Adjustment layer default opacity - configurable in preferences
Implemented
Adjustment layer default opacity - configurable in preferences
Webinar Professor David Grover often presents his approach to create a new, filled layer in order to set his tools adjustments to the max. values he thinks would be reasonable in that very moment, then clear the mask and slowly brush the mask back in, selectively.
Later, or tomorrow, you can lower the layer opacity if you feel you overcooked the adjustments. However the opposite (increase the opacity) is only possible if you were wise enough to start with a lower opacity before your adjustment settings.
Having the option to configure the default opacity for each newly created adjustment layer (not heal or clone), e.g. 80%, was a good idea from one of the webinar participants, David agreed.
Not my idea but I strongly support this idea, and it should be easy to implement.
#25573
-
Official comment
Hi,
Thank you for your request and for your thorough elaboration. I can see that our Support Team have forwarded your request (#25573) on this matter to our developers.
Have a good day.
Best regards,
Jakob, Capture One -
So set a brush to a chosen opacity and then have that opacity applied at, say, 80% just in case you got the assessment wrong and decide to change it?
I would guess that most of us are not that adept at trying to double guess the results of multiple settings being combined. Would this result in more confusion in most cases rather than a better solution?
0 -
Grant,
I think you missed the point. Even though I am a C1 user since version 8 I sometimes get new ideas from the webinars, which I recommend, then I believe you immediately understand his technique. It might be not yours but I like it for certain adjustments.Not sure I can explain it in words but I try:
-you want to adjust selectively some area(s)
-create a new filled layer
-adjust the tools you need, focus on the areas you want to change
-clear the layer
-set the brush to opacity 100%,but FLOW to a very low number, e.g. 7% slowly brush back the effects you have dialed in when the layer was complete filled
-stop when you like it
The area you wanted to adjust does not need to be filled with the same mask density everywhere, it is more like dodging (or burning) with small strokes (with whatever tools you like), if you like them small.Especially if you have a pen this works like a charm.
Now, if you finally assess your image in the end, you can reduce the opacity of the layer or layers. Considering you have done other adjustments and other layers since then, it is not unlikely that early layers need some tweak.
Being able to increase the effect could help too. The latter is the background of this request.
And this does not only apply to combined tool usage, it also applies to a single tool.
If you use small strokes in that area these miniscule parts of the area have a certain proportion to each other, in terms of mask density.
A simple tool like the Exposure, yes, you can just increase the exposure, but a tweaked curve or more complex color adjustments with multiple color samples not so easy.
Whether or not a combined effect always plays into your favour if you increase the combined effect is not relevant, as often it does!
Increasing or decreasing depends on the other adjustments you might have made meanwhile, and your fresh brain after a break or overnight.
The request is just to set a default value in preferences, the default default value should be 100% so the behavior you are used to does not change.
regards
0 -
The request is for the default opacity of the layer, not the brush.
0 -
BeO,
Yes I understand all of that.
What I don't really relate to is how people will adjust to the concept of making what they think are 100% adjustments at the time they make them while using an 80% (or whatever) adjustment setting to allow some margin for a possible increase at some future point. Especially if multiple tools are involved for a layer. And even more so if the nature of the tools deployed is not consistent. i.e. not a linear adjustment calculation.
Just for the point of discussion I will see if I can come up with an example - possibly an extreme example and rather unlikely to be used BUT the point is that less extreme examples may still see the same practical limitations.
An alternative might be an option to duplicate a layer and so have 2 levels of control but I'm not sure how that would work and whether it would also result in the same challenges for getting a balanced result.
Grant
0 -
Hi Grant.
If increasing an effect (layer opacity up) does not reault in a good looking, balanced appearence because of differing non-linear nature of the applied tools, then decreasing this layers's opacity shouldn't result in a well balanced appearance either. Which means the whole layer opacity slider would be obsolete, for this kind of tool combination, but maybe not for others. But then these others may possibly be achieved by tweaking the used tools directly. Sure, you can remove all tools but the levels tools from C1 and achieve the same result, probably, if you are used to, and have enough time.
The point is that if you find an example for which increasing the opacity does not work does not proof that there aren't examples for which it works. Btw. the result is highly subjective anyway. Proof by contradiction only wokrs if you find a contradiczion to the thesis, but my thesis is not that it works in every situation. If I would say so the one example where it dies not work is sufficient to proof it wrong.
Tbc... this text box is too small...
0 -
... continue...
imagine you are adjusting the tools when the the layer is fully filled, and let's assume your adjustments are perfect (at maxixum opacity) for the selective areas you wantto change, but the areas will require small brush strokes with varying mask density. Now, Fter clearing the mask, you are tired and do not apply the correct mount of brush work to the area, but you made a good job with the relative proportion of the small, brushed areas. Then you would have some headroom to increase the effect (remember your original settings were perfecr for 100% mask density (filled layer) and 100% layer opacity. But because your brush strokes do not reach this perfect line, and the opacity is set to 100, you cannot bring this headroom into the image.*)
if you want to make sure this does not happen you would have to decrease the initial opacity. Or overcook the tool settings in the first place, at least ever so slightly. Which is a little bit of a weak point of Davids technique because it is harder to assess an overcooked adjustment than a"correct" target adjustment. Which you can do more often if you have a headroom due to layer opacity less than 100%.
*) Unless you copy the layer as you said.
Btw, increasing the layer opacity, at least if it is not too much, works for me for all slider adjustments which I do not max out but adjust to taste.
Regards
BeO
0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
7 comments