Bring Transparency to the top menu level!

[greenmorpher]

different thing, Josef

Cheers, Geoff

[maxwell]

Hi,

Looking in the internet for "add transparency" a lot of different answers and possible solutions are given. Among others changing the background color of a layer to transparency or descriptitions of tools like "Color to Transparency" are the most often noted. On the other side changing the background color to transparency is in almost all image processing systems a layer property, as is the case with Photoline. In this sense if you are looking for "Add Transparency", at first a description has to be given what you are looking for and if "Add Transparency" is unambigous, which is not the case in my opinion. Photoline is a very complex software and to find the best places for all the tools is surely very difficult. The Hubers have problems if they like to satisfy all users.

Greetings

Josef

[greenmorpher]

With respect Josef, it is perfectly easy. But it is not going to happen so let’s not bother about arguing the point. Suffice to say I think what you are saying here is just empty words. There is no question or implementation or even of removing the current access to the item -- all that can stay. All I am suggesting is that access to the item be improved by adding it to the top level of the menus, obviously in addition to the odd little click on a tiny grayed out graphic buried two levels down the context menu.

I simply can’t understand where all this defensiveness comes from. it would make no difference at all to your use of PL, presumably, nor to the use of PL by the others who have defended the status quo.

Or would it? Are you all afraid one little menu alteration/addition it might make subvert your complex work flows?

Forget it.

Cheers, Geoff

[Herbert123]

I have to admit that it is odd that turning on transparency for a layer is only found in the layer properties via that checkbox. I suppose most of us have the layer properties panel open at all times, because it is so important in Photoline's overall workflow, and we do not think twice about that option after having used Photoline for a while. I am even unable to recall at this point whether the layer properties are visible or hidden when Photoline is installed for the first time - is it hidden? If so, I think it should be visible by default.

As far as adding the transparency function to the main layer menu: I am not against or in favour of this. I feel the underlying issue is really that we all have different workflows, and I would love to see a customization option which would allow us to change the menus themselves in the preferences. That way each of us could easily add, remove, and move/group menu items, and creating our own menu layouts.

That would be helpful to all of us, I think.

By the way, is that transparency option available as a menu item at all? If so, we could add it as a button to a toolbar. But I cannot seem to find it.

[greenmorpher]

I have to admit that it is odd that turning on transparency for a layer is only found in the layer properties via that checkbox. I suppose most of us have the layer properties panel open at all times, because it is so important in Photoline's overall workflow, and we do not think twice about that option after having used Photoline for a while. I am even unable to recall at this point whether the layer properties are visible or hidden when Photoline is installed for the first time - is it hidden? If so, I think it should be visible by default.

The layer properties are not visible by default on installation. I don't think any of the panels/lists are.

By the way, is that transparency option available as a menu item at all? If so, we could add it as a button to a toolbar. But I cannot seem to find it.

Nope, it is not in the menus at all.

The brothers could make it into a tool. The place for it exists: along with automask, autotransprency and whatnot.

Cheers, Geoff

[Herbert123]

In the latest beta the transparency option in the layer panel is now less obscure: instead of a tiny icon, the word "Transparency" is used.

[greenmorpher]

So it remains concealed as before, but if you mine down to it perchance, it is now more easily identifiable. And I wonder whether they have fixed the Help and Manual.

But it really is no change. The brothers are not about to do anything to their sacred engineers logic toolbar and menu structure.

Cheers, Geoff

[Herbert123]

So it remains concealed as before, but if you mine down to it perchance, it is now more easily identifiable. And I wonder whether they have fixed the Help and Manual.

But it really is no change. The brothers are not about to do anything to their sacred engineers logic toolbar and menu structure.

Cheers, Geoff

I wouldn't want to go as far as that, and I disagree that the developers are stuck in a "engineer's logic mode": in the last three years the brothers have introduced a great number of GUI improvements which were almost all requested by us users! Remember how we, just two versions ago, had to deal with all those modal dialogs? And everything looked quite old-fashioned. We could not even MOVE panels from their groups.

No, the difference in GUI now and version 16/17 is night and day.

I understand your frustration in regards to this matter and your preferred personal workflow - on the other hand, user research has shown that the traditional drop down application menus in an application are, for the most part, ignored by users for alternative options when and if those are available (such as that layer properties panel).

With the word change, it works like this now (let's assume the beginner PL user is searching for a way to turn a layer's transparency on, and the layer properties panel is not visible):

1) user is looking at the layer. Let's right-mouse click the layer. The context menu appears. Hmm, no option to turn the transparency on. Oh, there are the layer properties! Let's open those. Ah, found the transparency option. Let's turn it on. Cool, I can now work with transparency in this layer.
Result: one right mouse-click, two left clicks.

