Neue Testversion 18.40b13

[Herbert123]

Burkhard: It did not work for me until I activated "draw isolated" for that additional group.

That's what I meant by "isolated group" – sorry if that wasn't clear enough.

Nonetheless, it is buggy behaviour.

I agree as far as the lines are concerned – this should not happen. Btw., those lines also disappear if you set the transparency of the 3d object to a value just below 100%, but at the same time, the overall transparency changes (e.g. in "3d flower.pld").

Apart from this, the handling of transparency for 3d objects is at least consistent with PL's handling of grouped vector layers – if you fix the 3d layer, you'll get a group consisting of vector objects which behave in the same way as the 3d object. The general advice in the manual is to use "draw isolated" if you need transparency to be applied to a series of vector objects together instead of each vector layer individually.

Cheers

Burkhard.

Thanks! I do have to admit here that I do not really use the 3d object tool in Photoline for real work - instead I am accustomed to work in Blender, Lightwave, and C4d. I create 3d content in those applications, and import it into Photoline. With the external file placeholder it has become much easier to update those assets, and (obviously) the 3d functionality in those applications is far more flexible and powerful. Still, Photoline's 3d object would become more interesting if it added some form or shape of bevels.

[bkh]

The layer containing the radial gradient fill is converted to a linear gradient fill, and there's no way to change it back to a radial gradient.

This seems to depend on the edge colour – if it's transparent, circular gradients don't work – probably because PL doesn't support these gradients on the edge? If you replace the edge colour by something else, circular fill patterns work – to some extent. Circular fill patterns don't seem to transform correctly – there is some transformation, but not the expected one. "Align Pattern" doesn't seem to have any effect.

I can reproduce the above with a simple circle with transparent edge – no need to go through the pdf export.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[photoken]

This seems to depend on the edge colour – if it's transparent, circular gradients don't work – probably because PL doesn't support these gradients on the edge? If you replace the edge colour by something else, circular fill patterns work – to some extent. Circular fill patterns don't seem to transform correctly – there is some transformation, but not the expected one. "Align Pattern" doesn't seem to have any effect.

Just to be clear -- I'm not asking for the radial gradient to be transformed in 3D space, just that the radial gradient be retained and remain editable. IOW, to behave like the gradient fill of a single vector shape when it's transformed by the 3D Body.

I can reproduce the above with a simple circle with transparent edge – no need to go through the pdf export.

Quite right. I had to mention the PDF factor because using PDF for round-tripping to Illustrator forces the original object into separate layers for the fill and the stroke, meaning that the radial gradient fill layer will always have a stroke of "None".

You're right about gradient handling also being dependent on the presence or absence of a stroke colour. With a stroke colour, I can achieve this:

3D shape stroked.png

and the gradient remains editable.

I can force the radial gradient to remain by first applying the 3D Body effect to an object with a stroke colour, and then setting the stroke colour to "None":

3D shape no stroke.png

However, the radial gradient is no longer editable.

At the very least, the behavior seems inconsistent; in addition to the radial gradient always being changed to a linear gradient, which I think is wrong.

[bkh]

However, the radial gradient is no longer editable.

You'll have the same result if you copy the fill gradient to the line colour instead of setting it to transparent – if you do that, at least the fill gradient will not change any more. Btw., is the linear gradient for the sides really what you want?

At the very least, the behavior seems inconsistent; in addition to the radial gradient always being changed to a linear gradient, which I think is wrong.

Indeed.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[photoken]

Btw., is the linear gradient for the sides really what you want?

Absolutely not. I just showed that image as an example of the only way I can retain the radial gradient on the (flat) face of the 3D Body. As in the first examples I posted, I want the sides of the 3D Body to be coloured with the stroke colour of the (modified) shape, per usual.

[Herbert123]

The GUI is ALMOST complete in terms of grey/dark interface colour control. The only thing left is to change the colours of the windows inside Photoline:

Untitled3.jpg

As you can see, the window chrome of the multiple windows stands out in a bad way.

