move selection

[erikals]

PL

hi, wonder, how do you move the pixels within the lasso area, like in PhotoShop,
is it possible in an easy way?

http://youtu.be/faVMtjQ-9gQ

PL

[bkh]

Why don't you use cut (or copy) and paste and move the new layer into place (followed by "Merge down" if you don't want the extra layer). PL used to have a mode for moving selections like PS, but imo, these floating selections are a nightmare from a UI perspective – I never liked these pseudo layers.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[erikals]

PL
well, i could, i just think it's very time consuming when doing this alot.

i must admit i like the PhotoShop way of moving lasso selections / lasso selections 'with content' much-much better...
also i prefer if it would remove the selection when finished, again, like PS...

maybe we could have these as an option?

[Juan]

PL
well, i could, i just think it's very time consuming when doing this alot.

i must admit i like the PhotoShop way of moving lasso selections / lasso selections 'with content' much-much better...
also i prefer if it would remove the selection when finished, again, like PS...

maybe we could have these as an option?

Although I move from PS to PL years ago (I haven´t touch PS since) I really miss this "feature" of moving and transform lasso selections.

I agree with you, maybe as an option would be great

Cheers
Juan

[Martin Huber]

well, i could, i just think it's very time consuming when doing this alot.

I don't see, how PhotoLine's way is more time consuming. It is one command to create a layer based on the selection (Tool > Lasso > Convert Selection To Layer) and one command to get rid of that layer (Layer > Merge Down). You need two user actions with Photoshop's way, too.

If you need the commands quite a lot, you can assign a shortcut to them or place them in a toolbar.

Martin

[Herbert123]

I do not mind the different marquee behaviour compared to Photoshop. I always felt the direct pixel manipulation was rather awkward, and avoided it. I did have to get accustomed to Photoline's different selection ("lasso") behaviour at first, but never miss it now.

In Photoline you do have to remember to add a shortcut key combo to TOOL->LASSO->CONVERT SELECTION TO LAYER. I use <shift><D> for this. Then make adjustments, and merge the layer down (for which I created a shortcut <shift><m>).

(Copying will not work, since that places it either at the mouse position or in the center of the document)

You might argue that this introduces two extra steps, yet in Photoshop I kept having to undo those direct selection adjustments all the time resulting in more steps in the end, and it is quite destructive by its very nature.

By the way, Photoline's stubbornness to stick to the term "lasso" instead of "selection" in the English version creates an internal inconsistency in terminology in this case (lasso menu):

"Convert Lasso to Layer"
and
"Convert Selection to Layer" (Since when is the word "selection" in use to denote what is really a lasso?)

These are confusing to say the very least, and unless the user tries them out by trial and error both are extremely ambiguous in meaning.

Better would be:

"Convert Lasso to New Empty Layer"
and
"Duplicate Lasso Content to New Layer"

I don't mind losing the selection ("lasso") after performing a copy or duplicate of the contents, or converting a selection (lasso) to a new empty layer.

But the one thing I SORELY miss is an option to call up the last selection (lasso) in Photoline. In Photoshop there is a quick "Reselect" option, and I would love to see a similar option in the lasso menu ("Redo Last Lasso" - "Lasso" as an alternative for the correct English "Selection" forces some awkward functionality labeling, unfortunately).

[bkh]

It is one command to create a layer based on the selection (Tool > Lasso > Convert Selection To Layer)

Not quite. "Convert Selection To Layer" copies the selection – in order to move the layer content, you have to cut and paste. (I don't mind because cut/copy/paste are common keyboard shortcuts anyway.)

Cheers

Burkhard.

[bkh]

By the way, Photoline's stubbornness to stick to the term "lasso" instead of "selection" in the English version creates an internal inconsistency in terminology in this case (lasso menu):

I don't think that PL uses "lasso" instead of "selection" – in PL, a lasso is the (vector) line surrounding a selection (or the 50 % transparency threshold, if there is a soft border). "Selection" refers to the selected image content (and there is "mask" as well, referring to the selected area). One might argue that PL is often too precise in distinguishing between the three terms where common language would just use "selection" for any of them.

But the one thing I SORELY miss is an option to call up the last selection (lasso) in Photoline. In Photoshop there is a quick "Reselect" option, and I would love to see a similar option in the lasso menu ("Redo Last Lasso" - "Lasso" as an alternative for the correct English "Selection" forces some awkward functionality labeling, unfortunately).

Very good point.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[photoken]

But the one thing I SORELY miss is an option to call up the last selection (lasso) in Photoline. In Photoshop there is a quick "Reselect" option, and I would love to see a similar option in the lasso menu

Yes, I second that request. I'll add it to the "Feature Request" thread to ensure it's noticed....

[Herbert123]

By the way, Photoline's stubbornness to stick to the term "lasso" instead of "selection" in the English version creates an internal inconsistency in terminology in this case (lasso menu):

I don't think that PL uses "lasso" instead of "selection" – in PL, a lasso is the (vector) line surrounding a selection (or the 50 % transparency threshold, if there is a soft border). "Selection" refers to the selected image content (and there is "mask" as well, referring to the selected area). One might argue that PL is often too precise in distinguishing between the three terms where common language would just use "selection" for any of them.

Cheers

Burkhard.

Let me rephrase that, then: the internal model used in Photoline by the developers is also applied in the conceptual model of Photoline, and does not really line up with the mental model of the user.

As you wrote: in common language a typical user would not really (want to?) differentiate between these terms, and there are certain industry conventions/expectations how the terms are currently in use. When a user selects a portion of the image, he/she will not realize the distinction between a "lasso" and a "selection". Internally the developers do this - the question is: why bother the user with this, and obscure the interface?

PS I am playing the advocate's devil here - I don't mind Photoline's terminology that much, but I do realize that it can be confusing at times.

[erikals]

PL
thanks for replies,

just wanted to know if it was possible, as i like the PhotoShop method better.

then again, i guess i can make an action script that solves it, maybe combined with an AHK script...

PL

[erikals]

PL

removing handle previews would be nice too, as an option
http://youtu.be/LujXWNceePw

also as an artist, i seldom scale stretch the graphics, so the Ctrl+t option in PhotoShop makes more sense,
removing the handles clutter.

don't get me wrong though, handles are nice, just not all the time.

PL

[bkh]

removing handle previews would be nice too, as an option

It's there: View -> Show Layer Handles

Cheers

Burkhard.

[erikals]

PL
well, yes, sort of, it works with the layers tool, but not with the lasso tool...
also not being able to deactivate the handles at the same tool makes it confusing to work with.

so again, more like PhotoShop would be nice, as an option at least...

PL

[bkh]

well, yes, sort of, it works with the layers tool, but not with the lasso tool…

PL doesn't show layer handles when you use the lasso tool. Maybe your example video is wrong, and you mean the lasso handles? In that case, no, you can't switch off the lasso handles (or lasso frame), but you can switch off the lasso together with the frame and handles in the toolbar (which is often the best option anyway if you want to judge the underlying graphics).

Cheers

Burkhard.