Or:

2) user is looking at the layer, and double-clicks it. The layer properties appear. Ah, found the transparency option. Let's turn it on. Cool, I can now work with transparency in this layer.
Result: one double left click, one left click.

The second approach is less intuitive - users are accustomed to right-mouse clicking an object nowadays - more than double-clicking. When I started out in PL I started right-mouse clicking the layers to see what I could do with them.

In Photoshop layers are automatically transparent. Only the background layer, when present, is not. To compare how Photoshop works: when right-mouse clicking the background layer, the top-most option is "background to layer". Different terminology, but pretty obvious once the user knows that only layers have transparency. However, a dialog pops up which breaks the flow a bit.

The second option is a hidden entry under Layer-->New-->background to layer. Not very obvious at all. I never use that option, and I know of no student ever to have used that option in my classes. Again, that dialog pops up which breaks the flow.

The third option is to <alt> click on the background layer, and it is the most direct method to turn "transparency" on for the background layer, converting it to a regular layer. Most experience Photoshop users opt for this solution.

As you can see, even in Photoshop the main menu option is hardly usable. I am unsure whether, even if "turn on transparency" is added to the layer menu, whether beginning users would actually find it. In my experience, by far the most students tend to completely miss the main menu in an application, and will look for options which they are looking for, in the immediate vicinity of the object in question.

With the current beta the word "transparency" is really obvious - as along as the layer properties panel is displayed. It is, in my opinion, easier to use than Photoshop in this regard. Select layer, click the checkbox. Done. But only when the layer properties are visible.

I see two simple solutions:
1) the layer properties are SO important in Photoline - that panel REALLY ought to be visible alongside the layer panel when Photoline is first installed. That would make it quite obvious to beginners where to look for layer options.
2) possibly the "turn on transparency" could be added to the contextual menu of the layer - if, and only when, transparency is not already turned on for that layer.

Of course, it could be added to the layer menu as well - I am just unsure how effective it would be, based on my experience with training users for the last two decades, and my knowledge of user experience design theory. There is only one way to test for this, and that is actual user testing.




3)

[greenmorpher]

The more I think about it, the more I think it should be a tool along with the two other transparency tools in the toolbox. A tool that can make a selection which would then have transparency or double click on it and the whole image has transparency.

I know some GUI stuff has changed; I have been around PL since v.whatever, 13 I think or was it before that?, but do you remember the discussion when, last year, about lasso selections? Yep, the brothers thought about it in exactly the opposite way to us users.

We weren't selecting what was inside the lasso but what was outside.

Anyway, I appreciate what you are saying. But you are also saying that the long menus are a waste of time. Good. They can dump everything else from them and just put in transparency!

[photoken]

...
and I disagree that the developers are stuck in a "engineer's logic mode": in the last three years the brothers have introduced a great number of GUI improvements which were almost all requested by us users! Remember how we, just two versions ago, had to deal with all those modal dialogs? And everything looked quite old-fashioned. We could not even MOVE panels from their groups.

No, the difference in GUI now and version 16/17 is night and day.

I agreee. When you consider the user customizations that can be done to the interface, ranging from constantly displaying every possible panel, list and dialog as separate little windows all over the screen to a "minimalist" look where everything is neatly confined to the docking area and only the two active panels are open, PhotoLine gets top marks for the useability of its User Interface in my book.

The logic of PhotoLine, in its concepts, their implementation, and its interface orgnization is one of its greatest strengths. If someone can't deal with logic, then that's their problem, not PL's.

With the current beta the word "transparency" is really obvious - as along as the layer properties panel is displayed. It is, in my opinion, easier to use than Photoshop in this regard. Select layer, click the checkbox. Done.

Yes. It's even more apparent when comparing PL to Photoshop Elements and PaintshopPro. When I used those programs and participated in their user forums, answering the question from a new user about why they couldn't erase part of their image to transparency involved a convoluted explanation like:
"Well, even though the background looks like a layer in the layer panel...it's really not a normal layer...you have to drill down into one of the menus to select the 'Promote to Layer' function...(what the hell does 'promote' mean?)...then, even though the background layer is still the bottom layer...it's no longer a background layer...and because it's now a normal layer...now you can get transparency on it..."

WTF is with all that????

Contrast that with PL, where you look at the layer's properties and enable Transparency. Done. Simple. Logical. Wonderful.

possibly the "turn on transparency" could be added to the contextual menu of the layer - if, and only when, transparency is not already turned on for that layer.

