"Save for web" as "legacy" in Photoshop CC (2015)?

[3catz]

Anyone know (a) why "save for web" is now "legacy" (under export) and (b) whether anything will replace it?

[Earth Oliver]

Fritz, i've done a little testing this morning and yes, the scales are quite different.

60% in Save for Web is not equal to 60% in Export As.

Here are examples at 50% quality:

Save For Web:

Export As:

It appears that Export As has nearly 2x the compression as SFW at the same quality level.

Was there a beta team testing this feature or did you guys just shove it in there at the last minute?

[Chris Cox]

Those are nowhere near the same quality level, the Export As example has more severe artifacts and is missing more detail.

I'd say you compared about 70% quality to around 30% quality - which will result in smaller files by throwing away image detail.

[Earth Oliver]

Exactly, Chris. The issue i'm seeing is that they were both set to 50% quality...

[FritzImages]

Hi Chris & Eartho,

thanks for your comments and analysis.  I went back into PS and set magnification for 200 then 300 on the two separate images and the artifacts are more pronounced in Export as.  I'll work some more on optimizing export as quality slider now that I understand that its relationship is different  than SFW quality slider.  Well done, thank you....

[Earth Oliver]

i've just redone the test to verify that i did it right the first time.

here's the base file with no compression:

with SFW at 50% quality:

Export As with 50%:

[FritzImages]

eartho,

Nicely done...it is clear that the quality amount sliders between Export As and SFE will yield different results at the same percentage.  Good to know...thanks

[RR456]

Chris,

Very much a beginner, thus likely stupid question.  That said, if I save an image as a JPEG and use Save for Web and quality is 100% and if I save the same image as a JPEG and use Export As and set the quality at 100%; which JPEG would, for lack of a more appropriate phrase, look the better of the two?

The JPEG would be used in a website slider but size or workflow would not be issues in my scenario since I'm simply trying to assess this subject area.  In the past I used SFW; however, some discussion and opinions is to now use Export As.

Thanks in advance.

[FritzImages]

This just out by Adobe:

Save for Web in Photoshop CC 2015

[Herbert2001]

And good riddance too, I'd say. The old SFW function was completely unusable for proper PNG optimization. Nor was there any individual control for chroma subsampling when exporting jpg images. No webP support either!

Trouble is, the current 2015 version does not offer a functional export assets option either, I believe?

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/extract-assets-feature-is-a-disaster

I don't really get it! How did you remove the feature to export assets in Photoshop 2015??? It wasn'...

So what are web devs and designers supposed to do in the meantime? The Photoshop dev team removes one widely used feature, and no alternative is offered? Naming layers with generator is not exactly user friendly. Right-mouse clicking layers to save files is too limited.

I was under the impression that the CC digital serfdom model would publish new versions when and if they were production ready - obviously this is not the case, and Adobe is back to its "Big Reveal" model, no matter whether features are finished or not.

How disappointing indeed.

[sonofmrsnak]

So why wasn't all this spiffy new image export enhancement simply done within the existing framework of SFW?

It would have been intuitive and allowed the developers to play all they wanted with improvements.

Other types of exports are simply that. Leave the web export functions separate.

[Herbert2001]

I agree - the SFW has basically remained the same since Photoshop 5.5 first introduced it, and it could have seen so many improvements in the last 15 years. Of course, it never happened, for some reason or other.

[dugfresh36]

i am in agreement with a lot of the users above who were completely let down by this news. SFW is an integral part of our workflow and with this Export As feature replacing SFW, they have just dragged that workflow into the street and brutally killed it.

i want to like it. i want to think of it as an improvement over the old method; a new tool that will boost productivity, even if there is a learning curve...i don't mind that. but right now, it has done nothing but have me 'seeing red'.

i gave it a real-world test, exporting a layer group that made up a header banner. in our workflow, we create the designs, then draw the slices around them. so, previous export using SFW was accomplished quickly and flawlessly by defining the area of the asset with a slice. a split-second shortcut key combo later, i'm selecting a custom export profile from a pulldown menu and hitting "save." done.

using Export As, i right click on that layer group to export. ok, not bad, i can handle that. but then i get a non-resizable dialog with extremely minimalistic settings. it defaults to PNG, so i select JPG. no biggie, but also no presets to choose from. so i then have to set the quality manually—another step—to 70%. because i can't make out the detail of my image (it's zoomed out to 50%) i have to zoom in to 100%—another step again— and then drag my image over in the pane to see the left edge—yet another step—because i thought i saw something that wasn't quite right.

and at 100%, it's confirmed...the image bounds are not the same as my slice bounds. i glance over at the canvas size settings and they're displaying the correct size. why? it is obviously NOT the correct size, or my dotted border wouldn't be flush with the edge of the image...there should be white space.

