Universal Brush
Implemented
I just tried the latest C1 release (Version 20, Build 13.1.0162).
Could you please bring back a "universal" brush?
In previous versions of C1, one just selected a (universal) brush (e.g., via the keyboard shortcut "B") and the brush would behave correctly, depending on the type of layer one used it. On an adjustment layer, the (universal) brush built the mask, on a heal layer, it built the target mask, etc.
This made it easy to revisit existing layers to adjust their masks. One just pressed "B" and started brushing; it didn't matter what the type of the selected layer was.
Now, when revisiting an existing layer, one has to either
1. select the right brush type, and
2. then select the target layer
(when changing from a different layer type,
C1 will select the topmost layer of the target layer type, which is
unlikely to be the target layer one really wants to adjust).
OR
1. select the target layer, and
2. then manually match the correct brush type (adjustment, heal, or clone).
One cannot simply select a universal brush and let C1 figure out which brush type
to actually use.
Either way, this new system causes more work, and tedious work at that.
A recent prominent "victim" of the new design is Joe McNally.
At
https://youtu.be/cOVpzasdwDk?t=3335
Joe is about to start painting on an adjustment layer while still having the healing brush active. David Grover has to remind him to change the tool (in order to avoid having the layer selection change unwantedly). In my view, Joe's approach was completely natural (use a brush tool on a different layer) and if he had used the old brush design, he wouldn't have needed tutoring from David Grover.
A further problem with the new brush design is that it is no longer possible to map normal brushing to a certain shortcut (say "B") and the Eraser brush to the same shortcut but with "Alt" added (say "Alt-B"). In the previous design, I could press the same key, either with or without "Alt" to quickly change between brushing and erasing. The new brush design with its proliferation of brush types makes such an efficient mapping/mode of working impossible.
Finally, note that it is good practice to name one's layers. This is not encouraged by the new automatic layer creation approach because the layer is not created before one actually applies a brush (after having selected the brush). So this means, using the new system, one would choose a brush, then do a preliminary stroke, interrupt the brushing to name the layer, and finally go back to brushing.
For users frequently employing multiple layers, i.e., those who need to name their layers, it is more natural to, first create the layer, then name it, and finally start brushing. However, with the new system, one needs to match the brush type to the type of the layer one has created. Previously, one could just choose the universal brush and it would exhibit the right behaviour (depending on the type of layer).
Adding an additional universal brush type to the three existing ones, would
a) not affect the new design, but
b) give users who are used to work efficiently with a universal brush
a much better experience, both in terms of selecting layers and
also in terms of switching between normal (positive) brushing, and
Eraser (negative) brushing (as it would be possible again to use
one shortcut key with and without "Alt" for activating the
universal brush or the Eraser brush respectively).
If adding back a universal brush should for some reason not be possible -- I don't see why not, but just in case -- then it would be very crucial to allow temporarily engaging the Eraser brush by holding down the "Alt" (or "Option" on Mac) key (see my respective "Temporary Eraser Brush") feature suggestion.
To preempt the argument that one only will ever have one heal and/or clone layer and that therefore switching between layer types will rarely occur:
1. Even if it rarely occurs, there shouldn't be extra work for the user.
2. I'll still have many heal/clone layers in order to
a) organise edits so that I can quickly target editing areas (e.g., face vs body).
b) have independent opacity control over several heal/clone edits.
c) be able to split retouching so that I can copy some edits to other images
(e.g., edits to a static background),
while keeping image-specific edits in separate layers that I won't copy to other images.
-
@Mihael,
one way to avoid GUI clutter would be to make the universal brush available via keyboard shortcut only.
The disadvantage would be that this wouldn't help beginners like Joe McNally. The advantage would be that the new design could be kept (while still allowing users like us to work efficiently).
Regarding retaining different brush types, if you forget to "click on proper layer" then the new design will not help you in most of the cases. Instead of ruining your "heal layer", you will be ruining the auto-selected adjustment layer. In other words, once you have more than two layers or so, chances are that the auto-selection will not pick the correct layer.
