Why is it not possible to keep the masks made in Camera RAW or import them as photoshop layers?

[hilbrandbos]

Why is it not possible to hold on to the mask that you so carefully make while importing the image into photoshop. For instance:

I have a photo with a human subject. I drag it into photoshop. I make two masks, one for the subject and one inverse. I apply my tonal adjustance to each of the masks. Why can't I keep these masks when I import the raw file to a photoshop file? Now I have to recreate these masks again, which means I do the same job twice? What kind of design is this? If I hate one thing it's doing double work. 

[JohanElzenga]

Camera Raw does not support layers, so it cannot send out a masked (= layered) image to Photoshop. It would require a major rewrite of Camera Raw, so that is why this is not possible (yet?). It would be nice, though.

[hilbrandbos]

Camera Raw doesn't need to work with layers. It just needs to export an amount of images with the contents masked out corresponding to the amount of masks and preferably put those images in one layered file.

[davescm]

What you've just described would require layer support.

As a work around take the raw image into Photoshop as a smart object. Then open the SO and make an extreme adjustment using the camera raw mask - for example turn everything in the mask black and everything outside white. Then you can use that output to make a selection/mask in Photoshop and save it as a channel. Then go back into the SO and undo the extreme adjustments.

Dave

[JohanElzenga]

Like I said; that would require a major rewrite of ACR. It's not a matter of 'just' changing a few lines of code. Maybe Adobe will do that one day, AFAIK you are not the first person who suggested this.

[hilbrandbos]

I thought of that workaround too, but it is still cumbersome. I felt I was quicker with the quick selection tools, but that is pretty much doing the same work as in Camera raw... 

[hilbrandbos]

Couldn't find any posts about it and I've searched long and hard to see whether it was possible to keep the masks and import them into photoshop. And what does it matter to you if it's a major rewrite or not, why react so apologetic for Adobe? If it's a good feature it's worth making. They should have thought of this before they even designed the masks feature. You have to agree with me that it saves a lot of work. 

[TheDigitalDog]

The edits are parametric. Some masks are pixel versions of previously generated AI masks (Select Subject/Sky) but they only live and can only be used within the ACR engine with the parametric edits. So no layers and no way to use these masks outside the ACR engine. IOW, Photoshop masks and LR/ACR masks are utterly different beasts. 

[JohanElzenga]

And what does it matter to you if it's a major rewrite or not, why react so apologetic for Adobe? If it's a good feature it's worth making. They should have thought of this before they even designed the masks feature. You have to agree with me that it saves a lot of work. 

I am not apologetic for Adobe and I already agreed that it would be nice to have. I am just trying to explain that it is unlikely that we will get this feature any time soon (or at all), because it would require a major effort that Adobe has to weigh against other requests and planned new features. That means I am realistic rather than apologetic. That's all.

[Chuck Uebele]

Dave's workaround suggestion is more work, but viable. I've done that with plugins, like Nik. I too agree, that it would be great to be able to export the mask.

[jane-e]

I've just Upvoted, making the total number of Upvotes "1".

Jane

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

Upvoted (well, there is no downvote option, so perhaps I just voted)...

Perhaps the feature request needs to be made in Lr and not Ps?

Layer support is not even required, just the ability to export out the mask as a file would be better than nothing, allowing one to manually mask in Photoshop if nothing else.

[jane-e]

@Stephen_A_Marsh wrote:

Upvoted (well, there is no downvote option, so perhaps I just voted)...

Interesting, Stephen — it says "Upvote" before you vote and changes to "Voted" afterwards.

~ Jane

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

Interesting, Stephen — it says "Upvote" before you vote and changes to "Voted" afterwards.

By @jane-e 

You're right Jane, seems like a strange choice of wording if one can't downvote. Being able to "vote" on comments also just confuses things, it should just be a like rather than an upvote IMHO.

[bmoag]

Adobe does not have to rewrite Camera RAW, although some think Adobe should rewrite much of the x86 code base. Adobe could simply position the "sensei" masking tool used in Camera Raw as a neural filter. Even better use it for the object selection tool because the current OST just doesn't.

[stamatiad]

As an photographer and programmer that handles hundreds of photos every day I agree that masking import/export is paramount. The AI tools are far from perfect, making the selection job arduous and repetitive. I don't know if I can develop some similar functionality with a camera raw plugin. If not I might move the whole raw developing routine in custom tools entirely. Too much hassle for nothing..