Why backgrounds?

OcTavO wrote:

It’s probably a dumb question, but what’s the point in the ‘background’ layer? I can’t really find a difference between it and a normal layer except that it’s way less versatile. I always end up converting my backgrounds to layers and most of the people I work with do to. So, does adobe keep this annoying quirk in place just to add a step to our already too busy lives, or is there some magnificent secret about background layers that I’m missing?

Layers make the file size larger for one. I have never had a problem with the Background. Easy enough to convert back and forth if need be.

—
Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html

Personally, I use the Background layer as a "Master", in case I have to reference back to it.

"edjh" wrote in message

OcTavO wrote:

It’s probably a dumb question, but what’s the point in the ‘background’ layer? I can’t really find a difference between it and a normal layer except
that it’s way less versatile. I always end up converting my backgrounds to
layers and most of the people I work with do to. So, does adobe keep this annoying quirk in place just to add a step to our already too busy lives, or
is there some magnificent secret about background layers that I’m missing?

Layers make the file size larger for one. I have never had a problem with the Background. Easy enough to convert back and forth if need be.
—
Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html

In article <1FfSe.5972$>,
"OcTavO" wrote:

It’s probably a dumb question, but what’s the point in the ‘background’ layer? I can’t really find a difference between it and a normal layer except that it’s way less versatile.

The "background" is not actually a layer.

Most file formats, like JPEG and BMP and so on, do not permit layers. The format has no way of saving layer information at all; it’s not allowed by the file specification. So when you open such a file, there are no layers–only a "background," which you cannot perform layer operations on.

—
Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

"tacit" wrote in message

In article <1FfSe.5972$>,
The "background" is not actually a layer.
Most file formats, like JPEG and BMP and so on, do not permit layers. The format has no way of saving layer information at all; it’s not allowed by the file specification. So when you open such a file, there are no layers–only a "background," which you cannot perform layer operations on.

But the step from background to layer is a simple one that could be automated by the program upon opening. Why does adobe leave it as an less operable area that either has to be duplicated or converted by the user? I know it’s a small thing and not really anything to gripe about, but to me it seems like an inefficiency amongst an otherwise astonishingly efficient program. I guess what I’m really asking is this:

"For what reason do the creators of PS have files opening into a less versatile background, instead of into a more versatile layer, when this conversion could simply be an automatic part of the opening process?"

OcTavO wrote:

"tacit" wrote in message

In article <1FfSe.5972$>,
The "background" is not actually a layer.
Most file formats, like JPEG and BMP and so on, do not permit layers. The format has no way of saving layer information at all; it’s not allowed by the file specification. So when you open such a file, there are no layers–only a "background," which you cannot perform layer operations on.

But the step from background to layer is a simple one that could be automated by the program upon opening. Why does adobe leave it as an less operable area that either has to be duplicated or converted by the user? I know it’s a small thing and not really anything to gripe about, but to me it seems like an inefficiency amongst an otherwise astonishingly efficient program. I guess what I’m really asking is this:

"For what reason do the creators of PS have files opening into a less versatile background, instead of into a more versatile layer, when this conversion could simply be an automatic part of the opening process?"

As Tacit indicated, it’s because the files are built that way. I doubt it’s a problem for most users. If you have to convert, simply hold down Alt and double-click on the layer in the palette. If you wish an action could be made that convert a folder full in batch.

—
Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 21:49:04 GMT, "OcTavO"
wrote:

"tacit" wrote in message

In article <1FfSe.5972$>,
The "background" is not actually a layer.
Most file formats, like JPEG and BMP and so on, do not permit layers. The format has no way of saving layer information at all; it’s not allowed by the file specification. So when you open such a file, there are no layers–only a "background," which you cannot perform layer operations on.

But the step from background to layer is a simple one that could be automated by the program upon opening. Why does adobe leave it as an less operable area that either has to be duplicated or converted by the user? I know it’s a small thing and not really anything to gripe about, but to me it seems like an inefficiency amongst an otherwise astonishingly efficient program. I guess what I’m really asking is this:

"For what reason do the creators of PS have files opening into a less versatile background, instead of into a more versatile layer, when this conversion could simply be an automatic part of the opening process?"

From my point of view, because I *never* do anything to the background .. I make a new layer by copy and work on that. My psd/tiff, therefore, always contains the original, plus the image I’ve worked on. It’s an extra backup and you can never have too many of those.

—

Hecate – The Real One

Fashion: Buying things you don’t need, with money
you don’t have, to impress people you don’t like…

In article <kToSe.6324$>,
"OcTavO" wrote:

But the step from background to layer is a simple one that could be automated by the program upon opening. Why does adobe leave it as an less operable area that either has to be duplicated or converted by the user?

Because if it were converted automatically to a layer, it would upon re-saving be converted back to a background, potentially losing such aspects as layer masks and the like.

Under no circumstances should any well-designed program EVER automatically change user data automatically without the user’s consent.

—
Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

In article <1FfSe.5972$>,
says…

It’s probably a dumb question, but what’s the point in the ‘background’ layer? I can’t really find a difference between it and a normal layer except that it’s way less versatile. I always end up converting my backgrounds to layers and most of the people I work with do to. So, does adobe keep this annoying quirk in place just to add a step to our already too busy lives, or is there some magnificent secret about background layers that I’m missing?

I choose to believe that it is an extra measure of safety to basically lock the image Layer, so one will not inadvertantly alter it, unless they REALLY want to. It would be nice to have a Preference to allow this Layer to come in un-locked, but then many might check THAT and accidently mess up images they do not intend to manipulate – all of us have done something to the WRONG Layer, and had to go back using some form of History, Snapshot, etc, all the while cursing about, "how could I have been so dumb, as to not check which Layer I had active… "

Hunt

Thanks for all the replies folks. If they really are a necessity due to file format, then personally I’d love to see an option in the preferences to "open all files as layer". But that’s just my peeve. 🙂

In article <Oe1Te.7351$>,
says…

Thanks for all the replies folks. If they really are a necessity due to file format, then personally I’d love to see an option in the preferences to "open all files as layer". But that’s just my peeve. 🙂

Adobe Studio has an area to suggest changes/features/modifications for upcoming versions of PS. This might be one to suggest.

Hunt