How to make a gigantic layer thumbnail?

[mysysctrlm74982608]

The largest thumbnail in the layer flyout menu option is not sufficient, I need a gigantic one.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

I know of no option for this – other than changing the screen resolution on the OS-side. 

Why do you need larger icons? 

[mysysctrlm74982608]

I need an independent window to show what am I doing besides the artboard synchronously.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

I haven’t gotten into UXP Panels myself, but maybe you could create a custom Layers Panel. 

@DavideBarranca , please forgive the intrusion, but do you know if this would be feasible? 

[Davide_Barranca]

Why not!

The Imaging API for UXP have been just published in Beta (they're likely gonna change before getting to the Release version), those might be useful to get the layer's thumbnail.

[barbara_a]

As previously said, no way to increase layer thumbnails at this time.

Depending on your workflow, you might find the Navigator panel useful. (WIndow > Navigator)

Navigator will show the currently visible layers in a single preview. You can enlarge or reduce the size of the panel which will enlarge or reduce the preview.

[mysysctrlm74982608]

Thanks, but I am not a newbie.

[rayek.elfin]

If you only need a second or third view of the same document: are you aware that you can open multiple views of the same file?

Window menu-->Arrange submenu-->New Window

Then arrange the windows using the same Arrange menu.

Or do you require separate individual views of each layer thumbnail? (Not sure if this is possible.)

[mysysctrlm74982608]

Nope, I need the independent layer thumbnail, not a window.

[rayek.elfin]

Nope, not directly possible.

I suppose it is possible to convert a layer to a smart object, and then open that smart object in a new window. But editing a smart object's content does not automatically update the parent file: it must be saved first.

If I may ask: what kind of project are you working on that requires gigantic thumbnails? Could you provide us with more information? We might be able to give you an alternative workflow.

In any case, layer thumbnails aren't meant to direct precise work. What size would you expect to work for you? 128x128? 256x265? 512x512? I've never heard of anyone needing large layer thumbnails that way.

In a different image editor (PhotoLine) the max size of layer thumbnails is 256px, and even that isn't enough for precise preview work.

[mysysctrlm74982608]

I need to see the details of Layer B, but because Layer A is above my Layer B, I can not directly tell what I am doing on Layer B. I need Layer A constantly on Layer B, but I have to know the instant variation on Layer B.

[thejanebradbury]

Can you not simply have Layer A at a lower opacity? Enough to see it in relation to Layer B, but so you can work on Layer B and see what you are doing. And depending on colour etc. maybe a Blend Mode would work? Like having a sketch layer set at Multiply.

[mysysctrlm74982608]

But opacity and other channels disturb clarity. Without clarity, I am unable to see the details.

[thejanebradbury]

Well, it's very difficult to give you an appropriate suggestion without knowing what is on Layer A or Layer B and how they might interact. My own approach would be to find an opacity/blend mode that worked, perhaps even make a copy of Layer A with a different colour if that was causing a problem, then delete it when the work was done on Layer B.

[rayek.elfin]

Here is a workaround that, while not perfect, may still be helpful:

1. convert layer B to a smart object.
2. double-click the smart object to edit B's content
3. arrange the parent file and smart object view side by side.
4. edit B, save (ctrl-s). The changes update in the parent view after a second.

Even if this is not a real-time feedback, it will still allow you to make changes to a clearly visible content of B and view the composition result of A&B in the other view while working.

It's too bad that we cannot hide and show different layers for each individual document view, because that would have solved your workflow issue. Perhaps an idea as a feature suggestion?

[mysysctrlm74982608]

But layer A is still above both parent and sublayers; it's not working.

[mysysctrlm74982608]

I need Layer A above Layer B while Layer B is still editable, and Layer A doesn't need to be invisible.

[mysysctrlm74982608]

But I can still check Layer B's status without manually hiding Layer B.

[mysysctrlm74982608]

My bad, but I can still check Layer B's status without manually hiding Layer A.

[Nancy OShea]

I need to see the details of Layer B, but because Layer A is above my Layer B, I can not directly tell what I am doing on Layer B.

By @mysysctrlm74982608

==========

@mysysctrlm74982608 

1. Use the Photoshop Navigator tool to zoom and select a region.

2. Toggle layer visibility on/off with the Eyeball icon.  Alt+ click on icon to disable visibility on all Layers except the selected one.   See screen capture below.

Hope that helps.

Merry Christmas!

❄ ☃ ❄

[mysysctrlm74982608]

It has to hide the layer manually. I need to see the gigantic thumbnail because I can check every single layer's details separately, but to use the navigator to only check from the top of all layers, not individually.

[D Fosse]

I need to see the details of Layer B, but because Layer A is above my Layer B, I can not directly tell what I am doing on Layer B. I need Layer A constantly on Layer B, but I have to know the instant variation on Layer B.

By @mysysctrlm74982608

If a "gigantic layer thumbnail" would solve this - in other words monitoring a physically separate, secondary image - I really struggle to understand why temporarily dragging layer B to the top won't do the same?

Dragging a layer in the layer stack seems a much more ergonomically efficient way to approach this - ?

[Nancy OShea]

In my outlier example above, all layers are very similar and transparent.  Dragging Layer B above layer A alone doesn't tell me much.  Disabling visibility is the best way I know to isolate Layer B content from the rest of the stack.

[rayek.elfin]

@D Fosse  My guess is that the OP wants to work on layer B without distractions AND still display the result together with the other layers (A) with real-time feedback.

It is actually a viable request in my opinion, but not possible (perhaps with some scripting? Not sure.)

[D Fosse]

Indeed, but here's what I don't understand: why does it help to have a separate image that you can't even work on? It doesn't make any sense. Work on one image, while keeping your eyes fixed somewhere else where you can't even see the cursor?

Duplicate the image, do whatever it takes, drag the resulting layer back to the first document.

The point I'm trying to make is that this sounds like a "stuck" idea that just blocks better solutions. There must be at least ten ways to do this that are more efficient. "Unstick" the thumbnail idea (which isn't possible anyway!) and find something better.

We need to see an illustration of what the OP is trying to achieve. Until then, this makes no sense to me. I understand the question, but not why it's supposed to help with anything.