Jump to content

.120 layer mask problems


Recommended Posts

I'm having an issue using a raster image as a mask for a layer.

If I use copy and paste it always creates a new layer, it doesn't add the raster info to the mask.

If I have the raster I want to use as a mask as a separate layer above the layer I want to apply it to and then use 'mask to below' it adds it to the correct layer as a mask but without any of the raster info. It has a 'crop' tool symbol shown over it which suggests it is now placed as an object rather than a raster. The mask icon shows as blank.

Basically, I cannot figure out how to add a raster image as a layer mask currently. Every approach I have tried results in failure.

Seems like a series of bugs to me.

Please help! I'm finding this incredibly frustrating. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And... part of this problem seems to stem from APhoto over eagerness to create new layers for everything.

Why on earth can I not just copy and paste some raster data to a layer without it creating a new layer. Every. *&%($. Time.   ?

Surely it should be possible to simply select (with marquee) the pixel data required, copy and then paste that into the layer mask? But, oh, no, you just end up with another layer. Joy.

 

edit: all of the problems described so far on this thread (except for crashing) are also occurring on the release version of APhoto (1.6.7). This makes me worried that the behaviour is by design which would be pretty nuts.

Edited by robinp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having experimented a bit further, I think the 'mask to below' tool is actually working. The problem is that the mask is not functioning properly. The reason for thinking this is that if, having done 'mask to below' I then choose 'edit mask' the correct image is displayed in the mask. However, it is not affecting the layer it should be masking.

Why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video showing the mask to below working, but the mask then failing to function at all. This is definitely not right @MEB.

If I make a mask and paint pixel info then the mask works fine and as expected.

 

Edited by robinp
removed video for copyright reasons (as in, it is ours) and it served its purpose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, >|< said:

When an object is mask-nested in another, the object's alpha is used as mask alpha.

There are a couple of ways to proceed, depending on whether you want to non-destructively or destructively create a mask from an image.

Mask To Below will mask-nest an image in an object and the alpha of the image pixels will be used as a mask, so if the image is entirely opaque it will not hide anything. A Channel Mixer adjustment can be nested in the image before the image is mask-nested in an object, and the Channel Mixer used to non-destructively map the image's grey levels to alpha.

Rasterise To Mask will destructively convert an image to a mask with the grey levels of the image  pixels converted to the mask's alpha.

Hi @>|<

thank you, that's very helpful. I had just found the Rasterise to Mask tool which had mostly resolved the issue. I do find it very counterintuitive that, even when a layer has no alpha (ie a pasted JPEG) using the 'mask to below' feature still doesn't work. There is nothing that gives you any visual indication that the mask being applied is the alpha (or even a non-existent alpha) other than perhaps the thumbnails being blank.

When using Mask to Below, it would seem logical and much more user friendly to ask the user which channel they wish to use as the mask, and ideally, to be able to change that selection at a later date.

My points about not being able to copy and paste raster info around without creating a new layer is still valid though. It drives me around the bend!

Robin

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.