It is only easier to select layers with "Q" or "B", if you have only one layer of each type. I don't think a serious software like Capture One should target users that only use one layer of each type. You may have a different view, but I think it should be OK to have different opinions of how many layers make sense in C1.
Regarding switching between "clone brush" and "heal brush": It is not the intention of my request to allow mixing of brush types on one layer. While it would also be a consistent design to allow many brush types to work on one layer, it would require quite a bit of paradigm change and I don't think Capture One would want to go there.
To clarify: I still want one layer to only have one job, but I don't want to match brush types to layer types. In the old design, there were several different brush types already, one just didn't have to explicitly select them.0 -
Hi,
Thank you for your post and suggestions provided.
This feature request was forwarded to the Product Management team.
0 -
Thank you, Lily!
0 -
@Class A,
I never said I want two type of jobs/brushes on one layer. Previous was possible to change layer type. You started as Heal and you could transform that into clone. Or adjustment. But after thinking a lot and testing tis is really NOT an issue anymore and I recall anything about it. It was really twice in a lifetime that this saved me time. Now I simply delete heal node if not working and make clone node (on separate layer) instead. So let this STAY AS IT IS.
*******
UNIVERSAL BRUSH:
INSTEAD of universal brush tat would adapt to layer, I suggest AUTO brush switching to correct type regarding selected layer. This solution gave same benefit but is more easy to implement and offer more options.
I just did a test to figure if I can copy mask from heal to clone layer and this way get what I wanted - to kinda "switch heal to clone" type, as I was able before (described above). I saw I CAN'T copy mask from clone to heal layer. So I wanted to test if I can make it adjustment mask and copy this into clone layer. I instantly run into mistake. I created blank adjustment layer, which was selected and I wanted to brush mask. Since I forgot to switch brush it jumped to heal layer and make another heal. SO I had to delete heal node, switch to adjustment layer, switch brush and start brushing again.
ERGO: Here we both agree, that this behaviour irritate us.
Now solution we see differently. You would like having universal brush back, that would recognise layer and started to brush correct type of mask in regards to that selected layer. Am I correct understanding your point? Solution is fine and no more mistakes. You have three layer types and where you brush, that is brushed in. Correct? I can agree. But ...
... universal brush can't figure out what you want to do until you start actually brushing. Since clone brush demand sampling point to be selected in advance - how universal brush will figure what you plan in advance?
BEFORE it was simple: it was a BRUSH. It always painted mask. Only then logic do a sampling or adjusting and blending the result in. It tossed a sampling node to random area, never where you wanted. I hated that. Fore healing I had to draw mask over escaped hair or facial line blindly, painting in whatever sample are was, than fixing node to make it work. If I made mistake, I had to do all over again. And when a lot of nodes was visible from all SEPARATE layers you could easily mess something up and pick wrong node, which it switched layer, and you might grab clone patch instead of sampling one, and clone node instead of heal one, etc. Ans also sometimes for a BUG reason my undo's vanish, so I can't even undo. A total mess, which were all accepted used to and we now advocate it that we "need it" back. Now all this is fixed and prevented with new way of separate brushes, we only need to pick proper brush in advance.
Another case with clone, when fixing crossed eye to a person, I hat to blindly brush where I WANT the clone before I see it and than logic thrown sample node somewhere clueless and than I need to move sampling node to other normal eye and than readjust and repaint, etc ... again a MESS that is illogical to what Photoshop, Photopaint, or other graphic software have. You always pick sampling area 1st and then you paint in where you want to clone and see what you paint in real time.
I accepted ow C1 works because I knew they had to make it this awkward procedure to select sampling AFTER painting since we had three functions on ONE universal brush. In PS you have J and S tool. Separate tools. One is healing one is cloning. No one complains. For cloning you need to pick sampling area in advance, which is logical and only simple and fast way to paint what you want. For better in C1 you still can move sampling node after, which you can't in Ps and any other software I know.
