Layers!!
Why did they change layers!! Now when you copy and paste layers, it doesnt overwrite the existing layers.This is a HUGE problem in a busy workflow!!!. Now you have to delete layers then apply new layers.If your on a busy set, its just a extra step you have to go through! There should be an option to decide to add or overwrite!!
-
They changed them because users asked for them to be changed due to wasting time in their workflow when previous layers that they wished to retain were deleted ...
The idea of replacing any layers "with the same name" would only work if people were especially consistent and accurate with their naming.
In addition the revised approach to some layer types may cause additional challenges.
0 -
While I agree that an option to overwrite or not might be a good idea, I can also see why it might not. Consistency is a good thing, and while C1 can be consistent with overwrite behavior, users aren't necessarily with naming. David Grover made s useful side comment in a recent webinar: he named a layer and then quickly said that he usually doesn't name layers. If you don't name, then adjustment layers are automagically named "Adjustment Layer 1", "Adjustment Layer 2", etc. And if you do rename, it's possible to misspell a name or simply not be consistent with names.
It took me a second to get used to the new copy method and I'm fine with it. While it's sometimes inconvenient, this is a case where I'd rather make a conscious decision as to which layers to keep/toss than have a program do it for me.
What bothers me more is that we can no longer move an entire adjustment layer mask with the old Command-click method. Now while a mask can be copied, it must be modified (brush, erase) manually each time. For me this is a huge issue. So fun to have 50-100 images in a stop-action sequence and have to manually modify several layers in each image when simply dragging the entire mask would either do the complete job or greatly reduce the amount of modification needed.
Win some, lose some I guess.
-1 -
think there is no real excuse for this idiotic and illogical new behaviour, I also very much doubt anyone really requested this change because for years the old way had not been an issues and I can't remember to have read even one complain about it. this is clearly a solution forced on us developed totally detached from professional needs. adobe software still works similar to the old c1 behaviour and it seems this is and was never an issue for their user base either . that co does not address this problem and is also completely quiet about in public like in their videos is rather telling.
1 -
Why are the C1 programmers so against toggle switches?
When implementing / changing a feature that has been around for generations of the software, C1 should create the new feature as an option that can be toggled on and off instead of forcing change across the board.
While C1 has become more stable over the years, I feel that they listen to feedback less and less (view images in subfolders is one example).
I've moved away from Phase cameras and lenses and assume I'll move away from C1 once/if an alternative is built.
1 -
Why are the C1 programmers so against toggle switches?
Can't speak for C1 programmers.
In general choices multiply exponentially, especially when it comes time to test the code. Code with three toggles can require 8 times the number of tests as code with no toggles, etc. This is exacerbated when the functions controlled by the toggle are distributed throughout the code.
Sometimes a toggle is easy to add with minimal impact. Other times what the user sees as a minor change takes the programmer weeks of development to get just right. Without looking at the code you can't tell.
I have no side in this Layers argument. I don't copy layers often enough to have an opinion as to which way is better.
0 -
Thanks for this insight, Marco.
I'm not a programmer by any stretch so appreciate knowing how much more work goes into things.
That said, for the larger conversation, I do hate when features that have been around for ages change instead of new features get added to make folks happy.
I don't know too many professional techs who enjoy this change (if you're one of them, please speak up and let me know what I'm missing).
1 -
I don't know too many professional techs who enjoy this change
no surprise because it makes work more difficult. whenever even a single layer is need I move to adobe which means in practice that c1 is degraded to a tethered shooting app but for this task still nothing is better or more convenient. why this issue is still not resolved is probably the same reason whey this bad change was made in first place, time pressure and not enough resources to implement a well thought through solution. they even didn't care to add a copy stamp to the copied layer as every other app in this world does. but this whole thing is not unique, normalise could have been a really fantastic tool but it falls short because the sample it takes is to small so it does not work reliable, but this seems not to bother them they just move on to the next new "exciting" feature they can add. today it is dehaze and guess what it also falls short.....
0 -
I find this change to be a real hassle and have yet to find a workaround. I work in large batches of focus stacked images - many shared layers. Many versions of the same image, some needing some global layers and some specific to that set of images. I make one adjustment and copy / paste a layer, and I end up with many duplicate layers. Deleting 10s or 20s of a layer is a pain ow starting over. What am I missing?
There should be a switch or preference, comments above aside. It's been like this for years of releases. Huge change with little comment or alternative.
I can adapt, but what is the way?
0 -
you miss nothing c1 seems not interested in making our work easier and fix this. I´m sure they are aware of the problem they created but probaply decided that the small group of user affected is not worth any attention. I did have some hope that a fix comes with c21 but now im convinced it is here to stay so do yourself a favour and use adobe... the professionals choice ;-)
0 -
CSP
adobe and c1 do different things. I'm on the Phase platform so no go for developing - no comparison. LR is different - and I use it as such. At least I can see my layers in one view unlike LR
This layer issue is a bump in the road in the grand scheme.
0 -
yes the layout for layers is much better in c1 it was always one of the reasons for me to prefer it over LR but this does not outweigh the problems introduced with c20. and yes LR is different, still do not like the interface but I have to say using it more now I see clear advantages over c1 in fields important to me.
0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
11 comments