CTA: COPY, PASTE, and SPREAD this plea, if you dare, or care, or are simply bored with your **pixel-stiff-challenged life.
Q: DO WE WANT PIXEL BENDER for PS CC?
A: YES, globally endorsed in 87 languages and accompanied by thunderous communal stomping.
Dear ADOBE cyber-gods,
Kindly gift the masses with a current cc version of:
PS PIXEL BENDER plugin/action. WHY? BECAUSE:
IOW: Just do it.
Enthusiastically endorsed by,
Millions of pensive PS Minions
*PS: Insert groveling.
**Stiff http://www.dictionary.com/stiff: definition, rigid or firm; difficult or impossible to bend or flex.
Attribution:Translated from Minon-esque to English by Constance, without regard to FICA scores, race, religion, nationality, health, age, geek-factor-rating, sex or stature.
No trees were harmed in the production of this letter, though trillions of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
#ps pixel bender, #ps pixel bender script, #ps pixel bender plugin, #ps pixel bender issue, #ps pixel bender action
[Edit from all caps to proper case by mod]
71 votes for the existing Feature Request in 5 years just does not seem that impressive …
[updated link to the Idea]
Maybe the reason is that it is burried here that normally noone even know about this article exists (including me now as I am trying to find the simplest possible way of writing simple straight-forward Photoshop CC2019 filter plugin)! 😞
i have been hunting for something like pixel bender for years. there is nothing. the 'oil painting' filter is garbage. useless. it is unbelievable that a feature so popular would be trashed for no reason and not replaced with something better.
also, can we please get a:
a utility or blueprint as to how to make our own working mixer brushes
downloadable art history brush styles......corel painter is merely using that technology for their 'autopainting ' and photoshop continues to leave the same crude but nifty styles there and doesn't add to them or make the method public so people can sell them or share their own styles.
Moderator Edit: All Caps removed
it is unbelievable that a feature so popular
What exactly do you mean by »so popular«?
In my experience most Photoshop users did not bother with the Labs offerings like Pixel Bender and Configurator.
So while it is regrettable that they were discontinued I would expect that this did not affect a significant percentage of Photoshop users.
If you don’t want to use it don’t, but the Pixel Bender Add On/Plugin is singular in what it does. It allows you to create realistic paint strokes to the extreme. Giving you a base for digital painting or just a stand alone app.
The oil paint filter is like green tea and Pixel Bender is like Burnt expresso. Night and Day. I’ve looked high and low for add ons, extensions and plugins that do the same thing and there simply isn’t anything out there.
Sell it on the side like apparently they did briefly. They already made the thing, it’s just a script. Sell it. It’s free money.
If you’re editing a photo and retouching do you need it? no. If you do design and digital painting do you want it-100% yes.
If you google ‘where did pixel bender go’, ‘pixel bender app gone’ , etc. it’s not an insignificant number.
It does what nothing else does.
Sell it on the side like apparently they did briefly.
That they did not, as far as I know; it was not sold but given away for free by Adobe Labs.
If I understood correctly at the time this was in part done to assess how users would react to it and use it.
And the result was apparently underwhelming.
With updated numbers:
75 votes for the existing Feature Request in 7 years just does not seem that impressive …
They already made the thing, it’s just a script.
I, too, consider it regrettable that it was discontinued but your assessment seems oversimplified and is probably not correct because a lot has been going on with Photoshop, the OS’ and the hardware since PB was last released.
I personally had only briefly looked into it (for un-premultiplying for example) and had certainly not taken full advantage of the possibilities, so I miss it less strongly than you but Adobe’s decision is ultimately a commercial one.
I suppose they did not see a sufficient demand to justify the expenditure.
Learning C++ in order to program a proper Photoshop Filter oneself seems a pretty high bar so maybe you should keep an old Photoshop version around (possibly even an old computer with the old OS and hardware) to be able to use the Filter.
Have you looked into alternatives to Photoshop itself? I have not tested it but Painter used to have a good reputation for digital painting.
I wouldn't say that Adobe's judgement is clear cut and based on commercial viability; look at the endless forums about glitches with Wacom pen pressure, the transform tool flipping it's function so that the most common usage requires holding the shift key or running a line of code for starters. I purchased 3 different add ons to try and do what PB did and no dice. If it isn't broke, why break it? It cost them nothing to leave it, it didn't require expansion and it could've even become an extension of the art history brush (thereby allowing PS users to have a Corel like customizable 'autopaint' feature. PS isn't just for photogs, designers and digital artists alike swear by it. I can't see justify buying Corel Painter because almost everything Corel does, PS already has functions that correlate. It doesn't do thick paint simulation or blenders that are only blenders, doesn't have autopaint but I haven't seen anything else that PS doesn't already do. I was blown away when i started digital painting that in the original default actions was a cloning action! I had to go to my kid's computer and steal her default set (because over the years I've become an action crackhead, messed with my palettes and deleted the defaults that would show up everytime ps had a brain fart or update or my pc crashed. who knew? I hope that they at least offer it as a separate purchase because it's an insane tool. The one thing it couldn't do was render dramatically in large image files-but for something like art filters you can run it on a smaller image and smart upsize anyway. If you ever find a copy of it on PS CS 5, give it a ride.
You said in your experience, most Photoshop users did not bother with.... How do you know this? How many Photoshop users did you talk to? I'm part of a community that discusses all things Lightroom and Photoshop. They are also lamenting that this feature is not available with Photoshop CC.
Hi, I think that there was not such an uproar on the forums, compared to the transformgate.
I do miss the Droste effect dearly!
I whish that a simple programmable platform was available, with some recipes, like Paper.JS, but for total noobs like me.
Did you go vote on the linked feature request?
I agree that somehting like this for Photoshop CC is really needed as it seems to be the easiest possible way how to write your own filter plugin.
And I also do not get what is so complicated for Adobe to maintain this - is there some extremelly like totally different code for CC comp[ared to CS that it would require hundreds of Adobe developers to maintain this? I do not believe so, it is just pure excuse for saying "See, we were really appreciative when Photoshop was gaining popularity abnd support from users many years ago but now, oh please, don't bother and move on" - although just a assumption but it really look like it to me, Adobe do not care much for their users base if they do not get a buck from it (sad, really sad behavior but it is telling a lot and I am not the only one seeing this for some time now).
Like it would probably ruin them if they would assign small team (1-10 ppl) to make this updated cos they are so pure, actually one of the purest software company in the world (yea, right).