Jump to content
DarkClown

Interesting behaviour of masked layer

Recommended Posts

I guess my confusion was due to years of PS!

In PS I never found this distinction really clear, in fact, I never bother thinking about it at all.

But R C-R is 100% spot on.

In After Effects there are two ways to affect the transparency of another layer, using a mask layer or a matte layer.

Tweaking the opacity affects the visibility of the layer as well.

I guess, semantically speaking, this makes Photo more of a compositing software than what PS is.


Andrew
-
Win10 x64 AMD Threadripper 1950x, 64GB, 512GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD + 2TB, dual GTX 1080ti
Dual Monitor Dell Ultra HD 4k P2715Q 27-Inch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I was pretty sure I used pixel layers as clipping mask some time ago. But I reviewed some older files and it occurs it isn't the case...

Obviously I mixed it up with my worklow in PS. Actually I have to work parallel with PS and AP, so it there might be some confusion in my memory. Sorry for that.
I will post my wish for b/w-layers support for masks in the Feature Request Section.

This thread here helped me a lot to understand how masks work in Affinty, so I thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We definitely need support for b/w images as a mask.  I want to use textures like paint splatter as a layer matte, but it is impossible at the moment.  The grain/splatter/noise textures that I want to use are too integrate to create an image with an alpha channel.  I have to use PS to create a file to use as a matte first...not a good workflow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the same as DarClown. This is ridicoulous!! A mask opacitiy set to 0% should mean the mask doesn't exist/affects the layer. And for example  if a black mask is set to 50% opacity it should correspond to a mask that is pained with 50% gray. I use this feature all the time in Photoshop and I am really upset that Affinity uses this other very illogical and not intuitive behaviour with the mask opacity. I regret having spent money on it. I will stay with Photoshop. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8.2.2017 at 3:42 PM, MEB said:

I'm trying to check the mask opacity layer issue with the dev team.

Nearly a year later ... it looks like the dev team really wants to stick with this mask-opacity behaviour. And even though one might be able to somehow argue with a (from my perspective) twisted logic why the current behaviour makes sense - if customers don't understand the logic due to the very high level of complexity and lack of comprehensibility you will loose them (see above) ... an intuitive and easy to understand mask-behaviour would from my perspective be the preferred soloution


iCore i7-3770, 3.50GHz, 32GB RAM, SSD, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, Windows 10 Pro - AP, AD and APublisher latest final & beta
http://www.timobierbaum.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×