Phil_rose

Oops, here's the picture.

Hi, I generated the noise as in the tutorial. This is what I ended up with. I finished up using Topaz Star Effects and Lens Effects and pulled them back with transparency and Screen. Phil

Ah, so it is! So I started over from the beginning and now I am just working from looking at it and adjusting channels and levels to make it work and it seems be working. I'll show you finished product when it's done! Thanks all for the help and let you know if anything else comes up.

(It doesn't come with an image to use...)

I did add that link above. Here it is again. Thanks! http://designstacks.net/create-a-realistic-star-field-with-space-dust-in-photoshop

This is the beginning of the tutorial and the look is totally different than it should... I wonder why. The file is the right size/resolution. Any ideas? Thanks!

I'm not but I followed along with the tutorial and created black layers. I might start from the beginning again!

Hmm, thanks for this but I don't seem to be getting the effect that I was expecting. I'll add the link to the tutorial here. I'm trying to create a star field and I followed through the instructions up to the point where tells me to work on levels on the lower layer. But what I'm saying is this which is just flat grey with no stars showing. In the second screenshot you will see what I did that gets a little closer to what I'm looking for but is still not right. I was hoping for a black BG with a multitude of stars. And I still doing something wrong? http://designstacks.net/create-a-realistic-star-field-with-space-dust-in-photoshop/2

Hi all, I'm following through a tutorial and it's telling me to enter the levels shown in the second of the screen grabs that I'm going to attach to this. But I noticed that there are three level boxes and they do not work in percentages in the same way as Affinity Photo does. Does anyone know how I could convert these figures as shown in the tutorial into percentages so that I could match it in Photo? Thanks very much for any information you might have! Phil

Ah, but I'm not technically adept nor interested in such aspects. I'm a photographer and designer rather than a programmer. I'm more interested in puerile humour. You see, 'turd' is a euphemism for faeces and so, to a childish person like myself, 'turdsize' is funny and 'speckles' just makes it more so.

Speckles??? This is just getting worse!

Turdsize? Always an important factor.

Eh? That makes no sense. You can't live without an align tool nor can you export that functionality to another party though you can export this vector tracing. It's a question of priorities. AD is a steal at the price so you do need to kind of take that into account and there's really no need to be taking them to task about it. They need to decide what order to do things and they are right to say that, since there is a good free alternative, they would put this to the back of the queue. It's a shame but really, I don't think they are doing anything wrong by being open and honest about it.

I have just discovered the Batch Jobs. Nice feature but not much use if I have to go in, choose all the required images, choose all the options, macros, sizes etc, each time. I have created a macro to put my watermark on an image and I'd love to be able to run a batch process and just point to a folder and have it run through a presaved batch. Any chance that could be added to Photo? I mean, ideally we'd have Droplets as in PS but that might be getting ahead of myself! Thanks! Phil

Still no sign. Any chance?