Hello, I believe ever since switching over to the cloud version of photoshop I've never been able to get shapes to have crisp edges anymore. They all have a 1pixel blurry edge around all 4 sides.
Even if I left-click the canvas and create a shape with dimensions like 100x20, all 4 edges have a blurry "un-crisp" edge
This kind of defeats the purpose of using a shape/vector. The only way to get a crisp edge now out of the shapes tool is to create the shape then transform it. The transforming snaps it back into crispyness.
Is there a "legacy shapes" option? Or some setting in photoshop to make shapes be crisp as they should?
Im attaching a screenshot to illustrate this. The black box was created with dimensions 100x20 and it still ends up looking pixelated.
Explore related tutorials & articles
21
Replies
Select Shapes tool > Left click canvas > Assign 100 x 20 px size > and since photoshop loves to auto-add a 1px border that I never asked for, this is how it appears. The 1px border just exagerates how bad and ugly the edges of a shape are.
It's weird. I was trying to test if this only when i click to create, or always drag and drop create.
In one document it happens every time, 0.5 pixel position, every time, no matter where I click, no matter if i click to create or drag and drop. In a different document, repeating the steps actually gives me a perfect whole number every time no matter what?
Now I'm confused why one document only deals in .5 pixels and the other only works in whole numbers when creating shapes
Edit: oops forgot screenshot
Photoshop does not add a border that was not asked for, it adds a stroke based on the settings in the option bar.
If you ask for that stroke to be align centred in stroke options (for stroke options click on the reveal arrow next to the line in the options bar) then it tries to place a 0.5 pixel stroke at each side of your vector path and, as half pixels do not exist, it uses semi transparent pixels.
However, if you choose Align inside or Align outside then you get a perfect 1 pixel solid stroke either inside or outside of your vector path.
Alternatively, you can leave Align centred and click 'Align Edges' in the option bar. That will move the edges to the nearest full pixel.
There is no bug here to fix
Dave
@Callingoutn3rds wrote:
"If you require, sharpness regardless of size or zoom level then don't use a pixel editor"
@davescm Instead of bashing photoshop and telling me to change programs
Dave is not bashing Photoshop. He is just expaining how these applications work. Photoshop is raster application; Illustrator is a vector application.
This may help you to understand what's going on. Here I drew a rectangle in Illustrator and it will print perfectly at any size as long as it stays vector. Note that I have the View menu open and Pixel Preview is not checked.
If I export to JPEG or PNG or PSD, the rectangle will be raster, that's what those those file formats do. Here I've turned on the Pixel Preview so I can see what the image will look like when I export to a pixel format.
Illustrator also has a Snap to Pixel command. If I had turned this on before I started drawing, I could have avoided drawing across partial pixels altogether. (Best practice.)
I can also turn Snap to Pixel on now and adjust the anchor points so they snap to the pixel grid.
First: the bottom left
Second the upper right.
Here's the rectangle now that it's snapped to the pixel grid. Now it will look good in a pixel application.
Here I've exported the rectangle to a PSD and opened it in Photoshop. The zoom is 2000%
I hope this helps.
Jane
This isnt something that demands fixing?
By @Callingoutn3rds
My personal opinion is that the feature should never have been added or it should be taken out now. I'm also positive that it would make a lot of folks angry if Adobe removed it.
Everyone who has answered is a long-time user who volunteers on the forums, and all we can do is tell you the how —we can't change anything. What you might do is start a new thread and tag it as an Idea so the Adobe team will look at it and others can upvote if they agree. Follow the steps here:
Jane
Still no bug, but some misunderstanding in your last post.
This is how it works, I have shown the coloured background so the pixel grid shows up in the screenshots, each rectangle has no fill and a 1px stroke:
1. With Snap Vector tools to pixel grid on, the vector path (a vector path has no width) is drawn on the borderline between pixels. It is done that way as a vector path is commonly used in Photoshop to select pixels.
a. With the 1px stroke centered it uses semistransparent pixels at each side of the path to simulate a 1 px stroke using the two adjacent pixels to the path
b. Stroke inside looks like this, a solid 1px stroke but drawn within the path:
c: Stroke outside like this, a solid 1px stroke drawn outside the path:
d. Stroke centred but align edges checked look like this, a solid 1 px stroke drawn drawn to the right of and beneath the rectangle - effectively keeping the path size but adjusting the position to fit on the pixel grid.
2. With snap vectors to pixel grid unchecked, the path can be placed between pixels. I have placed it a third of a pixel down and to the right of the previous example
a. With stroke centered it is drawn using partially transparent pixels either side of the path and the transparency is indeed varied in transparency on each side
b. With the stroke aligned 'inside' 2 pixels are used both with adjusted transparency to simulate a 1px line placed at 1/3 of a pixel
c. With the stroke aligned outside then partially transparent pixels are used to simulate the 1px stroke
d. With the stroke centred and Align Edges checked a 1px stroke is drawn aligning to the pixels within which the path is drawn
All of this is predictable and controllable by choosing the options appropriate to your use case. It is not a 'ludicrous' interpretation by those answering in these forums, as you suggest above, or 'lazy coding/engineering'. It is simply the result of choices that have to be made when adding a vector function to a pixel based document. Hence my comment earlier that if you need an exact stroke on a vector regardless of zoom level, or position, then you should use a vector based editor such as Adobe Illustrator which is not constrained by the need to use pixels in the document.
You also said '.... photoshop use to handle shapes and any position just fine.' Photoshop has not changed its handling of vector shapes.
If you do want to raise an idea, then do so describing exactly what additional option you would want to see and what benefit it would bring . I would advise you though to avoid insulting the developers that may look at it to see if it has merit
Dave
Is it really that hard (or impossible) for a "pixel program" to simply work with fractions of a pixel?
By @Callingoutn3rds
There is no such thing as fractions of a pixel. It's not "hard", it's by definition not a possibility.
Until you understand and accept that basic fact, this isn't going anywhere.
Post a feature request if you wish, but there are no other ways Photoshop could work. Every possible variation is already covered in the available options.
And just to be clear: this is how Photoshop has aways worked, and how any raster editor has to work.
AdChoices