AP Tools

[jackamus]

I am using AP for the first time, prviously I used Photoshop which was pretty easy to use.

I'm trying to remove part of the image using either the Erase or the Clone tools'

I've read the manual on each of these tools but it doesn't seem to actually tell you how to use them - it only tells you what they can do and how to adjust their parameters.

In Photoshop you could use the Clone tool by using 'alt' to select the sample area and then click the part you didn't want.

Does AP work in a similar manner? If so where can I find the instructions?

Also as I use the various adjustments part of the image momentarily blurs - is this a bug?

 

[Twolane]

You might have a look at this video, but I'm not sure if it's what you're looking for.

 

[jackamus]

42 minutes ago, Twolane said:

You might have a look at this video, but I'm not sure if it's what you're looking for.

 

Thanks for the help. this would do what I want but I would also like to know how to use the Clone and Eraser tools.

I do suspect that I missed something to do with the layers. I will go back and check.

[iconoclast]

The Clone Tool works the same way as the Clone Tool in Photoshop does. Even the handling is the same (Alt key to pick up pixels, then release Alt and click to the target point). Take a look at the settings in the Tool Bar too. E.G. in most cases "Aligned" is the best choice.

Concerning the Eraser, I think there is no big difference too. But I would probably prefer to use a mask for it, because it is a non-destructive way to erase. You can always restore everything you erased by painting with black colour on the mask, if you repaint it with white colour. I'm not sure at the moment if that would work with the Eraser Tool too (as it does e.G. in GIMP). But you should be able to redo erasing with the Redo Brush. So there are different options to do what you want to.

[jackamus]

The mistake I was making was not selecting the image layer.

Since using it I find it is very erratic and slow. Is this normal or a bug?

[iconoclast]

In my case it works pretty good. But I'm on Windows 10. So I can't say if there is a bug on the Mac version.

[R C-R]

4 hours ago, jackamus said:

The mistake I was making was not selecting the image layer.

Since using it I find it is very erratic and slow. Is this normal or a bug?

It works fine & quickly on my Mac (specs in my sig below) but I don't use it on huge files.

How large (in pixels) is the layer you are working on & is it an Image, Pixel, or some other kind of layer?

[jackamus]

9 hours ago, R C-R said:

It works fine & quickly on my Mac (specs in my sig below) but I don't use it on huge files.

How large (in pixels) is the layer you are working on & is it an Image, Pixel, or some other kind of layer?

The images were 12MB pdf. I went back to do a screen shot to show the blurring but couldn't reproduce the problem. I can only assume that it was a one-off glitch.

[iconoclast]

In case of Image layers it needs a little more time on first click, because the layer must be rasterized first. Possibly it is the same or takes even more time with PDfs, because PDF is not an image file format, but a sort of container format that can contain images, text (as vector data) and vector graphics.

[jackamus]

I see what you mean. It would have been better to scan the original image as a jpeg rather than a pdf.

[Return]

You can rasterize pdf too.
But if you use a new on top pixel layer and the option current layer and below it also would work on a placed pdf file.

[Pšenda]

1 hour ago, jackamus said:

It would have been better to scan the original image as a jpeg rather than a pdf.

Or as TIFF if you care about the quality of the source image.