Resizing Ajustment Layer with Mask after Unclipping

[geskphoto]

I ran into this problem today and I hope there is a better way to address;

 

1) After the 'Develop" persona step, I moved to the Photo personal and cropped a portrait photo for the size I was looking for

2) I started my editing and workflow which included selecting nd masking out the subjects eyes and then creating an adjustment layer/mask allowing my to increase the brightness of just the eyes.

3) After exporting the document, I realized I need to change the size and aspect ratio of the final image.

4)  Within the Photo Persona, I used "Document/Unclip Canvas" to reset the size of the document back to the original form.

 

This is where the problem arose.

 

The Adjustment Layer/Mask created in step 2 did not resize to the original document size and was now too small for the canvas creating notable boarders within the image.  IOW, the adjustment layer/mask for the eyes was smaller the the original document and as i had increased the 'brightness' there was a noticeable border around the document.

 

The attached image illustrates the problem.  Note the lighter boarder around the edges.

 

if i tried to adjust the size of this Adjustment Layer/Mask, it was scaled and the area used to highlight the eyes was also scaled and hence no longer over the eyes, but showing up on the forehead as two bright blotches.

 

So - is there any way to adjust the size of an adjustment layer/mask WiTHOUT scaling .... or do i simply need to adjust my workflow so that cropping is the last step ?

[v_kyr]

Quote

... The Adjustment Layer/Mask created in step 2 did not resize to the original document size and was now too small for the canvas creating notable boarders within the image.  IOW, the adjustment layer/mask for the eyes was smaller the the original document and as i had increased the 'brightness' there was a noticeable border around the document. ...

Yes it behaves always like that when adjustment layers or live filter layer masks are used and the document size is changed afterwards (it's especially good visable when making the doc smaller afterwards here). This is probably a common bug with adjustment masks here, though I don't know if it has already be filed in as one (a bug).

During some tryouts I saw that you can only overcome to this, if you flatten or combine the visual layers (meaning building one single flattened layer out of the image layer and the adjustment mask) here before resizing the document.

[toltec]

2 hours ago, v_kyr said:

Yes it behaves always like that when adjustment layers or live filter layer masks are used and the document size is changed afterwards (it's especially good visable when making the doc smaller afterwards here). This is probably a common bug with adjustment masks here, though I don't know if it has already be filed in as one (a bug).

During some tryouts I saw that you can only overcome to this, if you flatten or combine the visual layers (meaning building one single flattened layer out of the image layer and the adjustment mask) here before resizing the document.

 

I reported it, but Serif don't think messing up the design when resizing the document is a bug.

 

 

[toltec]

OOps. Double post alert 

[R C-R]

7 hours ago, toltec said:

I reported it, but Serif don't think messing up the design when resizing the document is a bug.

To be fair about it, I think he means it is not a bug in the traditional programming sense of a coding error that causes an incorrect or unintended result. In that respect he is probably right -- the app is working as intended -- but the real issue is if it should work like that or in a more user friendly way. I think we can agree that the more user friendly way is what users would prefer.

 

Anyway, considering what he said about resizing a document not keeping proportions on a layer by layer basis, there is another workaround besides flattening the layer first, which is to resize the parent layer(s) first & then resize the document appropriately. It is far from elegant & a royal PITA to have to do it that way, but it does work ... kinda. That is, the radius is scaled proportionally but the center point remains document oriented, so it still has to be adjusted. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by R C-R
restored missing text I clumsily deleted

[v_kyr]

7 hours ago, toltec said:

I reported it, but Serif don't think messing up the design when resizing the document is a bug.

 

If you apply a Depth of Field live filter layer (nested) on an image and afterwards resize the image doc, it leaves unsightly transparent areas in the image which you probably don't want to have there then.

[toltec]

2 hours ago, R C-R said:

To be fair about it, I think he means it is not a bug in the traditional programming sense of a coding error that causes an incorrect or unintended result. In that respect he is probably right -- the app is working as intended -- but the real issue is if it should work like that or in a more user friendly way. I think we can agree that the more user friendly way is what users would prefer.

