More about Shadow Creation

[Dennis Nisbet]

@v_kyr Try as I might, the best way I've found to create the shadow will not work with a Macro. That's OK with me but it doesn't do anyone else any good and it certainly doesn't speed up the composite creation process. That's the big benefit I get in PS.

Thank again. I did learn how to make a Shadow that was identical to what I was doing in PS. I can also make a Macro that gets the image ready for the shadow making process.

As a side note, It took many months for PS to make a good selection/cutout process and it is still a little clunky. I've cut out hundreds of images in PS and struggled through their many attempts. It was great to use the process in AP.

Now, if they can just fix the Macro process.  

[JimmyJack]

All of this, with the addition of a blur, can be done with a Macro (as can be seen in my earlier post). And all elements stay editable.

But the problem remains that the Macro cannot be used on other objects. 
I thought, maybe, that a live Perspective filter instead of scaling might change that. But it did not .

A Macro can be created (and used on multiple objects) to create a copy and make the gradient, but beyond that, as it stands now, scaling and blurring would have to be added manually. So, is the first couple of steps really in need of a Macro? Basically its two clicks. Duplicate and Use Style (FX). 
After that it's scale and, if you want, one or two additional filters: Live Perspective and/or Depth of Field Blur.

If one is doing dozens of objects, and each one needs the same shadow treatment, then sure, some time can be saved if the whole process could be automated.

 

[Wosven]

Having a set of layers for blur effects and a main layer (with effect too) for the shadow on which you draw it — or fill a selection — depending of need seem more usefull than a macro.

But like macro, we've got problems since the mask part of layers take a pixel area as an effect area, instead of the full document area (meaning: if you modify some parts, you'll need to adjust first the "mask" area too, or it will only select part of the canvas). We've got the same problem with bluring or shadow effects that appear inside of the canvas limit instead of only around the objects in the canvas if we move or resize those objects.

About the overlaping shadows on objects: it's not accurate, I should have checked Bernard S. Bonbon's books about perspective, shadows end reflections for this, those are for layers examples.

ombres_portees.afphoto

[R C-R]

I think that without doing a lot of manual tweaking afterwards, there is no way a macro or a script can simulate a very realistic cast shadow effect if there are only flat 2D objects to work with, each of which is an image of one or more 3D objects lit by one or more light sources.

Basically, there just isn't enough information that can be extracted from the files for that to work.

[Dennis Nisbet]

The best guesses are that there are 14,000,000+ PS users worldwide and only 20% of them are in the PRO category. Non-Professionals are at every level of expertise. Thousands of them just tinker for the sake of enjoyment. I don't have any idea how many of those users 

My experience, dealing on-line and by phone with hundreds of these users indicates that things like good cutouts, shadows, highlight-shadow controls are a big part of what they like.

A powerful Macro system, or in the case of PS Actions, is an important part of doing business in this world.

 

[v_kyr]

Quote

The company Serif has a Photoshop alternative on offer. It calls herself...

Hmm ...

Well I love such knowledge quiz

[firstdefence]

14 hours ago, Dennis Nisbet said:

A powerful Macro system, or in the case of PS Actions, is an important part of doing business in this world.

It's Adobe's Scripting that brings the automated muscle and the advent of the latest Photoshop fashion accessory "The Panels." Affinity could beef up the Macro facility for sure.

Affinity Script? I doubt that will happen anytime soon.