Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

I know many folks think that certain filters will take the cake, or calculations is the bomb, and who can deny that the saturation sliders are fun to play with. But for my money, the ability to work through multiple selections at once is probably the biggest punch out the program has to offer. Painting through a live selection onto a canvas that has a mask, that is inside a folder that has a mask and so on. You can make complex selections look like kids play when you use this work flow.

What about you?

I'm pretty good at the things I need to use in Photoshop, and since I have a very restricted set of requirements compared to commercial photographers (very small number of pictures I have to retouch), I don't have to concern myself much with "workflow" issues.

All of which is an excuse for saying, "what in hell are you talking about?".  It's probably really important, Bob, but I don't understand it.  A little tutorial if you would, please.

QOL wrote:

First time I put a mask on a group I literally went WOW out loud.

Ok, so you & Bob both get it.
Can Tx & I have an explanation, please? 

SLE Photography wrote:

QOL wrote:

First time I put a mask on a group I literally went WOW out loud.

Ok, so you & Bob both get it.
Can Tx & I have an explanation, please? 

The mechanics are pretty simple... add masks to layers, group, then add a mask to the group the same way you would add a layer mask. it's what you can do with that makes it so much fun and a creative tool. I'll see if I can dig up a file that I've done it with.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Suppose you did what QOL suggested, you would have a layer... with a mask on it. You put that layer in a group folder... with a mask on it (you can put masks on folders). Imagine now, loading a selection, any selection you want, and making a change to the original canvas (or layer) through the active selection. Paint, filter, whatever you want to do, you can do it, and you're doing it through two masks and a live selection. And to be more involved, if you are doing this through the apply image tool, you can use an additional mask by checking it in the dialog box for the tool.

This is how I can select an area and affect a change to it in seconds, as opposed to using outlining tools that take minutes and longer.

I have a feeling this is one I would have to see demonstrated before I really understood the power of the process you are describing.

TXPhotog wrote:

I have a feeling this is one I would have to see demonstrated before I really understood the power of the process you are describing.

Me too.  I'm confused both about the process and about the utility of it.

For me the most powerful feature is "Layers". It totally rocks that you can make nondestructive changes.

Although not mastered to the level of many here I have to agree with Masks. Recently I've become very impressed with using Snapshot in the history box and making selections with the Pen tool. I'm still learning the power of Photoshop.

Using a channel from LAB or CMYK in an RGB file!!!

Not to be a smartass, but I would have to say the most powerful feature in Photoshop is the user interface otherwise known as the person sitting in front of the computer.

I don't think I can point to any one thing as being the most powerful feature. Layers, blend modes, masks, adjustment layers....they're all pretty powerful. I guess I'd have to go with the feature you need for the job at hand as being the most powerful.

I do use actions and scripts a lot, though. 

Dannielle Levan Photography wrote:

IMO?  Ctrl-Z.

That's only useful to you people who constantly make mistakes

Gibson Photo Art wrote:

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

QOL wrote:

SLE Photography wrote:

QOL wrote:

First time I put a mask on a group I literally went WOW out loud.

Ok, so you & Bob both get it.
Can Tx & I have an explanation, please? 

The mechanics are pretty simple... add masks to layers, group, then add a mask to the group the same way you would add a layer mask. it's what you can do with that makes it so much fun and a creative tool. I'll see if I can dig up a file that I've done it with.

Suppose you did what QOL suggested, you would have a layer... with a mask on it. You put that layer in a group folder... with a mask on it (you can put masks on folders). Imagine now, loading a selection, any selection you want, and making a change to the original canvas (or layer) through the active selection. Paint, filter, whatever you want to do, you can do it, and you're doing it through two masks and a live selection. And to be more involved, if you are doing this through the apply image tool, you can use an additional mask by checking it in the dialog box for the tool.

This is how I can select an area and affect a change to it in seconds, as opposed to using outlining tools that take minutes and longer.

I follow, but it makes me wonder. Yes you can make adjustments through all those layers, but why would you do it in this manner? Seems to be complicating the process. What is the real advantage?

You still have to start with a selection of some type otherwise it's a global adjustment.

I have no idea what the most powerful is. As I learn more they all seem to have their place. Every time I think I can disregard a Photoshop tool I find someone who came up with a method of using it that makes it useful again.

When I look at the work of other retouchers and photographers, typically I see tell tale lines, glossy features, masking mistakes... a whole slew of problems. Part of my workflow revolves around subtlety and finesse.

Imagine I want to change the tonal response of a face to make it brighter in the center, and darker at the edges, which is something I do all the time. Things to consider are the face outline and what the face is surrounded by. Hair lines, brows, lips and eyes, always need to be dealt with. If I wanted to simply toss a curve at the center of the face, all I need do is draw a lasso around the desired area, feather the selection, and adjust the curve to taste. The problem is the overlap into areas I don't want to affect, they need to be dealt with in some manner.