i go ahead and finish the export anyway, crossing my fingers...but to no avail: the resulting image was too small, dimension-wise.

i get why this is happening, this image-boundaries disparity. but the fix? i now have to create a layer the exact dimensions and position of my desired final image...you know, like i easily did with my slice. this layer has to be duplicated and stuck into each of my 10 layer groups (for each different header). also, setting this layer's fill or opacity to 0% has no effect on influencing the dimensions of the image to be exported...it just makes it like the layer doesn't even exist. luckily, i can set it to white because it's going to be on a white page, but what if i needed it to be a transparent PNG in case this asset is used elsewhere on the site and may end up on top of a colored background? guess what...you're out of luck.

yes, i can 'shape' the dimensions of the image by using the canvas dimensions setting, but this adds (or subtracts) white space equally from each edge...keeping the image centered, which doesn't work if your resulting image is supposed to be intentionally off-center.

and that is that. adjust canvas with no way to adjust the design's X/Y position within that canvas. done.

the thing with slices is that they 'force' the boundaries of the export area—regardless of the actual layer or layer group bounds. pretty handy, i think.

what i find even more alarming than a simple, effective process being completely derailed, is this quality difference at the same settings that people are noticing. this feature should have been labeled "preview" as it was nowhere NEAR being ready for release to the masses.

i understand that all of this can supposedly be used in conjunction with artboards, but i gotta tell ya...i'm not holding out any hope for that solution, either.

i am open to hearing others' thoughts on how to solve this, though.

[mark_chief]

EXACTLY.

[Neuromancer5758]

Excellent responses all. I am bitterly dissapointed that Adobe has made such a dramatic change with no immediately obvious equivalent (or God forbid an enhanced equivalent). To say that this is negatively affecting my workflow is an understatement.

[3catz]

Now how to get Adobe to become aware of this?

[Herbert2001]

Of course the Photoshop dev team is aware of these issues. They just did not have enough time to finish the features for CC2015's release date (which was probably enforced on them from higher up the command chain).

Next version things will have improved. Things are always tough during times of transition.

[3catz]

so coming soon?  Chris Cox, do you know?

[Herbert2001]

Do not read anything absolute into what I wrote: from what I can tell Photoshop's web export options are (finally) being updated into the 21st century, which is a good thing. Trouble is, with growth come growing pains.

I expect the next version to see improvements in the current (granted unfortunate) situation.

SFW was always terrible for PNG export, for example. So it is good to see these changes, however inconvenient they are at the moment.

[StrongBeaver]

I personally never liked save for web, and adapted the export assets feature from 2014 instantly.  I would procrastinate because I had to use save for web not because it was difficult, it was the setup process that was a monkey wrench.

[DavidROfficer6198]

Yes I know. They brought "Artboards" to photoshop. Now when i resize the canvas, what I've worked on disappears until it shrink the screen to find where in heck it has moved. A lot in the CC 2015 programs seem like downgrades and losing features we use a lot.

Adobe would do much better if they listened to users rather than shelving features that are used in favor of things we don't need. Premiere Pro CC 2015 is a clear example of ruining what worked in CC 2014.

I'm rolling back to a photoshop that works like i want it and not the way adobe wants it. We shouldn't have to pay $60 per month for programs with features we don't want.

[AtonMusic]

This once fine application (Photoshop) is being ruined - year by year. Great features are being removed. New ones which are yielding poor results are being added. Performance is degrading on OS X so badly that I am using Affinity Photo more and more.

That said, this is not just photoshop and it is NOT just me. I use this app professionally and have numerous of colleagues urging the same concerns. One had a personal meeting with adobe in their Hamburg office expressing his concerns.

He said 'The spirit' once present in those offices was completely gone. Almost appeared as if they were bewildered.

I too am VERY bewildered. Very. And although Affinity (IMO) is NOT quite 'there' yet. They have definitely realized that adobe is loosing ground big time and they are picking where adobe left off.

And their software is amazing and although I have been using adobe since about 23 years I cannot wait for the day where I can cancel my adobe subscription and deinstall all that software that keeps getting slower and slower and performs worse and worse.

Sad Sad Times, in my life concerning my Professional Work Software. Who would have thought that this company would hit such an all time low !

[maxelcat]

I'd like to add my voice.

I really like the new save as assets functionality. In some workflows it is excellent!

However, I often will do simple tasks that don't really require the saving of a psd and the use the save for web to create a jpeg for a client etc. In order to do this I now have to either create a psd first or use cntrl-shift-slt-s. I don't really want to litter my pc with lots of necessary, small psds that I would then want to delete -creating more steps in the workflow.

At the moment I can quickly save out - butt the word 'legacy' worries me.

Please can we have the save to web back?

[maxelcat]

of course I meant 'unnecessary' not necessary

[jaldrichrlba]

So those of us who use Save for Web because email are out of luck?