... it could be added to the layer menu as well

Absolutely not. Whether or not a layer can have transparency is now correctly only shown as one of the layer's properties. The main menus and the layer's context menu now correctly only show layer actions. That is how it should be. It would be a great mistake to add frustration when looking for a particular layer action to have to look past multiple properties entries to find the desired action.

In short, there's a difference between a layer's actions and a layer's properties, and that difference is now correctly maintained in the interface.

[Herbert123]

The more I think about it, the more I think it should be a tool along with the two other transparency tools in the toolbox. A tool that can make a selection which would then have transparency or double click on it and the whole image has transparency.

Actually, that is quite a good idea. I would not mind such a tool, and definitely see some scenarios where I would use that. It does make sense when you compare that with the other two two tools. Auto-transparency turns on transparency by default.

I know some GUI stuff has changed; I have been around PL since v.whatever, 13 I think or was it before that?, but do you remember the discussion when, last year, about lasso selections? Yep, the brothers thought about it in exactly the opposite way to us users.

We weren't selecting what was inside the lasso but what was outside.

Sure, it can be difficult switching or adjusting one's mindset/paradigm to a different line of thinking. That is why I enjoy these discussions, and I am certain the brothers are reading these posts as well to keep track of what their users are thinking about the software.

The one single thing that keeps bothering me since the very beginning is that selections of pixels cannot be edited directly - they first have to be copied to a new layer, then adjusted, and merged back into the original layer. I and others on this forum have requested a "direct manipulation mode" many times in the last two years. It would dramatically improve Photoline for pixel-level work and quick pixel adjustments. It could be a simple switch in the selection tool settings, and would make many users, and people switching to Photoline, very, very happy.

No response yet to this idea - and the frustrating thing is that Photoline used to work like that in earlier versions. Why not have both options? Best of both worlds?

Aside from this, however, I would say 9 out of 10 suggestions (when they make sense) are taken seriously into consideration. Compared to Adobe and other companies I have dealt with or still deal with, the brothers are incredibly responsive to suggestions and ideas.

Anyway, I appreciate what you are saying. But you are also saying that the long menus are a waste of time. Good. They can dump everything else from them and just put in transparency!

I do feel sometimes that the logic behind the menu organization can be somewhat vague initially. "Special tools"? But hey!, I have seen far worse. Still, it would be nice if we could customize and re-order those menus ourselves in the preferences.

[Herbert123]

The logic of PhotoLine, in its concepts, their implementation, and its interface orgnization is one of its greatest strengths. If someone can't deal with logic, then that's their problem, not PL's.

What would you think of an option to customize and re-order the menus in the preferences? That would be helpful. But I am unsure about the amount of time and effort that would take to develop, and I am unsure about the pay-off in practice among users.

Contrast that with PL, where you look at the layer's properties and enable Transparency. Done. Simple. Logical. Wonderful.

True - it is very simple once the layer properties are displayed.
I do feel the layer properties ought to be displayed when Photoline is freshly installed and started for the first time. First-time users should be made aware of the importance of that panel.

possibly the "turn on transparency" could be added to the contextual menu of the layer - if, and only when, transparency is not already turned on for that layer.
... it could be added to the layer menu as well

Absolutely not. Whether or not a layer can have transparency is now correctly only shown as one of the layer's properties. The main menus and the layer's context menu now correctly only show layer actions. That is how it should be. It would be a great mistake to add frustration when looking for a particular layer action to have to look past multiple properties entries to find the desired action.

In short, there's a difference between a layer's actions and a layer's properties, and that difference is now correctly maintained in the interface.

Good point, I never thought about it that way. I tend to agree. Perhaps a third transparency tool could help out instead. I actually quite like the possibilities of such a tool, as suggested by Greenmorpher.

[photoken]

What would you think of an option to customize and re-order the menus in the preferences? That would be helpful. But I am unsure about the amount of time and effort that would take to develop, and I am unsure about the pay-off in practice among users.

I share your concerns about that. There are many requests still outstanding that would be better uses of development time and provide new, real, and substantial benefits. The current options of creating a custom toolbar and a customized context menu can take the place of custom menu reorganization for the forseeable future, IMO.

Perhaps a third transparency tool could help out instead.

I don't see it. Unless I'm missing the point of the supposed new functionality, it seems that would basically muddy the waters about what Transparency tool to use and when....

[greenmorpher]

"Muddy the waters about what transparency tool to use and when?"

