"blend if" inside groups (or smart objects)

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

Hi. I think, I’ve spotted some interesting things.

This is where I started off:

Then I took this paper texture:

Now, I resized it to fit the background notepad and made several identical copies of the texture layer, their only difference being different values for "blend if underlying layer", so that the texture smoothly ends with the underlying notepad on each side (as there are luminosity differences both on the notepad and the notepad’s background).

That looks fine for "normal blending" (don’t worry about the messy bottom, it will be cropped when everything’s done). But I actually need the texture to be multiplied with the background layer. Obviously setting each layer to multiply isn’t going to cut it because they would multiply each other, too. So I need to either put all the layers into a smart object (option 1) or – option 2, which I’ll resort to here – put all layers into a group set to multiply, since this way all of the layers in the group are put together first and the composite group is then treated as a single image and blended with the rest of the image, using multiply.

But look at the – unexpected – results:

... whereas I rather expected the result to look like this (I only roughly masked the edges for demonstration purposes):

To me it seems, as if putting the group would nullify the "blend if underlying layer" settings for each layer. Besides, the same happens if I use a smart object instead of the group (option 1). I don’t see why this should happen at all.

So my questions: Is this behaviour deliberate? And if so, can somebody explain ? And can somebody suggest a solution to get to the last screenshot (without masking manually obviously) ?

[PeterK.@adobeforums.com]

Without experimenting too much with this, I can tell you one quick and dirty way would be to merge all your layers down onto a blank layer. This would put all the info into one layer and maintain the transparent areas. Of course, you would lose all the "blend if" parameters, and the individual layers, but you could always keep a copy of the group to go back to for editing purposes. Not sure if there's a slicker way, as I haven't played around with this too much, but this may do in a pinch for you.

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

Thanks for looking into this Peter. Not sure what to make of your suggestions. If I merge all layers I get this:

That's back to square one for me, because I'm almost exactly where I was in screenshot 2. I don't know how your suggestions bring me to screenshot 5. And do you know why the "blend if underlying layer" parameters get lost inside a group/smart object ?

[John Joslin]

Note to self: Don't click on this thread any more.

Note to Mark: If you really need such a long post, make it the second in the thread (or better, post links to the images).

Have you got shares in scroll wheels?

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

For anybody who wants to play around with this, here is the (downsampled) .psd file:

<http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=d7cc516b5b1c49aed2db6fb9a8902bda>

[PeterK.@adobeforums.com]

Ah, sorry, I was confusing my blend ifs. In the past I've done a blend if on the underlying layer AND on the current layer to remove whites (resulting in transparency).
Since you've got masks seperating out your pieces, I suppose you could add up selections of all the masks and use that as an overall mask for the group, then set the group to multiply. Does that work for you? I'm not sure if you've got every piece masked completely. Keep in mind that the blend if will interact with all of the images below it, so unless you mask them away from each other, they will interfere with the blend onto the bottom background layer. From your screenshot, the masks seem to show that texture overlay base will be blending with texture overlay right.

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

Note to John: Tastes differ.

And do you have something to say on-topic? I'd be chiefly thankful for that.

[PeterK.@adobeforums.com]

Thanks for the file, it made it a lot easier to see what was going on. Try changing the Knockout of each layer from "none" to "shallow." That should keep the layer from multiplying with the ones below it.

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

Peter, you can download the .psd file if you want. As I tried to explain in my OP, the masks are in no way related to the borders of the notepad on the "background" layer.
Think of the maks as broad "sections" used to divide the texture layer and apply different "blend if" values to each section. (If there were "blend if" values that would nicely blend throughout the whole image, one single texture layer would be enough).

Example:
"texture overlay left" has "blend if underlying layer": 124/141->255
These values work fine on the notepad's left border. But for the other borders I need other "blend if" values, hence the need for the duplicate layers (with different "blend if" values).

(I overexplained it a bit, just to remove any doubts).

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

Peter, I missed your post. I'll try this and get back to you in a second.

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

OK, tried it. It doesn't work for me. Following your instructions I set each instance of the texture layer to knockout:shallow.

Results:
* Without any groups and all texture layers set to multiply, I get the same as in the OP's screenshot 3
* With the texture layers set to normal but inside a multiply-group, I get the same as in the OP's screenshot 4

[PeterK.@adobeforums.com]

Sorry, I forgot to mention to put all the multiply layers into a group set to "pass through". This way, the shallow knockout keeps the layers from multiplying with each other, while each layers characteristic is passed down to the background layer.

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

You are right, that solved the issue. Thanks PeterK. I find it so nice that you and the other guys here lend a helping hand. You are good people.

As for the blending issue, it just shows me, that I've to go through the documentation again, apparently there are things I didn't get. In case you can say it in a nutshell: why does *anything* change if I put layers inside a "pass through"-group? I thought this mode lets the group parse all the layers one-by-one as if they weren't in a group. I though it was just a way to have a better overview on your layers.

And does it make sense to you that a "multiply"-group nullifies the "blend if" parameters ?

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

And I'd need to merge the different texture layers into a single one, but if I merge the "pass-through" group, I loose the blending effects. Any ideas?

[Mark_J_...@adobeforums.com]

And one last question if I may: Is there a way to add an adjustment layer that would only affect the layers in the "pass-through" group (i.e. the "texture overlay" layers) ?