Skip to main content

Filter by idea status

10000+ Ideas

Chain83Inspiring

Change default for Move Tool (Auto-Select)Open for Voting

The Move Tool currently defaults ot Auto-Select being enabled by default. This was changed a few years ago, we're past all the confusion this caused, so we've had time to see how well this change worked (or not).   Argument for keeping it: New users who don't understand layers can click on this on the image to move them, and this can be intuitive for someone completely new to Photoshop.   Unfortunately, in my experience (doing support on /r/Photoshop and holding Photoshop classes) this option being enabled by default causes more problems than it solves, and experienced users tend to turn it off. With overlapping layers it is easy to move the wrong layer as it will usually grab the top layer, making it "impossible" to move the desired layer.Example: Here, clicking the icon will grab the text layer. Not what new users expect!Example: Here, clicking the icon will grab the adjustment layer on top. Not what new users expect! Inexperienced users who are not aware of this setting might get stuck, being unable to move the desired layer. Yes, I've seen multiple times people posting online struggling with this. Even with the correct layer selected, once they try to move it grabs another layer. It's easy to with a click (that doesn't appear to do anything) change what layer is active and being worked on. Imagine finding out a bit late that you've been drawing on the wrong layer for some reason. Not fun.   I notice it has been improved to not grab unmasked adjustment layers, and while this definitely helps, it doesn't do enough to fix the above. So I think the default should be changed to Auto-Select being disabled (for a fresh install of Ps).

yoob111Known Participant

P: Request_Per-Brush Size Memory in PhotoshopUnder Review

Hi, I am urgently reporting a very inconvenient issue with Photoshop’s current brush size-saving system, and I’m asking for a fix.I love Photoshop and want to continue using it, but the lack of a per-brush size memory feature makes it very stressful to work with. Other art programs such as Clip Studio Paint, Procreate, Krita, and Blender’s Grease Pencil already include this feature, which makes the workflow far more intuitive.Here’s what I need Photoshop to do:Each brush should remember its own last-used size independently, rather than all brushes sharing one size.The current problem:If I use Brush A at size 20, then switch to Brush B at size 5, returning to Brush A resets its size—it doesn’t remember I last used it at 20. Even with the "Capture Brush Size in Preset" option unchecked, all brushes just share the most recent size. This makes it impossible to keep track of the sizes I set for different brushes.Why presets don’t solve this:Of course, I could save new brush presets for each size, but since I use 10+ brushes in one illustration and constantly adjust their sizes, creating endless new presets would be chaotic and unmanageable.Why the new 7-brush history isn’t enough:The recent update that remembers 7 brush history entries is not a real solution. If I use more than 7 brushes or repeat brushes multiple times, earlier size history is lost. Expanding this history might help, but it still doesn’t replace true per-brush memory. If adding the per-brush memory feature isn’t possible... please consider adding a separate panel (which can be turned "on or off" in the brush menu bar) just for managing brush history beyond 7 (for example, up to 50).Since the system automatically replaces older brush history once it reaches the maximum limit, having the ability to "pin" certain brush history sizes ("Pin" : "a feature that prevents automatic deletion regardless of the maximum limit") so they are not deleted and can remain available whenever I need them, would be great alternative solution. What’s needed:Brush A should always remember its last-used size. Brush B should always remember its own last-used size. Switching between brushes should not overwrite their sizes.This is already standard in many leading illustration programs, and it’s hard to believe Photoshop still doesn’t have this basic, essential feature in 2026. I know many professionals who have switched away from Photoshop because of this.I’ve waited years for Adobe to add this, and I’m writing now because this issue seriously impacts my workflow as an illustrator. Please, please add Per-Brush Size Memory to Photoshop. It would make a huge difference for artists like me who want to keep using this amazing program.

Substance Designer for IpadOpen for Voting

I’d really love to see Substance 3D Designer come to the iPad.I use Designer a lot, and I think it’s one of those programs that could actually work really well on a tablet. A big part of the workflow is building graphs, testing different nodes, tweaking values and experimenting with materials, so it would be great to be able to do some of that without always having to sit in front of a desktop PC.For me, the biggest benefit would simply be convenience. Being able to work on a material while sitting on the couch, on a plane, while traveling, or basically anywhere away from my main workstation would be incredibly useful. Sometimes I just want to experiment with a graph or make a few changes, and having to go back to the computer for that can feel unnecessary.Modern iPads are also surprisingly powerful. ZBrush, for example, works really well on the iPad, which shows that these devices are already capable of running serious 3D applications. Because Designer is mostly node-based, I also feel like the interface could translate pretty well to touch, especially for navigating graphs, connecting nodes and adjusting parameters. Apple Pencil support could be useful too.It would also be really nice if projects could move easily between desktop and iPad. You could start something on your PC, keep working on it later from the iPad, and then continue again on desktop without having to change your workflow.I don’t think an iPad version would need to replace the desktop version or have every single advanced feature from day one. Even having a solid version focused on creating, editing and experimenting with graphs would already be extremely useful.I think Designer is a really good fit for the iPad, and I’d definitely use it regularly if you guys ever decided to bring it over.