[photoken]

As you can see, the window chrome of the multiple windows stands out in a bad way.

Rather than change the colours of the image windows (or, even better, as an additional display option), just use tabs for the image windows instead of complete window things.

I no longer have Photoshop Elements installed, so I can't provide a screen shot, but when using its default "Tabbed Document" mode, the individual images can be displayed in any number of layouts. Each individual image is contained in a simple tab, which eliminates the wasted space and distracting colours of window frames, buttons, etc.

[Herbert123]

As you can see, the window chrome of the multiple windows stands out in a bad way.

Rather than change the colours of the image windows (or, even better, as an additional display option), just use tabs for the image windows instead of complete window things.

I no longer have Photoshop Elements installed, so I can't provide a screen shot, but when using its default "Tabbed Document" mode, the individual images can be displayed in any number of layouts. Each individual image is contained in a simple tab, which eliminates the wasted space and distracting colours of window frames, buttons, etc.

I agree completely - but I was a bit hesitant to bring it up myself, since there already are tabs of sorts in Photoline. I would love to see true tabbed document windows, with buttons/shortcuts to control tabbed layouts.

[photoken]

I agree completely - but I was a bit hesitant to bring it up myself, since there already are tabs of sorts in Photoline. I would love to see true tabbed document windows, with buttons/shortcuts to control tabbed layouts.

OK, I tracked down a link to my 3-yr old download of PSE10 on the Adobe store site. I'm downloading it now and will install it in order to get a screenshot of its multiple image display and options. Then I'll post the image as part of a formal request over in the General Discussion forum.

[bkh]

I've just noticed that the window titles in PL's "Window" menu have become very long – they show the entire information in a document title (current layer name, colour mode, zoom).

Window menu.png

I'm not sure how "new" this is – maybe I've only noticed this now because of the relatively long document name. In any case, I'd prefer just to have the document title in the Windows menu. (Actualy, I could do without the additional info in the title bar – I normally use the Attributes Panel to look up this kind of information anyway, but of course others may see this differently.)

Cheers

Burkhard.

[photoken]

I'm not sure how "new" this is – maybe I've only noticed this now because of the relatively long document name. In any case, I'd prefer just to have the document title in the Windows menu. (Actualy, I could do without the additional info in the title bar – I normally use the Attributes Panel to look up this kind of information anyway, but of course others may see this differently.)

+1

It's there in PL 18.02, also.

I agree about only having the file name in the Windows menu. It's especially wasteful to have the image name repeated....

I really like having the additional info in the program's title bar, however. I only have to glance there instead of mousing around to get that info.

[bkh]

There seems to be a problem with the "Denoise" adjustment layer – the preview is far off when viewing the image at zoom rates below 100%:
The following image shows the problem at 25%.

Denoise 25%.png

(left: image with denoise adjustment layer, center: denoised image, right: denoise adjustment layer with sizes multiplied by zoom rate).

Seems that the parameters of the adjustment layers aren't scaled properly. (Imo, one also has to multiply the threshold by √zoom, but there is no significant difference in the sample image). EDIT: noise is proportinoal to the (linear) zoom rate, so the threshold should be multiplied by the zoom factor as well.

I'll attach the original file as well (it's a 100% crop of an image at ISO 25600, so don't be suprised).

Cheers

Burkhard.

[ellhel]

Hab gerade in "Anwenderfragen" den Link zur BETA gepostet. Darf ich das überhaupt, oder ist das nicht gern gesehen?
Dann lösch ich den Link nämlich wieder.

Grüße
Helmut Strieder

[Hoogo]

"Früher, als alles besser war (tm)", konnte die Betas benutzen, wer intelligent genug war, sie zu finden. Das waren die, die das Wort "beta" auch richtig verstanden haben und sich nicht über Fehler beschwert haben, sondern sie gemeldet haben. I liked that

Das wird aber offenbar schon lange nicht mehr so eng gehandhabt. Direkte links auf Betas gab es inzwischen öfters.

[ellhel]

Dann bin ich ja beruhigt… ..

Grüße
Helmut