order of adjustment layers - DPChallenge Forums

01/18/2007 01:31:30 AM · #52

Originally posted by Gordon:

I tend to do adjustments in a fairly heavy handed, obvious way, then back off the opacity and paint a mask to get the effect I want. I'll also filter the mask to smooth it out (e.g., gaussian blur on the mask)

Main idea is to do anything to about 110%-150% of what it should be to see the effect clearly, then back it out with opacity to get it subtle enough to not be obvious.

I agree with Gordon. I work similarly to this. A good thing about doing things this way is that it is non-destructive and if you decide next week that you screwed up it is easy to undue or redo subtle corrections.

01/18/2007 02:03:46 AM · #53

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I'd call this "non destructive single-step" editing; he can always toss the current duplicate layer and get back to where he was when he started it.

True but that was already a given if he simply keeps his RAW/JPGs from the camera. As you go on to say he can't go back to specific editing steps because of his workflow therefore it's destructive in nature.

An interesting sidelight: none of us have mentioned "snapshots", which are easy to make and allow reverting to each stage in an image's development at any time, until you close the image anyway. Assuming you bother to make them. You can set preferences to create a snapshot every time yous ave the document.

Snapshots can be used to define the source state for the history brush, btw: so you can finish work on state 12, set state 10 as your history state, and use the history brush at low opacity to reveal elements of state 10 in the state 12 layer...

R.

How do you make these snapshots?

And a second question, what is the difference between "opacity" and "fill"?

And all the styles - what exactly do each of them do, what would be their common uses?

And one more - what is "link layers" used for?

[I should probably go get a book on Photoshop]

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 02:07:51.

01/18/2007 02:10:16 AM · #54

OK, one more. Over time I've heard the description "non-destructive" over and over.

I don't understand why using adjustment layers is non-destructive, or, maybe what I don't understand is what is destructive about making adjustments in either duplicate layers or on the image directly. Is it the reverseability?

Also, some adjustment can only be made to layers directly, not in adjustment layers, why?

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

01/18/2007 02:26:46 AM · #55

Originally posted by ursula:

Basically anything that can't be undone easily is destructive. For example, applying curves directly to a pixel layer rather than using it as an adjustment layer. However you are right that duplicating the pixel layer will "preserve" the original but it doesn't allow you to go back and adjust the "curves" done to the duplicate layer because it was applied directly to the pixels in that layer and not as a separate adjustment layer. Obviously you can go back in the history and "undo" it but at some point that gets lost as the history builds up.

As for why things like Shadow/Highlights aren't available as separate non-destructive adjustment layers is anybody's guess. It should work just like curves, hue/saturation etc.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 02:41:04.

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

01/18/2007 02:33:52 AM · #56

Originally posted by ursula:

- Snapshots can be made from the History Palette. It's the little camera-like icon near the trash can.

- Opacity adjusts the entire layer's visibility while Fill only adjusts the original pixels on the layer minus any styles you apply to it. Fill is good for when you are creating web graphics particularly buttons in that if you apply a drop shadow to the layer and lower the Fill of that layer the original pixels will dim but the styles in this case the drop shadow will remain intact.

- Styles are just that. They add effects to the layer. I don't think I've ever used them but they are probably good for creating web buttons and such.

- Link Layers allows you to link two or more layers together. Great for when you need to move something around and need other things to move in relation to it. Good for web design when you have created a navigation and decide to move it and all of it's buttons to a new location.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 02:38:40.

01/18/2007 02:41:40 AM · #57

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by ursula:
OK, one more. Over time I've heard the description "non-destructive" over and over.

I don't understand why using adjustment layers is non-destructive, or, maybe what I don't understand is what is destructive about making adjustments in either duplicate layers or on the image directly. Is it the reverseability?

Also, some adjustment can only be made to layers directly, not in adjustment layers, why?

Basically anything that can't be undo easily is destructive. For example, applying curves directly to a pixel layer rather than using it as an adjustment layer. However you are right that duplicating the pixel layer will "preserve" the original but it doesn't allow you to go back and adjust the "curves" done to the duplicate layer because it was applied directly to the pixels in that layer and not as a separate adjustment layer. Obviously you can go back in the history and "undo" it but at some point that gets lost as the history builds up.

