Rubber Stamp
Michel Carrier
The Sample Merged option has been replaced by Use All Layers.
I seem to be constantly clicking to avoid repainting what I just covered.
Is there anyway to avoid this problem and if not, can I replace the new
Rubber Stamp P.S. 5 with the old one P.S.4?
Michel
stu...@nbnet.nb.ca
TheBookDoc
Rubber Stamp P.S. 5 with the old one P.S.4?>>
This is actually not a problem. It keeps you from making bad/repetetive
clones. The old tool let you work in a way that patterns and fills could repeat
very easily. The tool change requires some getting used to (especially if you
were used to the way 4 worked) but in the long run it is better for your
technique and images. If you are cloning large areas, it might be better for
you to consider another tool. For example, making larger selections and
copy/paste might accomplish what you are trying to do more quickly. Click and
move often using the Stamp -- and change sample sites: these techniques will
get better results -- though they may take some getting used to. The stamp tool
in PS 5 sort-a twists your wrist into doing it better.
I am venturing a guess, but I am pretty sure there is no way to switch tools in
PS between versions. Either way, I wouldn't go back.
RL
_____________________________
Richard Lynch (thebo...@aol.com)
Author of ADOBE PHOTOSHOP 5 HOW-TO
ISBN 1571691561
Available here:
<A HREF="http://members.aol.com/newwriting/photoshop">Adobe Photoshop 5
How-To</A>
TacitR
>The Sample Merged option has been replaced by Use All Layers.
>I seem to be constantly clicking to avoid repainting what I just covered.
I've talked to Photoshop tech support about this.
The new behavior of the rubber stamp tool is deliberate. There is no way to
make it behave like Photoshop 4's rubber stamp tool.
The tool now behaves the way it did in Photoshop 1. It takes a snapshot when
you start cloning, and clones from the snapshot--so if you run over areas that
you have cloned, the ORIGINAL image reappears. They explained that they did
this because people who do not know how to use the tool properly were
complaining about the weird patterns you sometimes get if you clone over the
same part of the image again and again.
Your only solution is to (1) Go back to Photoshop 4, and (2) complain long and
loud to Adobe.
I believe that Adobe made the wrong choice. I also believe that a program
intended for high-end use should not be crippled in order to protect novice
users from themselves.
In fact, at the service bureau I work for, we have not upgraded all our
workstations to Photoshop 5, BECAUSE OF this rubber stamp misfeature.
(Normally, we buy about 40 copies of each new version of Photoshop. We bought
two copies of Photoshop 5, which we use only if a client has built images in
Photoshop 5. We will not purchase any additional copies, nor any copies of
future Photoshop upgrades, until there is a way to use the old rubber stamp
tool behavior.)
Compain to Adobe! See if they listen.
------
Onyx, the game of sexual exploration; Xero, the industrial magazine
of art, fiction and photography; and online photo gallery--all at
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
Steven
>
> >I've been having difficulty using the Rubber Stamp in Photoshop 5.0.
> >The Sample Merged option has been replaced by Use All Layers.
> >I seem to be constantly clicking to avoid repainting what I just covered.
>
> I've talked to Photoshop tech support about this.
>
> The new behavior of the rubber stamp tool is deliberate. There is no way to
> make it behave like Photoshop 4's rubber stamp tool.
>
> The tool now behaves the way it did in Photoshop 1. It takes a snapshot when
> you start cloning, and clones from the snapshot--so if you run over areas that
> you have cloned, the ORIGINAL image reappears. They explained that they did
> this because people who do not know how to use the tool properly were
> complaining about the weird patterns you sometimes get if you clone over the
> same part of the image again and again.
>
> Your only solution is to (1) Go back to Photoshop 4, and (2) complain long and
> loud to Adobe.
>
> I believe that Adobe made the wrong choice. I also believe that a program
> intended for high-end use should not be crippled in order to protect novice
> users from themselves.
I don't agree. Single stroke recloning doesn't make sense. To make a clone you
have to apply one stroke and you''re cloning what is in the picture at the
beginning of that stroke. If you want to make a clone of this clone you have
to apply a second stroke. Perfectly rational and consistent. It is not only
beginners that find avoiding recloning a pain in the neck.
> In fact, at the service bureau I work for, we have not upgraded all our
> workstations to Photoshop 5, BECAUSE OF this rubber stamp misfeature.
> (Normally, we buy about 40 copies of each new version of Photoshop. We bought
> two copies of Photoshop 5, which we use only if a client has built images in
> Photoshop 5. We will not purchase any additional copies, nor any copies of
> future Photoshop upgrades, until there is a way to use the old rubber stamp
> tool behavior.)
What do you need this re-cloning for so badly?
> Compain to Adobe! See if they listen.
>
> ---
> Onyx
>
--
ste...@sifre.demon.nl
(remove * if present)
TacitR
A good deal of the retouching we do involves removing elements from a picture
for advertising work. (We like this shot of the client's building for the
annual report, but please remove this smokestack from behind the building.)
Using Photoshop 5's cloning brush to do something like this
often--surprise!--causes the thing you're trying to remove to re-appear where
you really don't want it to.