 

No, I think it must be a bug 

 

If you resize the D.O.F. filter inside a parent layer by dragging the parent layer handles, it works as it would be expected to. i.e. the D.O.F. filter resizes with the image. It also works if you use a Filter, as opposed to a Filter Layer. So why not when you resize the document with the Live Filter Layer nested ?

 

If I put text inside a layer and resize the document, both objects resize to their proportions.

 

I just tried Live Perspective, and a few others. They nearly all screw it up, which makes them all but unusable without workarounds.

 

Even the lighting filter

Before

 

After resizing the document

 

If I nest the Live Filter and resize the parent layer.

It is OK.

 

Imagine setting several Lights, Reflections etc, only to have everything move in relationship to where you put them. Ouch !

 

Funnily enough, the Vignette Filter does get it right when resizing.

 

I can't honestly think that anyone would deliberately design it like that. If it looks like a bug and acts like a bug . . . 

 

   

 

I just tried a few other Filters, and they all go wrong too. Pinch/Punch, Distort, Halftone and so on.  I could not try Defringe but if that went wrong too, it would have to be redone.

 

Strangely, If you paint on a Layer Mask the mask does rescale with the image, even although the Filter it is masking does not scale. Weird !

 

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, toltec said:

No, I think it must be a bug

All I am saying is in the original programming sense, a software "bug" just refers to something that is not working as the programmer intended. It doesn't have anything to do with if that is what users want it to do.

[toltec]

10 minutes ago, R C-R said:

All I am saying is in the original programming sense, a software "bug" just refers to something that is not working as the programmer intended. It doesn't have anything to do with if that is what users want it to do.

 

OK, how about a "Design flaw" ?

 

I guess it depends on if the programmer designed it to make a mess of our carefully laid out designs, or not.  

 

We may never know.

 

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, toltec said:

We may never know.

We may also never know how much time & effort it would take to rewrite & debug the code to do whatever as users we would like, or how that would affect improving other existing features or adding new ones.

[toltec]

15 minutes ago, R C-R said:

We may also never know how much time & effort it would take to rewrite & debug the code to do whatever as users we would like, or how that would affect improving other existing features or adding new ones.

 

True, but it is a pretty disastrous fault, bug, omission or whatever, when every single Live Filter Layer (except vignette) goes horribly wrong when resizing the document. That is a huge part of the Affinity Photo feature set, rendered next to useless.

 

When it comes to code, the code to resize the filter layers already exists. It is used every time the parent layer is resized with a Live Filter layer nested inside it. I'm sure Serif could quickly adapt it.

 

If I was reviewing Photo as a program, my rating would go from 4 stars to 2 stars if only half the features actually worked properly. Maybe less than 2.

 

I am a big Affinity fan and used to working round minor bugs and omissions, but that is truly awful.

[R C-R]

5 minutes ago, toltec said:

True, but it is a pretty disastrous fault, bug, omission or whatever, when every single Live Filter Layer (except vignette) goes horribly wrong when resizing the document. That is a huge part of the Affinity Photo feature set, rendered next to useless.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that. I can't speak for anyone else, but the only time I want or need to resize a document is when I am exporting it to a raster format. Otherwise, I have no reason to resize it.

[carl123]

Try this

Before unclipping the document

Invert the adjustment/mask layer  (Ctrl + I on the thumbnail)

Then unclip

Then Invert the adjustment/mask layer again

Don't have time to test properly but it seemed to work on what I was working on

[toltec]

Interesting idea.

 

Mind you, on a product that is supposed to challenge Photoshop, can you imagine what Adobe would be saying about all the contortions needed to get a basic operation to work?

 

I'm sure they will be sleeping well tonight 

 

 

[firstdefence]

Moving things happening...

 

• Open image
• apply a live filter, i.e. lighting, I put the lighting effect to the side of the image to gauge movement.
• Resize Document and lighting moves.
• Now go to the History Panel and move back and forth through the history and observe where the lighting effect moves or doesn't move. You have to do this a few times. 

 

The lighting filter must know where it is relative to 0,0 so why doesn't it position correctly on reduction or enlargement, it does appear to scale though.

