Skip to main content
jjwithers
Inspiring
April 9, 2011
Released

P: Clipping mask to a Layer group?

  • April 9, 2011
  • 48 replies
  • 22466 views

Just one of those things that i've always thought could come in REALLY handy. I have no idea how the actuality of this function would work due to all the possible complexities of the contents within a layer group... but wow, i often think i'd love to clip some adjustment layers to a Layer Group. I am aware of the Pass through to Normal feature but it doesn't really cut it.

48 replies

Known Participant
May 27, 2011
Working on a recent web design, I realized that there's a real limitation right now with the way clipping groups work.

Rather than sinking your R&D money into 3D, which IMO really doesn't belong in PS (see this thread in forums: http://forums.adobe.com/message/36350..., there are a number of improvements to existing core features that seem like a natural evolution of the feature set in traditional directions.

Currently, clipping groups are one of the more powerful features for creating complex compound elements. Smart Objects are great, but lacking an Isolation Mode or edit-in-place, often end up not being the best for creative work (you can't see the context as you make changes, or not as easily). But clipping groups suffer from a couple of serious limitations that constrain the designer's ability to develop compound shapes that still retain the maximum amount of flexibility.

1. Clipping groups do not extend to layer groups. A layer group can take a mask, but cannot take FX, whereas a clipping base layer can take FX which then can be composited "through" its clipped layers. Think of making a complex web button: the clipping group's base layer is the fundamental "shape" of the button, but can also hold the bevel, the drop shadow, and whatever other effects you might want for rollovers, etc.

2. Clipping groups do not nest. This is particularly useful when creating a compound shape, but also needing to leverage an adjustment layer that needs to be constrained to a particular layer. This issue could be addressed if clipping groups can clip layer groups, but I believe that until you address the nested clipping issue, you will not be able to code issue #1, beacuse the current UI does not provide any way to prevent you from putting a clipping group inside a layer group, so if you then clip the layer group, you run into the nested clipping issue. So you'll have to deal with the logic at some point anyway.

jjwithers
jjwithersAuthor
Inspiring
April 20, 2011
I just added a new comment pertaining to this at the bottom of this thread... with a screen shot.
jjwithers
jjwithersAuthor
Inspiring
April 20, 2011
Here is a another idea. See the screen shot. It would be great if all the layers labeled R2 could be put in a folder and somehow remain 'clipped'.

Image is not available

Inspiring
April 20, 2011
Marc, although it is possible to do what Joshua wants in a different way, it would be easier if he could add clipping masks to a folder.

With your solution, if you alter the shape inside, then you have to alter the mask too - that's why clipping masks are so much better (which I'm sure you know)

In addition, I'd also like to see the ability to make a folder into a clipping mask.
PECourtejoie
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 14, 2011
Yes, I get you, Joshua, hence my remark that SOs are not perfect...

It would indeed be useful sometimes to have more layer-like functionalities for Groups (especially the CTRL+Click to get the selection, without having to use Option+Cmd+E to create a temporary copy), especially if one works with people that don't know how to deal with SOs. But I think that the way forward is SOs, therefore, I'm glad that you are trying to tackle down some of their bugs!
jjwithers
jjwithersAuthor
Inspiring
April 14, 2011
I don't mind using smart objects at all. Sometimes they make my file sizes unbearable though. I have to work on outdoor print resolutions so things get big. quick. Also, i have to share my files with people of all different skill levels and sometimes a SO REALLY confuses them.

Additionally, there is a SO bug that i have been working with an Adobe engineer on which keeps my SO usage low. When a mask is added to a SO, and multiple transform tool procedures have been performed, eventually the coordinates of the transform box become zeroed out to the top left corner of the image even though the SO is elsewhere on my document. It is VERY frustrating once it happens because once it happens, it stays like that. I can launch the image into CS4 and transform the SO as expected but it remains 'broken' in CS5.... again... getting off topic...
Marc, it is hard to explain all my different scenarios of working. Yes, i add masks to my folders, yes, i change the blending modes to 'normal'... but i can say that this is one of those things on my personal wish list. The next time i come across an example in my workflow (which might take a few weeks), i will post it.
PECourtejoie
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 14, 2011
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Marc. I didn't know how to answer without sounding arrogant or rude either 😉

Joshua, I think that the multiple "shortcomings" for Layer groups (no way to apply styles; no way to CTRL+Click them to create a mask of their pixel opacity [one of my pet peeves] ; or getting a thumbnail that shows the content of the group, since the arrow and bolding of the title are telltale enough for me; no way to Clip layers to them) have a reason...
I doubt that these requests have never been submitted before, and that there is a genuine reason why those features have never been implemented. That said, all of those "shortcomings" or missing features can be fulfilled by converting the layer group to a smart object. (If I may jest the following in good spirit: if that's advanced enough for you 😉 )

For me, smart objecting becomes more and more common than grouping, with the added advantages that I outlined earlier.
I know it is difficult to change years of habits, but if you just consider SOs as Super Groups, you will have a hard time to come back.
(And yes, I know that they are not always perfect)
marcbjango
Known Participant
April 14, 2011
Add a mask to the group (folder)?

(I definitely like advanced compositing abilities, but can't think of a use case where what you're after could do something you can't already do.)
jjwithers
jjwithersAuthor
Inspiring
April 14, 2011
What if i want to clip a layer that isn't an adjustment layer? a layer of pixel data instead?
marcbjango
Known Participant
April 14, 2011
I think it's very on-topic. Normal lets you apply adjustment layers to a group and only have it affect the group and not what's underneath. Isn't that exactly what you're after?