I hate working at the computer, so anything that saves time is important to me. I don't want to outline the brows and lips, or anything else for that matter, so I draw a loose lasso around the area I want to affect, and I feather it to taste. I then ask for a layer curve, without making any adjustment, I click OK and close the curve dialog box. Then I blend in one of the channels so that I have a continuous tone positive mask inside my soft selection.  Now I open the curve and make an adjustment to lighten the selected area, Since I'm using a soft mask approach, there will be bleed over into areas like lips and eyes. So, I put the curve into a folder, and hit the folder with a difference mask. this operation cuts down on the intensity of the correction to the point that it needs a boost. So. I load a luminance value selection, and I paint white into the difference mask, in the brighter areas of the face that I want to be brighter, and the effect of the difference mask is mitigated by the addition of the white paint.

It sounds like a lot of hassle, but once you understand the workflow, you can accomplish what I just outlined in a matter of a minute or two. The result is a seamlessly perfect application of brightness using the contone values of the original image, with absolutely no visible clue as to what was done to brighten the image.

One of the things I hate the most about the work of Amy Dresser, Jill Greenburg and Dave hill, is that they employ a sledge hammer all the time with total disregard for a photographic sense of continuous tone. I use the same techniques they do, but I think my pictures still look like photographs.

Anyhow, that's what I meant by selections within selections, both live and masked. And the example I gave is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of how you can use it.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Gibson Photo Art wrote:

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

QOL wrote:

SLE Photography wrote:

QOL wrote:

First time I put a mask on a group I literally went WOW out loud.

Ok, so you & Bob both get it.
Can Tx & I have an explanation, please? 

The mechanics are pretty simple... add masks to layers, group, then add a mask to the group the same way you would add a layer mask. it's what you can do with that makes it so much fun and a creative tool. I'll see if I can dig up a file that I've done it with.

Suppose you did what QOL suggested, you would have a layer... with a mask on it. You put that layer in a group folder... with a mask on it (you can put masks on folders). Imagine now, loading a selection, any selection you want, and making a change to the original canvas (or layer) through the active selection. Paint, filter, whatever you want to do, you can do it, and you're doing it through two masks and a live selection. And to be more involved, if you are doing this through the apply image tool, you can use an additional mask by checking it in the dialog box for the tool.

This is how I can select an area and affect a change to it in seconds, as opposed to using outlining tools that take minutes and longer.

I follow, but it makes me wonder. Yes you can make adjustments through all those layers, but why would you do it in this manner? Seems to be complicating the process. What is the real advantage?

You still have to start with a selection of some type otherwise it's a global adjustment.

I have no idea what the most powerful is. As I learn more they all seem to have their place. Every time I think I can disregard a Photoshop tool I find someone who came up with a method of using it that makes it useful again.

When I look at the work of other retouchers and photographers, typically I see tell tale lines, glossy features, masking mistakes... a whole slew of problems. Part of my workflow revolves around subtlety and finesse.

Imagine I want to change the tonal response of a face to make it brighter in the center, and darker at the edges, which is something I do all the time. Things to consider are the face outline and what the face is surrounded by. Hair lines, brows, lips and eyes, always need to be dealt with. If I wanted to simply toss a curve at the center of the face, all I need do is draw a lasso around the desired area, feather the selection, and adjust the curve to taste. The problem is the overlap into areas I don't want to affect, they need to be dealt with in some manner.

I hate working at the computer, so anything that saves time is important to me. I don't want to outline the brows and lips, or anything else for that matter, so I draw a loose lasso around the area I want to affect, and I feather it to taste. I then ask for a layer curve, without making any adjustment, I click OK and close the curve dialog box. Then I blend in one of the channels so that I have a continuous tone positive mask inside my soft selection.  Now I open the curve and make an adjustment to lighten the selected area, Since I'm using a soft mask approach, there will be bleed over into areas like lips and eyes. So, I put the curve into a folder, and hit the folder with a difference mask. this operation cuts down on the intensity of the correction to the point that it needs a boost. So. I load a luminance value selection, and I paint white into the difference mask, in the brighter areas of the face that I want to be brighter, and the effect of the difference mask is mitigated by the addition of the white paint.

It sounds like a lot of hassle, but once you understand the workflow, you can accomplish what I just outlined in a matter of a minute or two. The result is a seamlessly perfect application of brightness using the contone values of the original image, with absolutely no visible clue as to what was done to brighten the image.

One of the things I hate the most about the work of Amy Dresser, Jill Greenburg and Dave hill, is that they employ a sledge hammer all the time with total disregard for a photographic sense of continuous tone. I use the same techniques they do, but I think my pictures still look like photographs.

Anyhow, that's what I meant by selections within selections, both live and masked. And the example I gave is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of how you can use it.

Hmmm. I'm going to have to decipher that first and make sure I understand all that is being done. I will post here with questions.