Creating A Movable Grid Layer …

[Dr_No]

Hello and welcome once more to: How We Do Dat, Hah? Today the Big Question is:

How to create a Movable Grid on its own Separate Layer?

Creating the grid is no problem. BUT: What's the Secret of the Ages for making that Grid Layer a SEPARATE MOVABLE layer that is NOT integrated solidly with the underlying layer (and therefore immutable, immovable, and unchangeable.

The goal is to create (a) Image layer @ bottom; (b) Grid layer above; (3) color fill layer with squares in different grid blocks in-between the image and the grid layers. Creating a grid layer is no problem - BUT: it will NOT allow its layer visibility to be turned off - that's only doable thru the Grid Manager (‘turn grid off’). The unlocked base layer displays the grid even after the separate grid layer is off until it's disabled in Grid Manager. 

Image of project attached below.

How we do dis, hah … ? Thanks to all for your input and suggestions.

[Gnobelix]

Hello @Dr_No,

i would draw a grid with the pen tool and and save it as an asset.
This asset can then be placed over a layer and thus be treated as a separate layer.

I hope this helps.

 

Cheers

[Old Bruce]

You do realize you can move the grid.

    

 

[Dr_No]

Gnobelix: If all else fails, I may need to do that, but it's rather an inflexible solution, yes?

 

Old Bruce: Yes, I saw that. It still doesn't address the problem of making the grid layer its own layer that can be turned on and / or off. As it is now, I can ‘create’ a grid on a separate pixel layer, but it is bound to the image layer and can only be on or off as a binary option. I need (no, want) the grid as the upper layer in a 3-layer ‘sandwich’ with image at bottom, grid at top, and color squares layer as the ‘meat’ in the sandwich.

[Old Bruce]

3 minutes ago, Dr_No said:

the problem of making the grid layer its own layer that can be turned on and / or off.

View > Show Grid

4 minutes ago, Dr_No said:

I need (no, want) the grid as the upper layer in a 3-layer ‘sandwich’ with image at bottom, grid at top, and color squares layer as the ‘meat’ in the sandwich.

That is pretty much how the Grid works, it is visually overtop everything.

[Lisbon]

Hi Dr_No

I have a suggestion, but it's a completely different workflow.
It involves creating checker board that will serve as a guide.

1) Duplicate background and and set opacity to 50%
2) Filters > Colours > Procedural texture > Preset: Basic Shapes / Chequered

At this point you can change the size of the squares and change the position of the "grid" by dragging your mouse on the canvas.

3) With the Flood Select Tool (check Contiguous) you can select any square

[Dr_No]

Lisbon … There's a certain elegance to that as an approach, but its technique locks the design in concrete since the 'grid' and the image are inseparable. To be sure, there are times in future I can anticipate this being a perfectly workable method, but for this particular image, I'm needing a grid.

Old Bruce … If that method were to allow a CLEAN image as the base, it would be fine. Problem is, unless I've completely overlooked a ‘Secret Sauce’ storage closet, I cannot separate the grid from the image. If I create a grid on a pixel layer above the image and then hide that layer, the grid is still viewable on the base image. Yes, I can rid myself of this meddlesome grid by clicking it off, but that's rather self-defeating, as it's no longer visible to indicate where to add squares on the intermediate layer. When I click the visibility of the ‘grid’ layer back ‘on,’ I can discern no visible difference. That layer responds to nothing - no blend mode changes it, no opacity variant changes it – it exists outside space-time. Shouldn't creating a simple grid on its own layer - responsive to blend modes, etc - be more direct and inherently more functional than this … ? Affinity, please help clear away this problem …

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, Dr_No said:

If I create a grid on a pixel layer above the image and then hide that layer, the grid is still viewable on the base image.
{...}
That layer responds to nothing

A grid made using the Grid & Snapping Axis Manager is not a document layer. That is why it does not respond to anything other than the options set in that manager or by toggling "Show Grid" on & off on the View menu (or with the keyboard shortcut for that).

[NotMyFault]

I did not fully get your question. If we use Lisbons approach in an variant:

• create a live procedural texture
• set it opacity to 50%

You get a grid as separate layer, sensitive to all blend modes etc, can be switched on/off.

what is still missing?

If required we can create additional layers of 1px wide lines in different colors between the checkered board.

So could you give one complete example / mockup how the grid and colored block should look?
 

[R C-R]

3 hours ago, Lisbon said:

1) Duplicate background and and set opacity to 50%
2) Filters > Colours > Procedural texture > Preset: Basic Shapes / Chequered

At this point you can change the size of the squares and change the position of the "grid" by dragging your mouse on the canvas.

3) With the Flood Select Tool (check Contiguous) you can select any square

I was having trouble making step 3 work because in step 1 I duplicated a background photo layer with a bunch of different colors in the squares created in step 2.

For me, it worked much better if in step 1 I created a solid black pixel layer & used that instead of a duplicate of any existing background layer.

[Dr_No]

R C-R … Thanks for the clarification as to why the ‘grid’ layer is non-responsive. That's quite helpful to know.

 

Not My Fault … Let's see if I follow this accurately (please feel free to correct any incorrect ‘understanding’): If I …

(1) Duplicate the image layer (which is not the best of all possible worlds for this particular project) and, (2) create a live procedural texture @ 50% opacity, then the IMAGE is NOT part of a visible grid? The GRID overrides the image as the visual and its IMAGE drops away? If that's the way it will work In Real Life, that may be perfectly useful as the operative mechanism. I do not currently have available  mockup of how the Grid & Image will look, but will be able to (hopefully) use this tip to work up a test image to attach in a bit. 

Apologies to all who have replied for being (in TullWorld Terms) ‘thick as a brick’ … it's just a ‘thang’ that was so much more directly done in (dare I say the name?) … Fauxtoshop. Old habits and slow deaths, y' know …

One last query: How does one use SINGLE-PIXEL grid? I have no problem accessing it or making it live (evanescently) on a pixel layer. As soon as I release the mouse, the single-pixel portion goeth ‘POOF!’ - I can find no way to fill that 1px line with color. If I understood it's operative mechanism, I could create a ‘template pixel line layer’ and duplicate as many as needed (would that require multiple layers, or would all dupes be constrained to the origination layer?) So many questions - so little thyme …

[R C-R]

1 minute ago, Dr_No said:

Not My Fault … Let's see if I follow this accurately (please feel free to correct any incorrect ‘understanding’): If I …

(1) Duplicate the image layer (which is not the best of all possible worlds for this particular project) and, (2) create a live procedural texture @ 50% opacity, then the IMAGE is NOT part of a visible grid? The GRID overrides the image as the visual and its IMAGE drops away? If that's the way it will work In Real Life, that may be perfectly useful as the operative mechanism. I do not currently have available  mockup of how the Grid & Image will look, but will be able to (hopefully) use this tip to work up a test image to attach in a bit. 

As in the reply I posted just as you were posting your last one, for me this works much better if I use a solid black pixel layer in step 1  instead of duplicating any existing layer. Also, I used a regular destructive  procedural texture, not a live one -- the live one does not work with the Flood Fill tool, as far as I can tell.

[Dr_No]

R C-R … Attached is a screencap which shows the result of duplicating the image layer and then applying a live procedural texture:

As you see, its main drawback is that it's a One-Size-Fits-All, with all differently-colored squares being equally affected by the Blend Mode - it's a Universal application of effect. I'll next try your destructive PT on a solid black layer. That sounds as if it's moving more in the direction I'd like this to take. Thanks again.

 

[Dr_No]

Update time: Attached is a screencap of the workaround combining several of the concepts presented in this thread. The final solution was to create (with the Rectangle tool) a Master Width Rectangle and then duplicate vert/horiz as needed. Then on to combining the positioned separate rectangles into a unified grid. This can now have a colorbox (a/k/a ‘title box') placed at bottom at whatever height is needed for text and filled with the grid color. Separate squares of the grid color can be created and placed where needed and text added over them. I'll post updates to indicate how well (or un-) this method works in practice. It appears the combined approach of the posts here has enabled me to achieve the endgoal thru the ‘Backdoor’ technique (If y' can't go in thru the front door … ). Thanks again to all. Here's the current screencap …

 

[Lisbon]

51 minutes ago, R C-R said:

For me, it worked much better if in step 1 I created a solid black pixel layer & used that instead of a duplicate of any existing background layer.

Interesting.
If I apply the "Chequered" procedural texture it completely ignores the contents of the pixel layer and creates a checker board.
This is why I suggested duplicating the background.
But, most important is that it worked for you.

[R C-R]

11 minutes ago, Lisbon said:

Interesting.
If I apply the "Chequered" procedural texture it completely ignores the contents of the pixel layer and creates a checker board.
This is why I suggested duplicating the background.

Well, that is how it works for me now (& how I expected it to work based on past experience) -- I have no idea what I was doing before when I was testing this about an hour ago. 😕