So I LOVE and APPLAUSE they finally made heal/clone as it always should be. No universal brus please!
My solution of auto brush selecting is actually same as your suggestion of "universal brush" that it will recognise layers. In order you "universal brush" would work, a logic must somehow know that you are on a clone layer, so it must act as clone tool and it must ask you to select sampling node. Right? So in the end same "universal" brush will act as clone brush on that layer. Right? So what it is different now? Only that it visually changes circles, and that you need to select it manually. So what you really ask is to change brush type automatically when you on certain layer. This is what I asked for. We NEED three brush types if we want three tools to operate at their optimum. Paint, Heal, Clone are three types of brushes in any software. C1 is now way less cumbersome than PS is. PS is one of the most cumbersome software ver existed. Only Space shuttle was harder to operate. So they just need to ADD auto recognise layer. Optionally.
How to do it (either we say to it my way - auto brush switching or your way - universal brush, that act three different ways under the hood - what is essentially the same thing):
My suggestion:
Brush changes in advance each time you select a layer - you click on adjustment, it is B. You click on heal, it is Q, you pick clone it is S. Fine. Now if you press Q, start painting it will select TOP MOST heal layer and start healing, no matter iif you are in layer tab or not. THAN with added auto switch, additionally brush will be pre-selected wen you click layer. You are adjusting a part of image (B), click on heal layer and instantly Q would be selected. So painting further will make heals. Than you use plus sign to add clone layer, instantly S would be selected and asking for ALT click for sample are be selected. Fine!
Your suggestion:
Brus is universal. It gives not attention what layers you have until you star brushing. You create new adjustment layer and start painting. It will draw mask. If it is heal layer, it will start throwing sampling nodes. If it is clone layer it will ask for sampling point being selected. So how tat differs from what I said? In essence it is te same, but lacking few important features:
- now we have three distinctive brush circles which reflects each tool,
- we can now pre-select brush mode.
- (the CRUCIAL one) we can now use ALL THREE tools without messing with layers. Before only adjustment had "unattended" mode (brushing without being in layer TAB) but still layer HAD TO BE created in advance.
Not only we get rid of making layer in advance, we also have all three modes equal now. And optimal. Now I can just press Q and instantly fix blemishes, spots, dust, pore, lines, etc from whichever tab, without even going into layers. Just like O tool was before. I will never use spot removal anymore (I removed it from GUI to free up space). For me new way is BLESSING and I believe we are plenty of which love new way. I only can see you advocate older (more cumbersome way) because you are used to it. Also when I re-read your answers few times, we ave same perspective ere just different naming it. Essentially you want brush that will match layer and I do the same. It is doable in this new way with ...
... just adding auto brush selection based on layer you are in. And let that be optional in preferences.0 -
Mihael,
I don't think we want fundamentally different solutions.
You wrote: "I never said I want two type of jobs/brushes on one layer."Sorry, when you wrote "CLONE BRUSH - same. I would only like to be able to switch CLONE to HEAL and reverse." it sounded like you wanted to dynamically change brush modes within the same layer.
You wrote: "INSTEAD of universal brush tat would adapt to layer, I suggest AUTO brush switching to correct type regarding selected layer."
I don't see a difference between a "universal brush" and your suggested auto-switching.
Note the the previously existing "universal brush" really comprised of three different brushes already. However, they were all accessible via the same single tool. My main point is that I want a single tool. I don't want a proliferation of tools (which I have to manually match to layers) and I am not arguing for brush that works identically regardless of the layer type.
It is perfectly fine that when working with a brush on a clone layer that one needs to select a sampling area. Even in the old version one could "Alt-click" on a point to tell the Clone brush where to sample from. I don't terribly mind whether one is forced to pick a sampling point or can try one's luck and adjust it later, if it doesn't work.You wrote "Since clone brush demand sampling point to be selected in advance - how universal brush will figure what you plan in advance?"
