JimmyJack

An alternative: You can also just set the black bits to the Erase blend mode. That'll burn a hole right through multiple layers of any type (if you want it to ). (this assumes you don't mind a rasterized final output) As far as the Boolean Subtract method goes.... a little tip. Select all (or a lot) of the black "to erase" bits at once, Boolean Add them together and do just one (or at least fewer) Subtract(s). (rather than subtracting one at a time)

Thanks. Yes, a bit drastic. That's why I was avoiding it until after posting. Thanks MEB. And I see now that Beta 8 is out. Fingers crossed . (Edit: I see MEBs answer below. Will amend the title so people are aware... and won't repost for 8.)

When using artistic text tool the orange/red triangle handles do not work at all: AD 1.6.0 Beta 7 (and now 8). I'm a bit surprised I don't see others reporting this so I'm guessing it might be on my end. (I've restarted the program several times, but haven't done a hard restart. What is it again? Hold down cmd?)

Yes, that is the trade off. I should have started with "If you don't mind using an FX....."

There's an angle input field in FX Gradient Overlay. But all the controls there are input.... nothing on canvas.

Hmm. I used your file (minus the problem result layer posted above). Turned on Preserve Alpha. Merged visible Ran Detect edges. Result: And with a simple blend mode change you can go in either direction:

My workaround of choice is to use Precise Clipping. It's never off when I work anyway. I just noticed the rough edges in the original examples. The whole thing with the Reverse Curve wasn't meant as a practical solution. It was more of a diagnostic exercise to figure what the heck was going on if interested eyes are watching. Not sure how (or if) simply turning on Precise Clipping affects a single curve direction, but that, at least, seems to be the issue when it's off.

Nope, never made it compound. (not even sure if a vector pen clip is doable in a compound. Bitmap fill yes. But I digress). Donut > convert to curves (gives you a curveS layer) > divide: you get two circles (I went straight to divide from the donut to skip the middle step). Grab one circle and click Reverse Curve (Node tool). Re-subtract the two circles to go back to a CurveS "donut" shape. Clipping now works.

Ah. Interesting. Yesterday both did nothing, but today I'm getting the same as you. So I surmise that the boolean is reordering points. To test: 1) I used the Donut, Divided, re-subtracted....... did not work. 2) I used the Donut, Divided, grabbed one (either) circle and reversed the curve, re-subtracted....... worked. So I'm thinking that the Donut tool, and not the Cog tool, has opposing curve directions upon creation that don't play well when Precise Clipping is off.... for some reason. If the same experiment is done on the Cog, clipping will break and act like the original Donut.

This isn't working for me. Maybe just a PC thing? How did you perturb? Add points/move? Boolean? Precise clipping is still off right? Can someone else try on Mac?

I believe this is happening because Preserve Alpha is not checked on the G Blur adjustment. Seems like a bug to me.

Another non transform panel/input solution.... as nice as that is. For a Rectangle: All you need is a 45º line. With snapping and CMD constrain, super simple. Readjustable on the fly. 1) Draw rectangle. Duplicate (CMD J). 2) Draw line. Snap to corner, drag while holding CMD (mac) to constrain to 45º. (Doesn't need to have a stroke (in fact it's better that way) 3) Resize the copy with CMD (mac) held down (snap to geometry needs to be on). If you're anywhere close to the line it'll snap all the way through the resize. Resut: Can be any size. Readjustable.

The basic brushes, for me, get anti-aliased regardless of the clip quality setting. (It's a little dirty but AA nonetheless.) But, I've given up on asking "why?"... in this case, one and not the other. Which leads me to the next point: Certainly seems that way. Why one and not the other? Bug .... oversight ... aliens, I dunno.

Turn on "Use Precise Clipping" in Preferences > Performance. (It'll solve the non antialiased clip issue (for text & brushes other than basic) also.)

What is quickly?..... or easy ? Did the below in about 5 minutes. But it certainly ain't no vector distort... 1) Draw rectangle 2) Power duplicate it down in size 3) Add a centered star with 0 inner radius (double star works too). The only tricky thing here is that in order for the star lines to line up with the corners (I think) it has to be rotated 90º. (star proportions should match the rectangle) Throw the star into a copy of the biggest rectangle to clip it. 4) "Mask" out the center with another simple rectangle.... or add a couple points and mask out whatever section/piece you want (pictured). Or clip it with the inverse. Still somewhat editable.... i.e. the star is still editable as a star.

Actually, more accurately i guess, it's a combination of dimensional knife and real time boolean subtract. All hopeful wishing aside... It's a huge hole (pun intended) in Designer and one of the things (top five) that keeps me from full adoption.

A vector erase tool is essentially a knife tool with dimension. We should have one. Today please .... holding breath.

In AP. Live Filters > Diffuse. Works on vectors too! (there's also a destructive version under the Filters dropdown)

Ha!! It's all inpainting . All the more reason why it's advisable to find replacement parts from the image itself. That way one doesn't need to try and match imagery coming from a different source to the overall image quality. Yeah, looks like a scan/photo of a printed piece. A little too tight to be a newspaper, so I'm going with.... a yearbook .

I sincerely hope you still have those Jaguars!! Gotta be late 60's right? As far as the eyes go, I'd pirate the eyes from the other guitarist. I added a levels adj, and set the layer to darken. Distant Sounds - v1_jj.afphoto

Ah good!! I was just coming back to post the right stacking. I took a little time in the selection refinement process. Take a look at how tight the B & W view is (of the mask). Tight but not hard. (Frankly it could even be a lot tighter!! ) hello *no* halo JJ.afphoto

Completely resolved. I simply had the (second) blur filter in the wrong position in the layer stack. It was outside of the mask.

Haven't we been doing this the past 5 pages? No and no. (take a look at MEB's mask in black and white) Again, you are already doing every bit of work and editing in this regard. Your selection method and refinement is everything you need (well hopefully)... IOW, the quality of the result using a mask has everything to do with the quality of the initial selection/refinement process (notice I didn't say mask. Ultimately they are one and the same. (Although a mask is non destructive and super easy to tweak down the road if needed.)) The semitransparent thing in refinement is, imho, a non issue in this particular case. But, if you want a harder edge you can use the ramp to get rid of a lot of it. Personally I think a hard edge is going to look worse, but that may boil down to personal preference. Cheers.

Good Morning T, Thanks for posting the file! (BTW, To the above: not at all. I completely understood what the cloning/painting was being used for. ) So MEB explained why you were getting the halo. Is that issue now off the table? Well at least we got rid of all the nasty terrible inpainting (Seinfeld: not that there's anything wrong with that ). But the above IS destructive. (not picking on it, just pointing out.) And at this point in the process, you have already, faiap, made the mask. So that work is done.

i Hope I can deliver . On a related but different issue I wish the blur above was a bit more even. There are a couple hot spots...