YoavLevaviParticipant

Optional "Magnetic Timeline" mode (Ripple edit & snap behavior similar to Final Cut Pro and CapCut)Open for Voting

Please introduce a toggleable "Magnetic Timeline" mode in Premiere Pro, inspired by the primary storyline behavior found in Final Cut Pro and modern fast-turnaround editors like CapCut.The Problem:Currently, making fast structural edits, deleting clips, reordering scenes, or inserting B-roll often results in unwanted gaps, accidental overwrites, or out-of-sync audio/video tracks unless the editor manually shifts clips or relies heavily on ripple-delete shortcuts and track sync locks. For content creators, social media editors, and documentary storytellers who iterate rapidly, the traditional track-based rigidity introduces unnecessary friction.Proposed Solution:A dedicated toggle button on the Timeline Header (e.g., next to "Snap in Timeline" or "Linked Selection") that enables Magnetic Mode:1. Auto-Close Gaps (Ripple by Default): Deleting, trimming, or moving a clip on the primary story track automatically pulls adjacent clips together with zero empty space left behind.2. Collision Avoidance: Dragging a clip between two existing clips pushes everything downstream automatically without overwriting.3. Smart Secondary Elements (Connected Clips): B-roll, sound effects, titles, and adjustment layers anchor to a primary audio/video clip so they move together when the primary timing changes, preventing sync drift.4. Non-Destructive Toggle: Editors should be able to toggle the magnetic behavior on and off at any moment, retaining full access to standard track-based editing when precise, multi-track finishing is required.Why this matters:Premiere Pro remains the industry standard for professional finishing and multi-track audio, but platforms like CapCut and FCP attract users who prioritize rapid assembly and friction-free pacing. Offering an optional Magnetic Timeline mode bridges the gap between ultra-fast pacing and advanced post-production capabilities without forcing users into third-party software.

HugoSantos
HugoSantosParticipant

Combine 3 App in 1Open for Voting

Not all of us are programmers.And yet, many of us are designers who still need to create web-based pages to present information, projects, products and ideas.That is the basic need.For years, Adobe Muse was a great answer to that problem. It allowed designers to work visually and build websites without having to become developers. We know Muse is no longer being developed. Dreamweaver has also been left behind in many areas, while XD seems to be moving toward the end of its journey.So here is a question for Adobe:Why are these capabilities still separated across different products — or disappearing altogether?Why not bring the best ideas from Muse, Dreamweaver and XD together into one new application?Imagine a modern Adobe tool where a designer could:• Design a website visually, without coding• Create responsive layouts and interactions• Prototype the experience• Work with real web content and components• Have access to HTML/CSS when needed, without being forced to start there• Publish directly to the web• And do all of this within the Adobe ecosystemThis wouldn't simply be “Muse 2.0.”It could be something much bigger.The web has become an essential part of almost every designer's work, but there is still a gap between designing something and actually publishing it as a functional website.Not every designer wants to become a developer just to get their work onto the web.And not every developer wants to spend their time translating every visual decision from a design tool into code.There should be a better middle ground.Adobe already has an enormous amount of knowledge, technology and talent across its products. The opportunity is to connect those pieces and create a tool specifically designed for the space between creative design and web development.And honestly, Adobe could use a killer app.A product that makes designers say:“Finally. This is exactly what I needed.”Maybe the answer isn't bringing Muse back.Maybe the answer is building what Muse was trying to become — combining its visual simplicity with the power of modern web technology and the interaction capabilities we expected from XD.I've probably heard this idea before. And I'm sure Adobe has heard it too.But perhaps it's time to ask the question again:If Adobe built one serious, modern, designer-first web creation tool by combining the strongest ideas from Muse, Dreamweaver and XD — would you use it?I'd genuinely like to hear what the design community thinks.And more importantly, I'd like to know whether Adobe is listening to us...

HugoSantos
HugoSantosParticipant

combine 3 app in 1Open for Voting

Not all of us are programmers.And yet, many of us are designers who still need to create web-based pages to present information, projects, products and ideas.That is the basic need.For years, Adobe Muse was a great answer to that problem. It allowed designers to work visually and build websites without having to become developers. We know Muse is no longer being developed. Dreamweaver has also been left behind in many areas, while XD seems to be moving toward the end of its journey.So here is a question for Adobe:Why are these capabilities still separated across different products — or disappearing altogether?Why not bring the best ideas from Muse, Dreamweaver and XD together into one new application?Imagine a modern Adobe tool where a designer could:• Design a website visually, without coding• Create responsive layouts and interactions• Prototype the experience• Work with real web content and components• Have access to HTML/CSS when needed, without being forced to start there• Publish directly to the web• And do all of this within the Adobe ecosystemThis wouldn't simply be “Muse 2.0.”It could be something much bigger.The web has become an essential part of almost every designer's work, but there is still a gap between designing something and actually publishing it as a functional website.Not every designer wants to become a developer just to get their work onto the web.And not every developer wants to spend their time translating every visual decision from a design tool into code.There should be a better middle ground.Adobe already has an enormous amount of knowledge, technology and talent across its products. The opportunity is to connect those pieces and create a tool specifically designed for the space between creative design and web development.And honestly, Adobe could use a killer app.A product that makes designers say:“Finally. This is exactly what I needed.”Maybe the answer isn't bringing Muse back.Maybe the answer is building what Muse was trying to become — combining its visual simplicity with the power of modern web technology and the interaction capabilities we expected from XD.I've probably heard this idea before. And I'm sure Adobe has heard it too.But perhaps it's time to ask the question again:If Adobe built one serious, modern, designer-first web creation tool by combining the strongest ideas from Muse, Dreamweaver and XD — would you use it?I'd genuinely like to hear what the design community thinks.And more importantly, I'd like to know whether Adobe is listening.