Ditto for another common type of retouching we do--extending the backgrounds on
photos, typically for billboards or to make a photo reach the bleed area of the
page.
Photoshop 1 had a clone tool that works the way Photoshop 5's clone tool works.
I remember being overjoyed when Photoshop 2 came out and fixed the errant
tool--and I wasn't the only one; a review I read of Photoshop 2 praised Adobe
for finally fixing the tool. (As an aside, anybody remember who first wrote
Photoshop? It wasn't Adobe. They bought it. Hint: Think purple dinosaur.)
If you watch the way the tool works, you will see a crosshair appear where the
tool is picking up the image data from. It is counter-intuitive to have this
crosshair travelling over blue sky when in fact it is picking up a brick
smokestack--that is no longer even there.
Steven
>
> >What do you need this re-cloning for so badly?
>
> A good deal of the retouching we do involves removing elements from a picture
> for advertising work. (We like this shot of the client's building for the
> annual report, but please remove this smokestack from behind the building.)
> Using Photoshop 5's cloning brush to do something like this
> often--surprise!--causes the thing you're trying to remove to re-appear where
> you really don't want it to.
At that point you would be re-cloning the pixels you cloned already in the beginning
of the stroke. This will almost always create an unwanted pattern. The human
eye is very good at detecting very subtle patterns, even two identical patches
of grain are recognized.
> Ditto for another common type of retouching we do--extending the backgrounds on
> photos, typically for billboards or to make a photo reach the bleed area of the
> page.
>
> Photoshop 1 had a clone tool that works the way Photoshop 5's clone tool works.
> I remember being overjoyed when Photoshop 2 came out and fixed the errant
> tool--and I wasn't the only one; a review I read of Photoshop 2 praised Adobe
> for finally fixing the tool. (As an aside, anybody remember who first wrote
> Photoshop? It wasn't Adobe. They bought it. Hint: Think purple dinosaur.)
>
> If you watch the way the tool works, you will see a crosshair appear where the
> tool is picking up the image data from. It is counter-intuitive to have this
> crosshair travelling over blue sky when in fact it is picking up a brick
> smokestack--that is no longer even there.
The PS5 stamp lets you clone an area without destroying the source until you
let go of the mouse button. In my view the PS1/PS5 tool makes more sense. You
make one clone from one source in one stroke. If you want to make a clone of
that clone you have to make a second stroke from the new source. Seems logical
to me. Maybe Adobe should have given us both options?
>
> ------
Stephen Pollard
<ste...@sifre.demon.nl> writes
>TacitR wrote:
>>
>
>The PS5 stamp lets you clone an area without destroying the source until you
>let go of the mouse button. In my view the PS1/PS5 tool makes more sense. You
>make one clone from one source in one stroke. If you want to make a clone of
>that clone you have to make a second stroke from the new source. Seems logical
>to me. Maybe Adobe should have given us both options?
>
>>
>> ------
>> Onyx
>
we too regularly use the clone tool for retouching, typically removing
zits from faces, crap from scans, or extending portions of an images
content. Having just installed PS5 which had languished in it's box
since we bought the upgrade last June and tried a bit of cloning I can't
honestly say I've noticed any major difference for OUR WORK.
I would always use cut and paste to remove larger areas (like a
smokestack) either using paths or a selection. It's simply quicker. But
then I draw a LOT of paths so this solution is second nature to Me.
That's my point. PS is such a complex and feature rich app it is
impossible to please all of the people all of the time. Frankly I think
Adobe should be congratulated on succeeding in pleasing most of the
people most of time - no mean feat!
Where there are obvious flaws which most users would agree upon Adobe do
listen and do make changes - The awful sRGB colour space being a good
case in point which they have fixed in the 5.0.2 upgrade. Without this
upgrade we would have stuck to 4 like a lot of other pre-press users
I've talked to.
Personally I'm far more miffed by the slower screen redraw (at least on
PC's) in 5. Our 266 Pentium redraws the same image twice as fast in 4.01
as our 450 Pentium Zeon does in 5.0.2!
Anybody else experienced this?
--
Stephen Pollard
Steven
>
> In article <369A9B9C...@sifre.demon.nl>, Steven
> <ste...@sifre.demon.nl> writes
> >TacitR wrote:
> >>
> >
> >The PS5 stamp lets you clone an area without destroying the source until you
> >let go of the mouse button. In my view the PS1/PS5 tool makes more sense. You
> >make one clone from one source in one stroke. If you want to make a clone of
> >that clone you have to make a second stroke from the new source. Seems logical
> >to me. Maybe Adobe should have given us both options?
> >
> >>
> >> ------
> >> Onyx
> >
> I don't have your familiarity with PS1. I only started with 3. However
> we too regularly use the clone tool for retouching, typically removing
> zits from faces, crap from scans, or extending portions of an images
> content. Having just installed PS5 which had languished in it's box
> since we bought the upgrade last June and tried a bit of cloning I can't
> honestly say I've noticed any major difference for OUR WORK.
