Welcome Dialog

Welcome to the Community!

We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.


Lightroom Classic: I'd like the ability to invert a mask

87 Votes
Engaged ,
Apr 10, 2011 Apr 10, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

After spending lots of time creating a mask, I think it should be possible to create a mask out of the remaining area so that you can work on it.
Idea Under review
TOPICS
Desktop

Views

25

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
52 Comments
Adobe Community Professional ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I have wanted this many times.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

There are many improvements I'd like to see to masking in addition to inverting, including:

a pen tool
ability to shift+click between any points to paint a straight line (not constrained to 90 degree increments)
ability to feather a mask, expand/contract or transform

Maybe the most far reaching solution to upgrading the masking function would be the ability to import paths/masks from a PS file. Can't expect LR to support all the functionality of PS masking, so let us do the work there and bring it in.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Given how much more advanced is Photoshop's selection ability (I gasp at what the true virtuosos can do), I wonder whether it's more difficult to write a more sophisticated selection tool in an application that is not pizel based.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Unlike Photoshop, Lightroom stores its "masks" as a sequence of brush strokes, not a bitmap. I think its entirely possible that to do all the kinds of things we want masking-wise, Lr would need some redesigning. This includes inverting the mask. Its trivial in a program that stores masks as bitmaps, but in Lightroom - not so trivial. Not just because its parametric, but because its initial design goals were different (there is no bitmapped mask to invert). Inverting "the mask " could still be done without a design change, but it would be relatively processor intensive.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Unlike Photoshop, Lightroom stores its "masks" as a sequence of brush strokes, not a bitmap. I think its entirely possible that to do all the kinds of things we want masking-wise, Lr would need some redesigning. This includes inverting the mask. Its trivial in a program that stores masks as bitmaps, but in Lightroom - not so trivial. Not just because its parametric, but because its initial design goals were different (there is no bitmapped mask to invert). Inverting "the mask " could still be done without a design change, but it would be relatively processor intensive.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Mentor ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm not sure why you'd have to invert the mask - just invert the application of the mask. Apply the effect wherever the mask is not, or multiply by 1-mask amount instead of mask amount.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Mentor ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm not sure why you'd have to invert the mask - just invert the application of the mask. Apply the effect wherever the mask is not, or multiply by 1-mask amount instead of mask amount.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"...invert the application of the mask..."

That would be useful too. I thought people were also wanting to use the inverted mask as a starting point and edit it before applying adjustments, which would take more code...

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"...invert the application of the mask..."

That would be useful too. I thought people were also wanting to use the inverted mask as a starting point and edit it before applying adjustments, which would take more code...

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lee Jay: Try this experiment.

Make a mask in a small area of the photo. Desaturate globally to zero. Try to add saturation back to the mask area. Does it work?

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Rob--if the automasks are strored as brush strokes, this would present an interesting problem: the boundary of the mask could change after it's drawn. Have you ever noticed that happening?

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I don't know about *auto*mask storage, but the mask *is* defined by a set of brush strokes that are stored parametrically. But don't take my word for it - you can see for yourself exactly what is stored:

- Save xmp then load the xmp sidecar into a text/xml editor. Or, if you dont have sidecars, load photo file with xmp into a hex editor.

Or, if you prefer to view closer to the source, use SQL on the lrcat file - PM me if you want query string detail.

Anyway, I really don't know whether Lightroom computes a net bitmask from the brush set before applying, or if its a different algorithm...

But the answer to your question is no - never noticed the boundary of the mask changing after drawn.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I don't know about *auto*mask storage, but the mask *is* defined by a set of brush strokes that are stored parametrically. But don't take my word for it - you can see for yourself exactly what is stored:

- Save xmp then load the xmp sidecar into a text/xml editor. Or, if you dont have sidecars, load photo file with xmp into a hex editor.

Or, if you prefer to view closer to the source, use SQL on the lrcat file - PM me if you want query string detail.

Anyway, I really don't know whether Lightroom computes a net bitmask from the brush set before applying, or if its a different algorithm...

But the answer to your question is no - never noticed the boundary of the mask changing after drawn.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
Apr 13, 2011 Apr 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

For some reason I can't add comments so I keep adding more replies.

Rob--I wasn't doubting what you were saying. I was just imagining that automask relies obviously on edges, colors, saturation etc. that could be changed globally and locally after the automask is recorded. Would that change the edge of the mask, or maybe it's all done in order so later changes have no effect.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You're pushing the limits of my understanding. Lee Jay?

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Adobe Community Professional ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lee Jay, I'm not sure of your point here but certainly you can paint in saturation to globally desaturated image - if the desaturation is applied in the HSL panel rather than in the Basic panel.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Adobe Community Professional ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lee Jay, I'm not sure of your point here but certainly you can paint in saturation to globally desaturated image - if the desaturation is applied in the HSL panel rather than in the Basic panel.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I wasn't doubting what you were saying" - sometimes I say more than I'm qualified to, so even if you were, its OK ;-}

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I wasn't doubting what you were saying" - sometimes I say more than I'm qualified to, so even if you were, its OK ;-}

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Mentor ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You could still do that. You could show the mask inverted and paint on it that way too (like alt-painting does now). My point is, I don't think you need a bit-mapped mask to have an invert function.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Mentor ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You could still do that. You could show the mask inverted and paint on it that way too (like alt-painting does now). My point is, I don't think you need a bit-mapped mask to have an invert function.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I don't think you need a bit-mapped mask to have an invert function" - You're probably right. Perhaps we'll see in Lr4...

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 14, 2011 Apr 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I don't think you need a bit-mapped mask to have an invert function" - You're probably right. Perhaps we'll see in Lr4...

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 28, 2011 Apr 28, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

CaptureOne just add the capability (in a dot release) to invert local adjustment mask - I guess this answers the question of whether its possible parametrically.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
Apr 29, 2011 Apr 29, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The announcement also included "Copy local adjustments mask from other layer". Does Capture One have layers?

Translate

Translate

Report

Report