacity by tapping the number keys. We could make that a preference (kind of bleh), and/or we could add some obscure shortcut (Shift-Return, maybe?) for putting focus on the first field, after which you could type in values and tab around. Would anyone find that, though?

My response: Forget the preference, Shift-Return, baby! I think that'd be just the ticket. Thoughts?

123next ›last »