> I would always use cut and paste to remove larger areas (like a
> smokestack) either using paths or a selection. It's simply quicker. But
> then I draw a LOT of paths so this solution is second nature to Me.
I wasn't complaining. Just responding to the gripes of others.
>
> That's my point. PS is such a complex and feature rich app it is
> impossible to please all of the people all of the time. Frankly I think
> Adobe should be congratulated on succeeding in pleasing most of the
> people most of time - no mean feat!
> Where there are obvious flaws which most users would agree upon Adobe do
> listen and do make changes - The awful sRGB colour space being a good
> case in point which they have fixed in the 5.0.2 upgrade. Without this
> upgrade we would have stuck to 4 like a lot of other pre-press users
> I've talked to.
Huh? This is like trading in your car because the ash tray is ful. sRGB is a
bad choice as a default but it can be set to anything you like in two seconds.
> Personally I'm far more miffed by the slower screen redraw (at least on
> PC's) in 5. Our 266 Pentium redraws the same image twice as fast in 4.01
> as our 450 Pentium Zeon does in 5.0.2!
> Anybody else experienced this?
I don't see this on my Mac. BTW: You mean Xeon, right?
> --
> Stephen Pollard
Stephen Pollard
<ste...@sifre.demon.nl> writes
If your Mac is a G3 I'm sure your right, they are very quick.
--
Stephen
Chris Cox
<in...@polardcreativitey.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Personally I'm far more miffed by the slower screen redraw (at least on
> PC's) in 5. Our 266 Pentium redraws the same image twice as fast in 4.01
> as our 450 Pentium Zeon does in 5.0.2!
> Anybody else experienced this?
It's partly video card dependent, and it can be monitor profile dependent.
If you're using a third party monitor calibrator, the profile could be
complex and then the color conversions for display take more time.
I will have to say that I haven't noticed a difference -- and our QA
department (languishing on Pentium 90's) hasn't mentioned it either.
Chris
TacitR
>smokestack) either using paths or a selection. It's simply quicker.
Not if the sky has a nice, subtle gradation in it... :)
>Personally I'm far more miffed by the slower screen redraw (at least on
>PC's) in 5. Our 266 Pentium redraws the same image twice as fast in 4.01
>as our 450 Pentium Zeon does in 5.0.2!
Photoshop 5 on the Mac is not quite so slow at screen redraw, but it is
noticably slower. Also, there's a crashing bug in PS5's virtual memory scheme.
If you have assigned four different scratch disks, and you're working on a
large (say, 500-700MB) image for quite a while, then using the Edit->Purge
Histories command will frequently cause a LOT of hard disk churning (like unto
five minutes' worth), followed by a crash.
Don't much cotton to the fact that PS5's Image Calculations command does not
allow you to specify a destination channel, either. Used to be the destination
could be a pre-existing channel--even a color channel. Not any more; the
destination is always a new channel. This is bad. We have a client (Salem
Cigarettes) who uses a large (800MB) image in their outdoor advertising
campaigns. Sometimes they print it in six colors (CMYK+K+daglo green),
sometimes in 5 (CMYK+K). We have an alpha channel that is used as the daglo
green. In Photoshop 4, we can create a simulation of the daglo green in the
5-color version by Calculations->Cyan, Alpha, Multiply, 20% opacity,
destination: Cyan, and Calculations: Yellow, Alpha, Multiply, 100% opacity,
destination: Yellow. Can't do it in PS5.
Jerry Kindall
(TacitR) wrote:
> Don't much cotton to the fact that PS5's Image Calculations command does not
> allow you to specify a destination channel, either. Used to be the destination
> could be a pre-existing channel--even a color channel. Not any more; the
> destination is always a new channel. This is bad. We have a client (Salem
> Cigarettes) who uses a large (800MB) image in their outdoor advertising
> campaigns. Sometimes they print it in six colors (CMYK+K+daglo green),
> sometimes in 5 (CMYK+K). We have an alpha channel that is used as the daglo
> green. In Photoshop 4, we can create a simulation of the daglo green in the
> 5-color version by Calculations->Cyan, Alpha, Multiply, 20% opacity,
> destination: Cyan, and Calculations: Yellow, Alpha, Multiply, 100% opacity,
> destination: Yellow. Can't do it in PS5.
I suppose I'm missing the whole point, but why not just use that alpha
channel to load the selection and fill with the desired green? The way
you did it in PS4 seems needlessly arcane to me... of course, I do hardly
any print work, so there may be a reason I'm not seeing.
--
Jerry Kindall mailto:kin...@mail.manual.com Technical Writing
Manual Labor http://www.manual.com We wrote the book!
js
I switched to Xeons and it works much better.
sorry couldn't resist
sicko
Chris Cox wrote in message ...
:In article <7nlr6DAd...@polardcreativity.demon.co.uk>, Stephen Pollard
:<in...@polardcreativitey.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:
:> Personally I'm far more miffed by the slower screen redraw (at least on
:> PC's) in 5. Our 266 Pentium redraws the same image twice as fast in 4.01
:> as our 450 Pentium Zeon does in 5.0.2!
:> Anybody else experienced this?