As for why things like Shadow/Highlights aren't available as separate non-destructive adjustment layers is anybody guess. It should work just like curves, hue/saturation etc.

Ah, thank you (for all the answers).

So "destructive" doesn't have anything to do with how the adjustment layers affects the pixels of the background layer? I sort of thought that because the adjustment layers look greyed out (they don't look like the picture), that they didn't change anything in the background layer, just made it look different, and that's why they were not destructive (compared to adjusting on the image itself, which seems to actually change the pixels of the image). But it is the "undoability" then. Hmmmm.

Now I'm trying to figure out how these adjustment layers actually work. They don't look like they're doing anything (when you just look at them), that is, they don't look like a picture. How in the world do they work? When you flatten the image in the end, do they actually change the pixels of the image that they are modifying?

Does it matter?

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

01/18/2007 02:57:29 AM · #58

It's both. Adjustment layers are non-destructive to the original pixels and it allows you to go back and change the settings at any point in the workflow.

Keep in mind whether you apply something like Curves via the Image/Adjustment/Curves menu or from the layer's palette the effect is the same. The only difference is you have that effect placed on a separate layer above the pixel layer. From there you can do any number of things like change the Curves' layer opacity or blending mode or use it's layer mask to apply it selectively. When you flatten it then it'll be like you applied the adjustment directly to the pixel layer making it difficult to change it's settings although you can always undo it or go into your history log text file and see what settings were used.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 04:24:19.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/18/2007 09:06:49 AM · #59

Originally posted by justamistere:

As mentioned earlier the opacity of layers can be adjusted, but so can a multitude of Blending-Modes.

The defaut is "Normal" in the combobox on the upper-left of the Layer-Tab. Tools such as pens/airbrushes, also have these same Blending-Modes options.

Choices available:
Normal, Dissolve, Behind, Clear, Darken, Multiply, Color Burn, Linear Burn, Lighten, Screen, Color Dodge, Linear Dodge, Overlay, Soft Light, Hard Light, Vivid Light, Linear Light, Pin Light, Difference, Exclusion, Hue, Saturation, Color

There's also Threshold & Pass Through for some layer styles. And these are just the simple blending modes - if you look in layer styles, blending options, there's a whole host of more subtle blending methods.

The photoshop help actually has a section 'blending mode examples' with pictures that might give you a starting point.

The main one I use for photos is soft light. If you put a new, 50% grey layer over the image, in soft light blending mode, then it is a subtle, non-destructive and editable way to dodge and burn. Paint black to burn, white to dodge, shades of grey in between to do more subtle effects. Then when finished, play with the global opacity to control the final strength.

Overlay, lighten, darken and screen can also be somewhat useful to adjust bad exposures.

I also use 'luminosity' mode a lot, for example, if you do a pretty extreme curves adjustment layer, you'll see not just the brightness change, but the saturation shift as well in normal blending mode. If you switch to 'luminosity' mode, the change will just be to the pixel brightness, leaving saturation to be adjusted by another layer.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 09:14:08.

justamistere

Nikon D3s

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

01/18/2007 10:01:35 AM · #60

Thanks Gordon for expanding on those tool-settings.

Yes, since I'm a Software Programmer, too, sometimes I RTFM, Read the f+ Manual. I Copy/Pasted all those Opacities from the online CS2 Help HTMs. There are Explanations/Descriptions of each. Next step for me is to print it and experiment more with each and combinations of them.

I wasn't aware that these same 24 blending modes also were available for your spot-editing tools like brushes/"spraycans".

Do whatever works best, or try some new-experiments. I always like to know the capacities/features of any Software-Toolbox.

If "Necessity is the mother of invention", well ingorance demotes me.

01/18/2007 11:23:53 AM · #61

Originally posted by Gordon:

I also use 'luminosity' mode a lot, for example, if you do a pretty extreme curves adjustment layer, you'll see not just the brightness change, but the saturation shift as well in normal blending mode. If you switch to 'luminosity' mode, the change will just be to the pixel brightness, leaving saturation to be adjusted by another layer.

Now this is going to be useful. Thank you!

01/18/2007 11:26:48 AM · #62

Is anyone else scared that Ursula is getting all this valuable information that will make her shots even MORE incredible??

01/18/2007 11:29:03 AM · #63

Originally posted by Melethia:

Is anyone else scared that Ursula is getting all this valuable information that will make her shots even MORE incredible??

