Explore related tutorials & articles
26
Replies
I do not get what you are doing? I open a test document it has five layers. A white background layer and four normal layers. Theses are smaller black layers each having a different color center. I run your script the canvas is trimmed to match one of my black layers. Expanding the canvas I see the background layer has been converted to a normal "layer 0" and none of the black bored las have hat the borders trimmed. It that what what you wanted.
I thought you wanted to trim layers. That what I tried to do in may script, But the magic wand will select empty pixels as well as color pixels. I was hoping could use the magic wand the it would fail to make a selection if clicked on an empty pixels. So I could catch the error and move the sample point till I found an actual pixel to sample. Instead all I cot do Is take a shot in the dark and sample some points on a layers bounds. A hit or miss approach. Still my script trims my simple black borders however If I rotate the layers a bit my sampling points may miss the black.
Mattmcquiff wrote:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8ojnt5ersx11e5l/WW_001.psd?dl=0
The script isn't complete, but the idea is after the trim to the bracelets I will then expand the canvas to a ratio of 2:3, then the distance between the edge of the item to the border is 5% of the width of the image at trim point. Although the "layer 1" is grey it is textured. Hence I need to keep the "layer 1" in tact.
Matt
If layer 1 is a solid color all you need is its color. The problem I see in your example PSD is that it look like you tried to trim bracelet layer using the magic wand tool not it contiguous mode with the tolerance value set too low to trim a background the had various shades of gray. Because the tolerance value was set to low the layer was not trimmed to the object. It is now not possible to get the size and aspect ratio of the layers object so there is no way to calculate the the 2:3 aspect ratio layer size required. The layer's object has a landscape aspect ratio. Putting it on a Portrait 2:3 aspect ratio canvas would have very large top and bottom boarders that could also exceed the original canvas size height.
If you place a black background in and target the bracelet layer and do a Ctrl+T free transform. You will be able the see where the layer was trimmed to and if you move the bracelet layer you may be able to see the low opacity gray pixels that were not trimmed.
To tell the truth I do not know what your after. Your script posted is coded to process many layers. Not just two layers like in your example PSD file. IMO how one would address one product vs many product would most likely be very different code.
In your previous write you stated the your target was a 2:3 aspect ratio which your 1020:1530 ratio is however how you came up with those number is beyond me. If you resize the Main Image layer to fit you would be resampling the layer.
You also write about setting canvas size without resampling. Changing a document canvas size never involves resampling. In fact only a background layer could or would see any changes to its pixels. For the background layer is a special Photoshop layer that does not support transparency. A background layer is always canvas size. A background layer can have pixels added and removed when a document canvas size is changed. No other layer pixels will be changes at all. Only its position relative to the document canvas may change and the document canvas size may act like a clipping mask for other layers. You have no background so your Layer 1 2000px bt 2000px will be clipped to your 1020px by 1530px Canvas size.
The PSD you posted Main image layer bounds are 1330px wide and 486 px in height. If you set the document canvas width to 1020 you would be clipping your product width and adding much texture on top and bottom of your product..
The size I came up with has one of your numbers 1596 that is what the final width should be and the height would be 2394 your texture would fill the width but not the height.
JJMack wrote:
To tell the truth I do not know what your after. Your script posted is coded to process many layers. Not just two layers like in your example PSD file. IMO how one would address one product vs many product would most likely be very different code.
The code isn't finalise, typically the PSD file will have 4 layers, it should only effect the layer selected as it hides all others (the script was found on the net)
JJMack wrote:
In your previous write you stated the your target was a 2:3 aspect ratio which your 1020:1530 ratio is however how you came up with those number is beyond me. If you resize the Main Image layer to fit you would be resampling the layer.
Sorry I shouldn't have included this this number is used in a later script to scale the picture to 1020px x 1530px Not needed at this stage but as you mention this is the same as 2:3
JJMack wrote:
You also write about setting canvas size without resampling. Changing a document canvas size never involves resampling. In fact only a background layer could or would see any changes to its pixels. For the background layer is a special Photoshop layer that does not support transparency. A background layer is always canvas size. A background layer can have pixels added and removed when a document canvas size is changed. No other layer pixels will be changes at all. Only its position relative to the document canvas may change and the document canvas size may act like a clipping mask for other layers. You have no background so your Layer 1 2000px bt 2000px will be clipped to your 1020px by 1530px Canvas size.
Canvas size resampling I meant to add that to the image size. The Canvas is not to be clipped to 1020px x 1530px but 2 inches x 3 inchs or 20 points x 30 points (just a measurement not exact pixels)
JJMack wrote:
The PSD you posted Main image layer bounds are 1330px wide and 486 px in height. If you set the document canvas width to 1020 you would be clipping your product width and adding much texture on top and bottom of your product..
The document canvas width is not set to 1020 from 1330px but is changed from 1330px to 1330px +20% 1596px
Then in Image Size I change the value of the width to 2" without resampling.
Then go into Canvas size select inches and change the height to 3"
The image is then in the ratio of 2(w):3(h) with no loss in image quality and no clipping.
JJMack wrote:
The size I came up with has one of your numbers 1596 that is what the final width should be and the height would be 2394 your texture would fill the width but not the height.
The figures you got are correct the final image is 1596 x 2394, and as per the previous post yes the layer 1 is not larger enough to fill the canvas (although it will be once the original image is correct). The idea is that the item is framed with "layer 1" Where it is not stretched to fit the background to keep it as it is.
I've updated the file at the same location, I've add some stuff to the layer 1 just to help see that I need to keep it scaled the same but allowed to be cropped.
Hope that starts to make sense. Make sense in my head not when try typing it 
AdChoices