Again, the "universal brush" ought to behave like any of the specialised brushes just depending on the layer type one is working on. So if one wants to brush on a Clone layer then -- by all means -- the universal brush tool could remind the user that they need to select a source area first.
You wrote: "Only then logic do a sampling or adjusting and blending the result in. It tossed a sampling node to random area, never where you wanted. I hated that."
Again, you could have chosen a sampling area with "Alt-click" previously already.
In any event, I'm not arguing to bring back worse healing behaviour or worse source area selection, I just point out how ineffective the multi-brush design is and that it can make users trip over its logic by forcing a change to the layer selection when the user doesn't expect / want it.
You wrote: "And when a lot of nodes was visible from all SEPARATE layers you could easily mess something up and pick wrong node, which it switched layer"I don't think it was ever possible to show several selection points from different layers at once. I never faced the challenge you are describing. If you really have so few layers that the new auto-selection design works for you, there shouldn't be any problem in selecting the right layer.
You wrote: "So I LOVE and APPLAUSE they finally made heal/clone as it always should be. No universal brus please!"
Again, I'm not arguing to make healing/cloning worse than it is in the latest version, and I don't think you got what I mean by "universal brush".You wrote: "Now if you press Q, start painting it will select TOP MOST heal layer and start healing, no matter iif you are in layer tab or not."
I'm happy for certain specific brush tools to exist which have that behaviour. All I'm asking for is that we get a way back in which we can choose a single brush tool (the same one, independently of what layer we are going to work on), select a layer, and then the brush behaviour will be adequate to whatever the layer type is. If this is achieved by disabling auto-layer selection and auto-brush selection via the preferences, that's fine.
It just must be one tool, that works as the brush did before in the old design.N.B., arguably, the new design might be considered to be closer now to how Photoshop works, which also has different tools for brushing, cloning, and healing. However, the HUGE difference is that all these Photoshop tools work on all layers and can be combined in a single layer.
As I have written before, there are two designs which make sense:
1. One tool that works on all layer types.
2. Many tool types that all work in a single layer.
Anything in between those designs complicates the life of the user, given that a brush metaphor is used independently of whether or not one is healing, cloning, or "adjusting". Yes, with the former brush types one can additionally specify source areas, but that doesn't change the nature of the tool in a fundamental way.
Given what layers are in C1 -- they are rather different to Photoshop layers -- the old "universal brush" design was better suited to C1 layers. As soon as C1 layers become as flexible as Photoshop layers then one adopt the "many tools" paradigm, not any earlier, though!
I hope I managed to convey that we really pretty much are after the same functionality.
What I would argue against, though, is a mix, such as auto-selection of layers for some brush types but not for others, etc. It seems that you want to treat the adjustment brush in one way and the cloning and healing brushes in another way. I submit that would be a mistake. Software is always easier to use if the interaction is as simple as possible. One great way to achieve simplicity is attain "uniformity", i.e., behaviour/interaction should be the same unless there are important reasons why it should not be the same.
Sure, perhaps some users prefer to first mask the source area for cloning/healing and than drag that area to the target area (cf. "patch tool" in Photoshop). However, if we can address cloning and healing with the same metaphor as is used for adjustment brushing then it should be done in order to avoid unnecessary tool heterogeneity.0 -
This has been partially been implemented in 13.1.1 and initially I was very excited but a major problem remains:
The problem is that switching back and forth between the Eraser brush and the normal brushing now still requires picking the right brush type (keyboard shortcuts "B", "Q", or "S") to go back to regular brushing. Otherwise, if one chooses the wrong keyboard shortcut, the automated layer re-selection still kicks in.
This means that one has to operate four (4!) keys just to switch between positive and negative (Eraser) brushing.
So close, but still not there. :( I have created a new feature request.
0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
36 Kommentare