Or maybe more credible :))))

Rae-Ann

Fujifilm FinePix S9000

01/18/2007 11:35:32 AM · #64

She may...but there are those of us lurking.....hee hee
Of course, Ursala is a ribbon queen without this knowledge..we may very well be in for it!

Actually I just did a restoration of an old photo and used layers and layer masks alot for the first time.

This thread has been awesome!! Thanks guys for all the wee tips :)

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

01/18/2007 11:45:58 AM · #65

Originally posted by Rae-Ann:

She may...but there are those of us lurking.....

Note to myself: Be wary of lurkers, especially lurkers who are free-lance photographers and restore old photos .... :)

Rae-Ann

Fujifilm FinePix S9000

01/18/2007 11:49:43 AM · #66

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
She may...but there are those of us lurking.....

Note to myself: Be wary of lurkers, especially lurkers who are free-lance photographers and restore old photos .... :)

um...scuse me fellow Canuck...just starting out, it really just sounds better then unemployed bum ; )....

note to self....study Ursula portfolio..lurk in her threads..pick up hints...

raish

Olympus C-2500L

01/18/2007 11:50:59 AM · #67

In the case of selected areas, if I'm not mistaken, an editing process carried out with an adjustment layer always affects the whole picture, whereas the same process when chosen from the layers menu will affect only the selected area.

I was mistaken once in 1967 and possibly again last year. I look forward to being wrong about this and someone telling me how.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/18/2007 11:57:48 AM · #68

Originally posted by raish:

If you add an adjustment layer, with an active selection, the adjustment layer will automatically get a mask that matches the active selection, so the adjustment will just happen to the selected area (but you can change the selection after the fact by modifying the created mask) As was mentioned in some other threads on this, a selection is just an active version of an 8-bit greyscale image (just like a mask in many ways, or like a channel)

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 11:58:29.

01/18/2007 11:59:13 AM · #69

If I'm not mistaken, Raish, I think he just said you're not mistaken. But I'm wrong a lot more than you've been.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/18/2007 12:04:34 PM · #70

Originally posted by Melethia:

If I'm not mistaken, Raish, I think he just said you're not mistaken. But I'm wrong a lot more than you've been.

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I think I said that he was mistaken. But I've been wrong more often than I'm right.

01/18/2007 12:08:06 PM · #71

OK. What I think is this... no one is mistaken but several if not all may or may not be confused.

I make a selection, create a new layer from "copy" based on that selection, my actions will only affect the selection that is that layer.

If, however, I choose an adjustment layer, like "curves", then while on that layer I make a selection, the adjustment I make in curves only affects that selection, not the whole layer.

Is that close?

01/18/2007 12:18:50 PM · #72

Originally posted by Rae-Ann:

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
She may...but there are those of us lurking.....

Note to myself: Be wary of lurkers, especially lurkers who are free-lance photographers and restore old photos .... :)

um...scuse me fellow Canuck...just starting out, it really just sounds better then unemployed bum ; )....

note to self....study Ursula portfolio..lurk in her threads..pick up hints...

01/18/2007 12:21:25 PM · #73

Originally posted by Melethia:

Except that what I've been doing is making the selection first, then calling an adjustment layer, and it works only for that selection (or mask, if I'm not mistaken). For example, if you look at channels and you make a mask from only the red channel data, then call a levels adjustment, it will only affect that data when you make the levels adjustments.

I've only known for a couple days that you can use adjustment layers on selected areas. It's been one of those "wow" things for me (I got to get better words).

For example, this image:

I selected the blue channel and applied levels (in its own adjustment layer) and Noise Ninja to it, inverted, and applied levels (in its own adjustment layer) and sharpening only to it. Using the masks created from the channels, it was easy to switch back and forth between the two.

Something else I discovered yesterday (maybe this is old news, but it was a discovery for me), if I select a channel (for example the red channel), then make a duplicate layer, invert the selection, clear data, fill with 50% grey, and blend in soft-light (play with saturation, maybe even desat entirely), I get a ready-made dodge/burn layer for only the channel in question. I can then blur the channel if I want, and adjust opacity and all that. That's what I did in this image:

yesterday, and, at least to my eyes, it brought out the reds beautifully. I like bringing out the reds.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 12:31:54.