Copy and invert mask?

Permanently deleted user

• August 01, 2015 19:16

So I am doing a lot of food photography and need to tone down some highlights on cutlery+plates with the local adjustment tool so they don't blow out. I paint the part I want to tone down and adjust the exposure down, now to adjust the whole picture up without adjusting the just adjusted layer up also, I make a new layer, copy the mask from before and invert it.

Is there a faster way to do this? It would be nice to be able to just alt+drag the layer or something like that to copy it and then use a keycommand to invert it or just just copy and invert it with one drag, is this possible without all the clicking and menu fiddling?

It just occurred to me, is it even necessary doing the second mask or can I just further adjust exposure down on the masked part after I adjusted the whole picture up without degrading the image as it is still in the raw format?

Thank you =)

0

• 

  Ian Wilson

  Moderator

  • August 02, 2015 13:44

  

  I think the solution that just occurred to you, so that you only use one mask, is the best. Probably the quickest thing is to adjust the exposure of the image overall first and then create a local adjustment mask and tweak the bit that needs it. But if you have adjusted part of the image as a local adjustment, and then decide the whole thing could do with being a bit decreased in exposure, you can go back to the background layer and reduce exposure. But that will decrease it for your locally adjusted part too. (The local adjustment is relative to the background layer, not absolute, for every tool except the white balance. So if you reduced the background by 0.25 stop, for instance, you might need to go back the local adjustment and add a further 0.25 to bring it back to what it was.)
  
  Ian

  0
• 

  Permanently deleted user

  • August 03, 2015 14:33

  Ok so first doing the overall and then the local.
  
  So if say I boost everything +1 then take the local down to -1 it would be as though I never boosted that local part +1 but just went down to -1 from 0 on that part because its a raw file?
  
  Thank you

  0
• 

  Ian Wilson

  Moderator

  • August 03, 2015 22:33

  

  [quote="modest mouse" wrote:
  Ok so first doing the overall and then the local.
  
  So if say I boost everything +1 then take the local down to -1 it would be as though I never boosted that local part +1 but just went down to -1 from 0 on that part because its a raw file?
  
  Thank you

  
  No. If you boost overall +1, then apply -1 just to the masked area, the masked area ends up at 0.
  
  That is: Plus 1 (overall) minus 1 (local) = 0 (local).
  
  The local adjustment is added to or subtracted from the overall adjustment. (The only exception as far as I know is white balance.)
  
  Ian

  0
• 

  Permanently deleted user

  • August 04, 2015 12:49

  Not apply -1 but take it down TO -1 =)

  0
• 

  William Middleton

  • August 08, 2015 15:38

  [quote="modest mouse" wrote:
  Not apply -1 but take it down TO -1 =)

  
  
  If you take it down to -1 on the slider, you will end up with things as described by Ian.
  
  If you intend to take it down to -1 relative to the original and unadjusted exposure, you will have to adjust the slider to -2
  
  Background > +1
  Layer > -1
  Result > Layer 0
  This is the scenario described by Ian.
  Layer is right back where things started.
  
  Background > +1
  Layer > -2
  Result > Layer -1
  Layer will be -1 relative to the original exposure.
  Background was lifted +1 and this affects the layer. The layer only was darkened -2 so it will end up being -1 relative to the original and unadjusted image...

  0

Post is closed for comments.