Macro and adjustment gradient transparency fade recording

[v_kyr]

I always wonder that in AP there is no direct way to apply a transparent color adjustment gradient fade, which would be pretty useful for macros to have.

When recording macros one actually can only use an adjustment gradient or a fx gradient effect, but the first one (which I would prefer to use for quick turn arounds) doesn't allow to alter/setup a linear gradient color transparency ...

... the fx effect in turn allows to setup this but works on a whole pixel layer and not an adjustment mask level.

Also the usual gradient tool allows to setup such color->trancparency fades, but isn't recordable in macros at all.

 

Any reason why an adjustment gradient (see the top shown panel) doesn't offer to setup a opacity color aka transparent fade here? - That looks somehow like an option omission to me.

[v_kyr]

The differences in gradient handling are pretty confusing and IMO inconsistent. An adjustment gradient, which can be recorded in macros, doesn't support...

• no color node opacity support
• no reusable transparent fade presets
• no typ setup
• no custom swatch field reuse

...and thus is somehow of limited flexible use here in contrast to the other ones, from which BTW only the FX gradient one also can be recorded in macros.

[carl123]

Not sure exactly what you want to do here

But a gradient with transparency can be saved as a Style then the Style can be applied to an object in a macro

[Polygonius]

I´m completly with you: The gradient-tool(s) (plural) are completely inconsistent. Most of them forgot it last settings (one minute ago) and restart with this often useless 50% grey/white. And the "adjustment/filter-gradients" does not allow to load a style in it, nor support "presets" for itself....

 

BTW:  the whole concept, the "abuse" of gradients / brushes for transparency effects is unnecessary confusing / wide windowed. Instead to PAINT/ERASE (or gradient) filter/adjustment with the black/white, maybe on special masks... that could be much faster and less confusing with an special tool like opacity/transparency  or dry/wet or whatever called. This tool (or mode) is ALLWAYS 100% opacity on one side and 0% on the other side. In case of a brush the strong-parameter defines the grey-value (compairing to the usally filter/adjustment...-brushing) and in case of a "gradient" each point is just a value of transparancy. A nice side-effect i never lost my real colors i use for real brushing or give a frame...

Do not know, but in AD there is something similar tool, but especially with lot of pixel-layers (montaging) such tools would make sense. If a pixel is selcted and i "open" the drywet gradient (or brush)  there will come automatically a nested mask for it. I do my transparancy stunts and asap i´m happy i will rasterize. 

The real holy grail would be, if such tools would be smart as the NIK control-points. If i define a target-color the "transparancy gradient/brush" works as deeper as nearer the pixels on the target-color.  But for the first run, i take this tools without this special advantage. Just make clear that each stop-point can edit directly here (on the "line") without a need to open a "color-box" or other unnecessary extra-clicks.

General in GUI-concepts use this paradigm: As less clicks as absolutly necessary, as most direct as possible!!!!  If a popup do not bring a really advantage, then avoid it, and search for a more direct way!

[v_kyr]

8 hours ago, carl123 said:

Not sure exactly what you want to do here

But a gradient with transparency can be saved as a Style then the Style can be applied to an object in a macro

I hardly do miss the color opacity setting in a common adj gradient map panel, as it's shown here ( or on youtube directly). That would allow a much quicker less steps setup and 1:1 way take over for a bunch of PS actions I have to convert. So I overall wonder why it has been changed, that's the main point and that this spoils equality and behaves inconsistently.

I know that there are other ways to do it for macros, though then with unnecessary extra work and more involved steps.

 

[v_kyr]

@Polygonius  Yes the different treatment of those is slightly confusing and should ideally offer instead the same equal adjustments settings here.

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, v_kyr said:

I hardly do miss the color opacity setting in a common adj gradient map panel, as it's shown here ( or on youtube directly).

I am guessing you probably mean that you greatly miss the opacity setting but regardless, you have made it very clear by comparing the video to the current Mac Affinity Photo version that the color stop opacity setting has gone MIA:

From the August 2015 video publishing date & its lack of a Tone Mapping Persona, my guess is the AP version in the video must be 1.34 or 1.3.5, but I have no idea if the opacity setting was still there in the 1.4.x or 1.5.x versions.

[v_kyr]

@R C-R Yes I highly wonder why this has been removed at all, since former versions had it and it would be pretty useful to have there on an adjustment mask level too (...though the type {radial, elliptic, etc.} is still missing on both shown variants). - The older bottom version looks similar to the PS one in usage for adjustment gradients (with transparency settings) and thus mostly like a 1:1 way of adapting things then.

I can only guess that they may had some behavioral bugs or interoperation AD/AP problems then and probably thus removed it in the meantime, otherwise I don't see any reason why not to offer useful opacity setting here.

[Polygonius]

Not here: "booth" gradients (regular.one and from fx-panel) offers the transparency-fader in 1.67 (beta).

But booth are small different to handle and only the regular accept styles or pallette-"colors" as "dragover", but on the other hand only the fx-gradient remembers last settings when "apply" to a pixel-layer, the regular will forgot...

 

ALL preste -systems in AP (taken the best parts of each of them... will be a good preset system, but isolated, this syem jas this feature and lacks on other questions and the next supports other things, but lacks on other squestions... what kind of mixmatch is that????)

 

However, booth lacks and has no consistency, and the "pseudo-brush-black-white-concept" for masking will destroy all colors for regularly brushing/gradient...

So a dedicted "transparence brsuh/gradient" would be useful!

 

EDIT: ups, sorry you are talking about the gradient-adjustment???? 

Well, even in 1.67 there is no transparancy anymore! Another reason to make all this more consistend!!!! 

This is un-necessary confusing / need to adapt / re-learn without any really advantage!!!!! Or is there any advantage???

[v_kyr]

Yes I meant the adjustment gradient here, see also the above comparison images from R C-R  ...

... which BTW also in contrast only supports a linear flow type here.