For goodness sake, Ken, you are talking absolute nonsense. There are basically three ways of introducing transparency to replace content in an image. You have tools for two of them in the toolbox, and for the other, you have to drill down into the Layer Properties menu/panel. Users would be confused by a third tool to cover the third contingency? The confusion is NOW, with the current structure.

In any case, all this is piss and wind -- the brothers ain't gonna do nuffin' and I ain't gonna buy more upgrades.

So we are all happy, I am sure.

Cheers, Geoff

[Herbert123]

In any case, all this is piss and wind -- the brothers ain't gonna do nuffin' and I ain't gonna buy more upgrades.

So we are all happy, I am sure.

Cheers, Geoff

That would be a shame to lose you just because of one relatively small niggle.

To put all of this in perspective: I have been a Photoshop user since version 3. I switched to Photoline a half year before Adobe went subscription only - I saw the signs on the wall. At the time my main issue with Photoline was the GUI and the overall modal workflow. Otherwise, I discovered that Photoline was extremely capable as an image editor (I do not care about the video and 3d fluff in Photoshop: I use professional software for that), and was actually able to do things quite elegantly which were a pain to work with in Photoshop.

Throughout the last three years I have seen SO many improvements, and the brothers are extremely open to sensible suggestions. Now, granted, there are requests of mine, ones which I feel would improve certain areas tremendously, that have not been implemented (yet?).

But the majority of user requests I have seen the brothers act upon: the GUI, modal dialogs (the important ones) have been addressed, variable stroke settings, small things such as the middle mouse button to pan the view, drastically improved guides, a dark interface with slider option, painting tools, dehaze, external app link that works wonderfully well, new resampling algorithms for great down-scaling (arguably better than Photohop), openEXR, Photoshop import, vector tool improvements, web export improvements (webp is not even available in Photoshop), placeholders, external(!) placeholders and embedded ones, new adjustment layers, anti-aliasing options, and much, much more.

Three years ago I started to draw more attention to Photoline via forums, review sites, and other places on the web by telling other users to take PL into consideration. At the beginning there were a number of users who would point out the ancient looking interface, and website, and would not take it seriously because of that. That is no longer the case at all.

Compared to Photoshop the improvements are quite staggering over the last three years. Photoshop hardly got any worthwhile workflow improvements (well, there are the crummy implemented art boards).

Adobe, with Photoshop, in the mean time, fail to address the many bugs and workflow issues which have plagued it for many, many years.

Simple example: since CS2 the so-called 16 bit per channel mode is actually a 15 bit per channel mode, and opening any true 16bpc image will remove information once opened in Photoshop. Worse, zooming out in an 16bpc image at 50% or less may introduce terrible gradient banding visually because of a legacy decision to shave off the image pyramid internally when in 16bpc mode.

That is a pretty bad workflow issue on several levels. And many users have fallen prey to this issue convincing themselves THEY are at fault when their images suddenly display with horrible visual banding, and try to fix things by introducing noise, etc. While in actuality it is a rather bad bug in Photoshop. Response of the developers is that this is a "feature". Yeah, right.

And there are many other issues that have been playing for over a decade which the developers just fail to address. The communication towards their users is at times stunningly elitist and patronizing. Just search the web for the controversy related to pre-multiplied alpha channels between a well-known professional user (forget his name) and Chris Cox (lead dev for the Photoshop team). The community was astounded and dismayed at how Chris behaved himself, insisting everyone else was in the wrong, while he was right.

I am just saying that any GUI in an application will have its workflow issues, and often these are experienced on a personal level. Personally, I would love to see a direct pixel manipulation mode for selections, layer based guides, and a number of other things being implemented in Photoline. I have asked for these a couple of times, as have other users.

But realistically developers have to make choices. I could allow my ego to control me, and become frustrated. And perhaps if these were to be show-stoppers, I would switch software. However, so far the brothers have indeed worked on improving Photoline tremendously, and their communication is by a multitude better than most of the software companies I have experience with. 8/9 out of 10 of my requests are acted upon so far, which is awesome. Every single bugs I have reported has been squashed, often within a couple of days.

It is all too easy to fall into a black and white mood with discussions such as these. It would be a shame indeed to see you, Geoff, stop updating because of one relatively minor workflow issue. And I am sure the brothers ARE listening to you, and have already made the first step by changing that obscure tiny icon to "transparency" as a label instead.

Anyway, any software has personal workflow issues. I just think it is slightly unfair to ignore all the GUI improvements and work done on improving the overall workflow in Photoline, and merely focus on one small thing, and then decide the developers are doing a poor job. That is just not true.