Filters wishlist…

DH
Posted By
Darrel Hoffman
Dec 8, 2003
Views
447
Replies
8
Status
Closed
I’ve always sort of wondered why Adobe hasn’t really done anything to their filter library since – I don’t know, at least as long as
I’ve been using it, and I started in Photoshop 3. Alot of these filters could benefit from the addition of a few simple settings.
For example:

Distort/Ripple – comes in Small, Medium, and Large. Why can’t they just add a Size slider, that lets you choose any size you want?
You should be able to go smaller or larger, or in between the 3 set sizes it comes with. Seems like an odd limitation.

Distort/Shear, Stylize/Wind, both only work horizontally. They could use an Angle setting, or at the very least, a
Horizontal/Vertical toggle. Having to rotate your canvas 90 degrees to use them sideways shouldn’t be necessary.

Distort/Spherize, Distort/Twirl, Distort/Pinch, Distort/ZigZag all could use a re-centering option, as well as a scale setting. The
fact that it always uses the limits of your canvas size is a serious limitation.

Sketch/Halftone Pattern (Rings), also needs a re-centering option.

Render/Clouds and Render/Difference Clouds needs a Scale setting.

You get the idea. I’m sure you can think of others like this as well. All in all, none of these should be that difficult for them
to do, but the filters seems to be the one part of the program that hasn’t been improved at all since I’ve used the program. The
only improvement I can think of in this area was the Fade Filter tool, which really does nothing you couldn’t have done before just
using multiple layers. With all the improvements in the brushes, new tools, etc, I’m surprised this part has remained virtually
untouched. Or are they just expecting everybody to load up on 3rd party plugins? (Many of which are poorly written and unstable.)
I’m using PS7, btw. Does CS address any of this? I hadn’t seen any mention of it in any of the press releases, so I assume that
not much, if anything, was done…

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

R
RTM
Dec 8, 2003
Darrel Hoffman wrote in message
snip<
Distort/Spherize, Distort/Twirl, Distort/Pinch, Distort/ZigZag all could
use a re-centering option, as well as a scale setting. The
fact that it always uses the limits of your canvas size is a serious
limitation.

These have all been effectively replaced by the "Liquify" tool. Its time they were taken out altogether.
One(?) of Photoshops main weaknesses is having too many ways to achieve the same result.
Its just a way of falsely bumping up the features count, and it bloats the code.


Ron.
MR
Mike Russell
Dec 8, 2003
RTM wrote:
Darrel Hoffman wrote in message
snip<
Distort/Spherize, Distort/Twirl, Distort/Pinch, Distort/ZigZag all could
use a re-centering option, as well as a scale setting. The
fact that it always uses the limits of your canvas size is a serious limitation.

These have all been effectively replaced by the "Liquify" tool. Its time they were taken out altogether.
One(?) of Photoshops main weaknesses is having too many ways to achieve the same result.
Its just a way of falsely bumping up the features count, and it bloats the code.

Huh? Adobe may be guilty of this, but including old filters in the release is not an example.

Liquify does not completely cover the features of these filters , Adobe does not particularly list or otherwise feature these filters in its advertising, and filter files do not bloat the code at all, since they exist as independent files from the PS executable.

My guess is they leave these filters in because a certain number of customers are used to them, and there is no particular benefit to deleting them.


Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com
www.geigy.2y.net
DH
Darrel Hoffman
Dec 8, 2003
Double-responding…

These have all been effectively replaced by the "Liquify" tool. Its time they were taken out altogether.

I disagree. The Liquify tool has its uses, I’ll admit, but sometimes, you just want to do a simple twirl or spherize effect without all the complications of the Liquify tool. BTW, just TRY to duplicate a Spherify with the Liquify tool. You can do the Pinch, and you can do the Twirl. But there’s just no easy way to get a Spherify filter to work, let alone the ZigZag. (Though I honestly wouldn’t miss ZigZag. I’ve never really had much use for that.)

One(?) of Photoshops main weaknesses is having too many ways to achieve the same result.

That’s bullshit. There’s no such thing as having too many ways to achieve the same result. I would call that a strength, rather than a weakness. More ways to do something means more flexibility in your working methods. Each method has its own merits, and some can be used for things that others can’t. If there’s only one way to do something, and it has limitations, then you’re stuck with those limitations. Having an alternate way around it means there are other options.

Its just a way of falsely bumping up the features count, and it bloats the code.

Huh? Adobe may be guilty of this, but including old filters in the
release
is not an example.

Liquify does not completely cover the features of these filters ,
Adobe does
not particularly list or otherwise feature these filters in its
advertising,
and filter files do not bloat the code at all, since they exist as independent files from the PS executable.

My guess is they leave these filters in because a certain number of customers are used to them, and there is no particular benefit to
deleting
them.

Damn straight. But it is still strange that they’ve had this stuff in there for so many versions and not improved it even slightly. They haven’t added any new filters (well, maybe 1 1 or 2), and the ones they have are unchanged from whenever they were first included. I’ll agree that some of the filters we could live without (Stylize/Extrude, for example, is about the most useless filter I’ve ever seen.), but most of them are still quite nice, if used correctly. (The number of times I’ve seen people use Craquleure all by itself with its default settings is appalling. And I mean, in "professional" level work, too. There are few effects so easily reconizable at first glance…) But like most of the other filters, it can create some very nice effects when mixed with other things. I’m not asking for a complete re-write of these tools. Just a few settings which should not challenge Adobe’s programmers for more than a day or two. (Okay, I’ll admit I have no idea how much work it would entail, but really, how hard can it be to change "Small/Medium/Large" into a smooth Size slider, or to give a Scale setting to Clouds?)
EG
Eric Gill
Dec 8, 2003
"Darrel Hoffman" wrote in news:TL5Bb.5736$7p2.3834 @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

I’m not asking for a complete re-write of these tools.

