Pixel Vs. Image Vs. (Photoshop) Smart Object Functionality

[DannyBCreative]

Hey Guys,

I know that when importing images in to AP, an (image) layer will maintain its original quality when scaling down then back for for example. I know once converted to a (pixel) layer, this will no longer be the case. Effectively, an (image) layer sort of works like a smart object in Photoshop, though not as powerful.

My question is: Is it possible to convert a pixel layer to an image layer, so from that point forward it will retain its image quality as mentioned above, sort of like a Photoshop smart object.

Thanks in advance!!

 

[Old Bruce]

The Pixel layer will retain its original dpi/ppi regardless of the scaling. It is x pixels by y pixels. It may occupy a much smaller area but it is still (say) 1600 x 900. Once you export the document all is changed to the Document's dpi/ppi, image and pixel layers.

[DannyBCreative]

Interesting. Ok, so image layer or pixel layer, whatever the dimensions of the layer when the image is added to the scene, they'll remain constant and quality will not degrade if resized down, then back up, so long as the project is not exported? I imagine rasterizing will commit the resolution as well, which is probably why I was confused about this, seeing that pixel layers are rasterized layers.

Thanks Old Bruce.

[Old Bruce]

4 hours ago, DannyBCreative said:

I imagine rasterizing will commit the resolution as well,

Yes.

[DannyBCreative]

Is there a way to see what the original dimensions were? For example, I have a layer that is 400x400px and I scale it down to 120x120, but then decide later that i want it back to its original size. Do I have to remember what my original size was, or is there some info setting that will show me its original size?

[Old Bruce]

7 hours ago, DannyBCreative said:

Is there a way to see what the original dimensions were? For example, I have a layer that is 400x400px and I scale it down to 120x120, but then decide later that i want it back to its original size. Do I have to remember what my original size was, or is there some info setting that will show me its original size?

This you cannot do. You'll have to remember yourself.

[walt.farrell]

8 hours ago, DannyBCreative said:

Is there a way to see what the original dimensions were? For example, I have a layer that is 400x400px and I scale it down to 120x120, but then decide later that i want it back to its original size. Do I have to remember what my original size was, or is there some info setting that will show me its original size?

If you did not Rasterize the layer after you scaled it, yes, you can, because it will have a different DPI than the rest of the document.

1. In Photo, I think you would need to know the original DPI of the pixel layer. If you know its original DPI (say, 300), then you can select that pixel layer using the Move Tool, and the Context Toolbar will tell you its current DPI (which should be larger, if you scaled down). For example, in a test I just did:
     Knowing that, you would need to enlarge it to reduce the DPI back to 300. That means you need to increase it by a factor of 1.713333333333333 (in this case), which you can do in the Transform panel by making sure the aspect ratio is locked, than typing *=1.713333333333333 into either the W or the H box.
2. Or, you could send the file to Publisher, if you own that application. Within Publisher, with that pixel layer selected, you could use Layer > Convert to Image Resource from the menu, which will make it an embedded (Image) layer. Then the Context Toolbar wll show you this:
   
   You can click on the pulldown, which will give you this:
   
   
   and you can simply click on Original Size without needing to perform any calcularions. You can then Rasterize the layer again to get a pixel layer.

However, if you Rasterized the layer after scaling it, you would need to have noted and remem bered its scaled DPI (before the rasterization) in order to perform any transformations.

[walt.farrell]

23 hours ago, DannyBCreative said:

My question is: Is it possible to convert a pixel layer to an image layer, so from that point forward it will retain its image quality as mentioned above, sort of like a Photoshop smart object.

But getting back to this question specifically, yes, you can do that in Publisher as I mentioned just above.

[DannyBCreative]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

But getting back to this question specifically, yes, you can do that in Publisher as I mentioned just above.

Thanks, Walt. But for the work I do, jumping to Publisher doesn't seem like a reasonable option. I do own Publisher by the way, but I use it for what it it's intended for, and not that often. I use AP for high-end composite work, so jumping into Publisher, to scale an image layer just doesn't work well.

Thanks for chiming in though. At least now I know that I can scale down and back up any layer without losing image quality. That was the more important question I had. For now, I can just eyeball the scale if/when needed.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, DannyBCreative said:

But for the work I do, jumping to Publisher doesn't seem like a reasonable option. I do own Publisher by the way, but I use it for what it it's intended for, and not that often. I use AP for high-end composite work, so jumping into Publisher, to scale an image layer just doesn't work well.

Note that most functions of the Photo Persona of the Photo application are also available in Publisher when you own both. And if you also own Designer, you also have all the functions of the Designer Persona of the Designer application available in Publisher.

So, except when you need the Liquify Persona or the Tone Mapping Persona of Photo, or the Export Persona of Photo or Designer, or the few other Photo functions that are only in the Photo application, you can instead do your work in Publisher.

[DannyBCreative]

Problem is UI. Publisher is a layout tool at its core, like InDesign, which I wouldn't use either for high-end photo manipulation or compositing work. I do own all three apps, and I do know how they can all be accessed from Publisher, but workflow would be drastically different, and in my opinion, counter to that of a professional workflow for this particular type of work. 

I do appreciate you taking the time to offer the suggestion, I just don't feel it's necessarily the right approach for the work I do.

Thanks Walt!

[R C-R]

4 hours ago, DannyBCreative said:

I do own all three apps, and I do know how they can all be accessed from Publisher, but workflow would be drastically different, and in my opinion, counter to that of a professional workflow for this particular type of work. 

Unless you need something available only in one of AP's personas that is not available in APub's Photo Persona, you could do almost everything in APub, including switching between its Publisher & Photo personas without ever having to run AP itself.