Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Photo, Designer and Publisher offer a gradient tool.
But the version available in Photo is less useful since the gradient-information is lost as soon as the gradient is applied.

Since Designer and Publisher store the information about direction, colors, midpoints etc. the gradients can be edited any time later.
This is not possible with gradients in Photo.
Please fix that,
Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are trying to add the gradient to a new pixel layer see this thread

 


Due to the fact that Boris Johnson is now our Prime Minister, punctuation, spelling and grammar will never be worried about ever again.  We now have far bigger problems to be worried about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, carl123 said:

If you are trying to add the gradient to a new pixel layer see this thread

Thanks but sorry, far too much text.

But as far as I understood, the user has to do something in a different way (create a fill-layer) to get same result
as he gets in the other 2 applications without this extra-voodoo. 
Sorry, thats a stupid developer-approach.

The gradient-tool in Photo does not behave like it does in Designer and Publisher - that needs to be fixed.
same tool ==>> same usage and same features!

no "you have to keep in mind that this very same feature needs to be handled completely different here, because..." - stuff.
usability, u know?


and, worst of all:    as it seems, a fill-layer (containing the gradient) can not be used as a mask-layer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Fritz_H said:

The gradient-tool in Photo does not behave like it does in Designer and Publisher

First of all, it is the Fill Tool in both Designer and Publisher; it is only called the Gradient tool in Photo to distinguish it more clearly from the Flood Fill Tool.

In any case the tool does in fact behave exactly the same way in all three applications.  The difference is not between the applications but rather in the type of layer selected - if you apply it to a vector object (shape, curve, etc.) the gradient is retained as a property of the object and can be modified later.  If you apply it to a pixel layer then the gradient is rasterized into the layer when you switch layers or tools, so it cannot be returned to.

This is completely sensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, fde101 said:

First of all...

Thanks, although your explanation may be technically correct, it completely ignores USABILITY!
You offer proper logical thoughts about layers and pixels etc.
But this is NOT how creative work is done, not how a creative process works.

Any software has to adapt to the user - not the other way around.

As soon as the user/artist/assembly-line worker/surgeon...   has to think about how to use the tool correctly
instead of thinking about the "creation" he is working on, there is room for improvement.

keep in mind: "Don´t make me think".  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Make_Me_Think

I know, there are a lots of people in this forum who do not understand this POV and say: " We have to do it THIS way, because the of the Software.."
Wrong.
Do not be satisfied with the second best solution as long as you can think of a better one.

There is no rule or law that stops Serif from implementing the Gradient-Tool properly in Photo OR at least make Fill-Layers work as Mask-Layers.
They just have to implement it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fritz_H said:

it completely ignores USABILITY!

Storing the gradient settings for a pixel layer makes no sense, considering that as soon as you use a brush on it, altering those settings would overwrite the brush stroke.

Doing nonsensical things for the sake of usability is more of a hinderance than a help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Doing nonsensical things for the sake of usability

That’s a wonderful oxymoron! :D


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher for Windows • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.8.4.186 • Designer for iPad 1.8.4.4 • iPadOS 13.7 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, fde101 said:

Storing the gradient settings for a pixel layer makes no sense, considering that as soon as you use a brush on it, altering those settings would overwrite the brush stroke.

Doing nonsensical things for the sake of usability is more of a hinderance than a help.

Please allow me to be honest: I am not interested to discuss my suggestion/request with you any further
since you may always find a way to construct a "..but what if.." - reply while i am trying to explain the basic-basics of Usability to you.

Fact is: Photo lacks an option to create editable gradients to be used as Mask layers.
I request this feature.

no further replies necessary, Thanks.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Fritz_H said:

Photo lacks an option to create editable gradients to be used as Mask layers.

You can do this using an ordinary rectangle (vector shape).  Use the opacity control of a standard gradient on the rectangle to adjust the opacity for the mask and drag the rectangle's layer in the Layers panel to the right edge of the thumbnail of the layer you want to mask with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Fritz_H said:

Any software has to adapt to the user - not the other way around.

There are many different user types. Which user type exactly should Photo adapt to? Your user type? Mine? A beginner? An expert in image editing? A photographer? A texture artist? A digital painter? An illustrator? The collage creator parent? The wiz kid programmer?

It is literally impossible to satisfy or even define every type of user. The best we can achieve is generalized user types - abstractions of reality. It is therefore impossible to have any software adapt to every single user's background, personal preferences, personal workflow, software experience, GUI expectations, and so on.

It is just plain impossible. Any user interface is a compromise. The more complex the software, the more the developers/UX designers have to compromise.

Now, having said all of this... I do agree with you that a bitmap gradient tool ought to "remember" the previous settings, and allow the user to edit an existing bitmap gradient. Not many image editors allow for this, however (only one comes to mind: PhotoLine). Even Photoshop can't do it. Truth is that by far the most design applications only allow vector objects to have "non-destructive" gradients. Node-based editors fare much better, and generally do support such a workflow.

So, unfortunately the "standard" consensus in layered image editors seems to be that bitmap gradients, once created, cannot be edited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Medical Officer Bones said:

(...)
So, unfortunately the "standard" consensus in layered image editors seems to be that bitmap gradients, once created, cannot be edited.

In my mind I see the following approach to implement a better solution:

the Gradient-Info (Parameters like Shape, Radius, Colors..) is stored, but the gradient itself is rasterized immediately.
Since the parameter-info is still there, the user can edit the gradient at any time later.
As soon as any other manipulation is done to this mask-layer, the software displays a warning, that the Gradient-Info will be lost.

I guess this approach is not too hard to implement but the result is very useful.
(e.g. in editing-situations where the gradient acts like a Graduated neutral-density filter for a certain effect: like darkening just the sky
brighten certain areas, like Olivio shows in this Video: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP5PcD2iJZs  )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.