 

[R C-R]

4 hours ago, firstdefence said:

Now go to the History Panel and move back and forth through the history and observe where the lighting effect moves or doesn't move. You have to do this a few times. 

Yikes!!! Do you see the position of the light randomly jump between two different points on (or off) the image like I do?

 

4 hours ago, firstdefence said:

The lighting filter must know where it is relative to 0,0 ...

Apparently, it does not. In fact, none of the live filters I have tried that have a center point adjustable on the canvas (spherical, pinch/punch, ripple, etc.) seem to save the center point coordinates as part of the filter's live settings -- only the settings that appear in the various live filter panels are saved. Since the x/y coordinates of the center point do not appear in the panels, there is no reference for positioning it if the document is resized ... or so I think.

 

EDIT: something else to try:

• Enable Show Rotation Center on a layer
• Resize Document
• Check where the Rotation Center is now

Same issue, maybe?

[firstdefence]

@R C-R Yes thats what I see re lights, going to sleep now so will try the centre point tomorrow.

[lepr]

.

 

[R C-R]

22 minutes ago, firstdefence said:

@R C-R Yes thats what I see re lights, going to sleep now so will try the centre point tomorrow.

Maybe tomorrow also try with the ripple, pinch/punch, or another of the live filters with an adjustable center point? Or just check out the 3 files in the attached Resize test.zip (448kb download) while you are having your morning coffee. The first is a simple 200 x 200 px striped test pattern; the second is that file with a live ripple filter centered on it; & the third is the second after being resized to 2X its original size.

 

The filter intensity remains unchanged after resizing at 200, as does the (apparent?) center point.

[R C-R]

10 minutes ago, owenr said:

When you close and then later re-open a document, these live filters are positioned as they were, so they obviously have saveable positional parameters. You shouldn't assume that data doesn't exist just because it is not presented in the user interface.

Unless maybe those positional parameters are saved globally for the whole document, instead of individually for each live filter?

[carl123]

14 hours ago, firstdefence said:

...

The lighting filter must know where it is relative to 0,0 so why doesn't it position correctly on reduction or enlargement, it does appear to scale though.

 

If you add a small (1%) Point light to an image and measure it's x,y coordinates using guides, when you initially resize the image (e.g. larger) the x,y coordinates of the new Point light position are the same.

If the x,y coordinates for the Point light had been programmed in percentages rather than pixels then resizing the document would have had the expected results.

The madness with the history panel is either a bug or a case of collective hallucinations

 

[lepr]

.

 

[R C-R]

15 minutes ago, owenr said:

Why do you say "unless"?

Long story short, because I wasn't thinking straight. (Illness in the family, not enough sleep, just getting old, take your pick.) 

 

53 minutes ago, carl123 said:

The madness with the history panel is either a bug or a case of collective hallucinations

It isn't just the live Lighting filter either. I get equally weird results with the Ripple & Sphere ones as well. For example, I applied a 70 px sphere filter centered on my 200 x 200 px 1 test pattern.afphoto file, then resized the document to 400 x 400 px. The filter center did not move, so it was still at the approximate 100,100 position. But going back in the History panel to just before the resize, I get this:

The document is back to 200 px & the sphere center is where it should be, but the Sphere alpha channel is still showing it as if it was applied to the pattern at 400 px. Going back & forth in the History panel I sometimes see the filter center & size as suggested by the alpha, applied as if it was ½ size & shifted to the upper left.

[lepr]

.

[toltec]

12 minutes ago, R C-R said:

 

It isn't just the live Lighting filter either. I get equally weird results with the Ripple & Sphere ones as well. For example, I applied a 70 px sphere filter centered on my 200 x 200 px 1 test pattern.afphoto file, then resized the document to 400 x 400 px. The filter center did not move, so it was still at the approximate 100,100 position. But going back in the History panel to just before the resize, I get this:

 

The document is back to 200 px & the sphere center is where it should be, but the Sphere alpha channel is still showing it as if it was applied to the pattern at 400 px. Going back & forth in the History panel I sometimes see the filter center & size as suggested by the alpha, applied as if it was ½ size & shifted to the upper left.

 

So are we talking bugs now