Ten to one they figure it isn’t needed with the universe of 3rd-party stuff now available for PS.

Just a few settings which should not challenge Adobe’s programmers for more than a day or two. (Okay, I’ll admit I have no idea how much work it would entail, but really, how hard can it be to change "Small/Medium/Large" into a smooth Size slider, or to give a Scale setting to Clouds?)

More than they want to invest if they are running their coders as hard as they can stand. I’m willing to bet they are pretty busy on bugfixes for CS – what, five major updates all at once on two platforms?

"Just a little more" here and there has broken several teams I’ve been on.

I sympathize with you, Darrel, but if it’s a choice of major new features or tweaks to remaining ones…
SB
Sally Beacham
Dec 9, 2003
"Eric Gill" wrote in message
"Darrel Hoffman" wrote in news:TL5Bb.5736$7p2.3834 @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

I’m not asking for a complete re-write of these tools.

Ten to one they figure it isn’t needed with the universe of 3rd-party
stuff
now available for PS.

Nope, I think it’s the other way around. They’ve got a lock on the SDK and can control what third-party guys get it – so why bother upgrading their own stuff – if they come up with something competitive, the SDK agreement prohibits the third-party guys from marketing their own.

So basically – why throw any more money into it, because they’ve already locked the door on everyone else.

Everyone else using the SDK, that is.

Say it with me… OPEN SOURCE API.


Sally Beacham
www.dizteq.com/www.lvsonline.com
Paint Shop Pro, Filter Frenzy, Xara X
sallyATdizteq.com
H
Hecate
Dec 9, 2003
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:17:36 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

"Darrel Hoffman" wrote in news:TL5Bb.5736$7p2.3834 @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

I’m not asking for a complete re-write of these tools.

Ten to one they figure it isn’t needed with the universe of 3rd-party stuff now available for PS.

Just a few settings which should not challenge Adobe’s programmers for more than a day or two. (Okay, I’ll admit I have no idea how much work it would entail, but really, how hard can it be to change "Small/Medium/Large" into a smooth Size slider, or to give a Scale setting to Clouds?)

More than they want to invest if they are running their coders as hard as they can stand. I’m willing to bet they are pretty busy on bugfixes for CS – what, five major updates all at once on two platforms?
"Just a little more" here and there has broken several teams I’ve been on.
I sympathize with you, Darrel, but if it’s a choice of major new features or tweaks to remaining ones…

They can’t afford the time for they’re programmers to do it. They have far more important things to do like coding activation…



Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui
EG
Eric Gill
Dec 9, 2003
Hecate wrote in
news::

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:17:36 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

"Darrel Hoffman" wrote in
news:TL5Bb.5736$7p2.3834 @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:
I’m not asking for a complete re-write of these tools.

Ten to one they figure it isn’t needed with the universe of 3rd-party stuff now available for PS.

Just a few settings which should not challenge Adobe’s programmers for more than a day or two. (Okay, I’ll admit I have no idea how much work it would entail, but really, how hard can it be to change "Small/Medium/Large" into a smooth Size slider, or to give a Scale setting to Clouds?)

More than they want to invest if they are running their coders as hard as they can stand. I’m willing to bet they are pretty busy on bugfixes for CS – what, five major updates all at once on two platforms?
"Just a little more" here and there has broken several teams I’ve been on.

I sympathize with you, Darrel, but if it’s a choice of major new features or tweaks to remaining ones…

They can’t afford the time for they’re programmers to do it. They have far more important things to do like coding activation…

Which is, of course, WORSE than a complete waste of time, since it’s a PR nightmare.
B
broga
Dec 10, 2003
I know this isn’t the perfect answer but ways exist to manipulate the filters in the way you wish.

Distort/Ripple – comes in Small, Medium, and Large. Why can’t they just add a Size slider, that lets you choose any size you want? You should be able to go smaller or larger, or in between the 3 set sizes it comes with. Seems like an odd limitation.

I thought the Ripple filter has been made obsolete by the Wave filter whch gives much greater control.
————————————————–

Distort/Spherize, Distort/Twirl, Distort/Pinch, Distort/ZigZag all could use a re-centering option, as well as a scale setting. The fact that it always uses the limits of your canvas size is a serious limitation.

Why re-centre the filters? You know the filter works from the center of the canvas. Make a large canvas, mark the centre of the canvas with the guides and move the layer until the centre of the canvas lies under the point on the layer at which you want your filter to start. This, of course, also gives the advantage that your filter start point doesn’t have to be on the layer at at – it could be off to one side and the effect spread in across the layer.
————————————————–

Distort/Shear, Stylize/Wind, both only work horizontally. They could use an Angle setting, or at the very least, a Horizontal/Vertical toggle. Having to rotate your canvas 90 degrees to use them sideways shouldn’t be necessary

You can create your own variable toggle by creating a rotate action with the Action>Insert Menu Item command and assigning it to a function key. Rotate 90 CW and CCW already exist as actions in the Command set


www.micromountain.com

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections