I don't get it: The keyboard-shortcuts dialog has a way to save sets of shortcuts, but no way to load them. What is the point then?
Thanks for any insight.
I don't get it: The keyboard-shortcuts dialog has a way to save sets of shortcuts, but no way to load them. What is the point then?
Thanks for any insight.
You could copy them to
~/Library/Application Support/Adobe/Adobe Photoshop CS5/Presets/Keyboard Shortcuts/
Thanks for the info, but... that's the intended method? That's pathetic even for Adobe. Why have the export function if there's no corresponding function to import the resulting file?
When you save the file, it gets added to the popup menu for the available keyboard shortcuts.
If you save it in the common location for shortcut files, then it'll always be there.
Thank you, but why would anyone save the file there? The point of saving a file would be to move it to some other machine. On the local machine, the keyboard shortcuts are already set up in Photoshop. Why would you be reloading them from a file buried in local preferences?
The point is saving your shortcuts is so you can reuse them later after changing shortcuts. Say if you wanted to reset the defaults to follow a tutorial (or let your mother try to follow a tutorial).
That's much more common than moving them to another machine.
"That's much more common than moving them to another machine."
Flipping back and forth between different sets of keyboard shortcuts is more common than a user who wants to deploy the same set on multiple machines?
If someone is at the experience level of following a tutorial, do you think it's likely that he already set up a bunch of custom keyboard shortcuts? And not only that, but those shortcuts conflict with those that would be used in a tutorial? Oh, and he figured out out to save sets of shortcuts before doing said tutorial?
You know where the saved kys-files are now and you can easily move them to another machine – so what’s your gripe?
I have actual usage data and customer survey results.
How about you?
I'm sure. That's why the same profound defects remain in Adobe products despite years of customer complaints. The scenario you present doesn't withstand the most basic common-sense analysis, which you didn't refute.
The idea is to take a look at what you're saying and admit, yeah, that's probably not too realistic. Heaven forbid.
You'd be surprised to learn how many of us have a fundamental, visceral aversion to copying, migrating, transferring or "deploying" system, preferences and program files from one machine to another.
Common sense might tell you that can't possibly be true, but it is.
Then how do you address the numerous gaps in Adobe functionality, which people in Adobe forums will defend by insisting that you do just that (create workarounds with macros and hotkeys and copy them around)?
For example, Photoshop's baffling lack of a "paste as new image" option. This has to be one of the most common operations in an image-editing application. Actually, that's too limiting; even audio-editing applications typically have a function to paste the clipboard contents to a new file.
Yet year after year, despite customer requests, Adobe fails to add the three lines or so of code to supply this function. Apologists always point out that you can do this with a macro.
But you're claiming that no one wants to do that. So have you also filed requests to have such missing functions added? Have you taken up the debate against the apologists? If not, why not?
And what are the rest of us to do? No matter what you ask for in these forums, no matter how obvious the missing function is, you can count on someone to piss and moan about how everything is perfect just how it is, or that there's already a solution. But now you're condemning that "solution."
But back to the original question: If you hate migrating settings around, what's your workaround? Do you manually re-record every macro and remap every key on every machine you use? And run around revising them all should that become necessary?
»Adobe fails to add the three lines or so of code to supply this function.«
I’m not familiar with your background, so I don’t know if your esitmate is based on actual programming experience – so: Is it?
You're hilarious, Mobious.
Mobius Strip wrote:
…And you're claiming that no one wants to do that…
I claimed no such thing. I said that some of us do not like doing that, not that "no one wants to do that" Don't be absurd.
As for the rest of your rant, I'll just skip it, because I cannot relate to any of the actions you describe. I don't do any of those things.
I stay away from "macros" and hotkeys. Photoshop is no more than my digital darkroom for me. I create anything the program needs from scratch in each machine.
I am nobody's apologist. That's the funniest thing you've written so far. Adobe staff must be laughing at the idea that anyone would call me an Adobe apologist.
What I was doing was simply attempt to disabuse you from your pre-conceived notion that everyone is for migrating, copying and deploying stuff, a factual error with which you were unsuccessfully trying to impugn Chris Cox's credibility.
Wo Tai Lao Le
You're asking for functionality that already exists. You're trying to justify that request by claiming that I don't know what customers want, and that we've ignored years of customer complaints. Yeah, that's really going to convince me to help you.
Yes, it might be nice to offer a convenience function for more simplistic users. And you're free to file a feature request for that. We'll fit that in with all the other feature requests we have, but it'll be a low priority because it is only a convenience function.
And trying to claim that your lack of understanding represents many users over many years -- that's not helping your case.
Please, search the forums, and let us know how many people have complained about this issue.
"What I was doing was simply attempt to disabuse you from your pre-conceived notion that everyone is for migrating, copying and deploying stuff"
I never said people want to do that. I sure don't want to do that, and I'm pretty sure that no one really wants to do that. What's your alternative? You say you would rather re-record or re-establish all of these workarounds on every machine one by one. That's fine for you. But it's absurd on a large scale or for experienced users.
"You're asking for functionality that already exists."
Exists if you record a macro. Fortunately, you can load action sets. And nice try with the condescension about "simplistic users." Pasting is not an action that caters only to "simplistic users." That asinine suggestion and tired strawman amounts to the old "you're not using it right" excuse, which is never accompanied by an explanation of how.
Adobe's longstanding failure to address design defects is evident all over Photoshop:
1. Dialogs don't remember previous settings. The Image Size dialog is a great example. Every time you pull it up, the units of measure are reset. So you have to switch from pixels to percent, or inches to pixels, over and over and over. The Save As dialog demonstrates the same disregard for user choices.
2. By default, Undo alternates between Undo and Re-do. Other applications have had multi-step undo for 20 years, and there's already a re-do key.
3. You fix #2 by remapping Ctrl-Z to "step backward" (on every system, because of the hotkey problem we've already discussed). This reveals another longstanding bug: "Step backward" inexplicably changes the layer that you selected, in addition to undoing the last action. If you were on a text layer and then switch to a bitmap layer and make a brush stroke, try pressing Ctrl-Z. Not only is the brush stroke undone, but the text layer is reselected, making it impossible to make a new stroke until you go and reselect the bitmap layer.
4. After drawing a selection box with the Rectangular Marquee tool, you can't resize it without going up to the Select menu and picking "Transform Selection" (or mapping a key for this on every system). Why can't you resize it by dragging any edge immediately? Even the free software that comes with scanners handles this properly.
5. Zooming with the mouse wheel doesn't snap to standard zoom factors. In fact, if you zoom with the wheel, you often can't even return to 100%. It will go from 99.4% to 102%, skipping 100%. Common sense would dictate that the zoom snaps when crossing Photoshop's normal zoom levels, like 25%, 50%, 66.7%, 100%, 200%, and so on. Note "when crossing"; I'm not saying the wheel should ONLY go to those factors.
6. No integrated thumbnail browser. It took until what, 2005, before Photoshop had any thumbnail browser at all, and it arrived in the form of a bloated separate application. Shareware photo-editing programs in the '90s had speedy and efficient thumbnail browsing, but in 2011 Adobe still can't pull it off. We hoped "mini-Bridge" was finally going to address this, but nope: You still have to have Bridge running. Sad.
And that's just what I can think of at the moment. Then there's Illustrator, which is practically abandonware at this point. If you want to talk about "many users over many years," this glaring defect is a great example:
So you guys can get to work, or just keep making excuses and blaming users. I wonder what it'll be.
OK, you really aren't reading the forum very closely. Most of what you just said is a mistake or misunderstanding on your part. And much of it has been covered recently in the forums.
1) The dialogs that make sense to remember settings do remember settings. Other dialogs optionally keep the last settings if invoked with the alt/option key. The Image Size dialog is a debatable case, and the units are set from preferences but easily changeable.
2) That's by design and customer demand. You can switch the behavior if you want in keyboard customization. The undo/redo behavior has long historical precedent, and is very very useful when using Photoshop (kind of like a flicker preview in animation).
3) Again, by design. Step backward is not the same as undo. And the layer selection is part of the document state that you are stepping back to.
4) Because you've made a selection (possibly combined with existing selections). It's not a rectangle, it's not a vector shape, it's a mask in the document. Moving, copying and using the selection would be near impossible if it automatically invoked the transform.
5) That depends on the steps returned by your mouse driver and the OS. Some step farther/faster than others - and the application can't see that, it only sees what the OS gives it.
6) I don't know where to start with those mistakes. Photoshop is not a browser, but an editor. You have a browser in the form of the Finder and Explorer in the OS, plus the OS open and save dialogs. Photoshop had a browser for a while called the File Browser. Then we moved it to Bridge to give you a dedicated file management tool instead of cramming it into Photoshop (where it was a really, really bad fit). Comparing Photoshop to toy software also isn't winning you any points.
Sorry, but you're pretty off base.
If you don't understand something, ask. Don't assume that everything you don't understand is a mistake. Sometimes people with a lot more experience than yourself have put more thought into designing those things than you may realize.
Apologists always point out that you can do this with a macro.
I guess I might be considered one of those apologists and I’d like to elaborate on why I may be perceived as taking Adobe’s side sometimes:
I’ve been working with Photoshop a long time now – this does not make me a expert on the programming side of the application but it gives me some experience with »work«.
And I for one find it irritating if (potential) customers approach me or representatives of the company I work for and tell us how easily a task can be performed that they themselves have precious little understanding of; the use of my native tongue’s equivalent of »just« (as in »you just have to …«) seems especially grating and is almost a red-flag.
So when people offer estimates on how easily/quickly a task could be achieved that they have no real understanding of it seems somewhat impolite to me.
Though if this applies to you or if you have the programming-experience to justify your assessment I don’t know.
I wouldn't make any estimates of engineering time without some basis. I don't make any expertise claims, because they invariably sound pompous and this is an anonymous forum and nobody can prove anything, so why bother? But since you brought it up twice: Yes, I have 20 years of professional programming experience in customer-facing, image-processing and editing software (among several other kinds) on Windows, Mac, and Unix.
Even that doesn't mean I know Adobe's code base (which, in a product as old as Photoshop, is almost surely a mess). My conclusion of the ease of "paste as new image" is based on the fact that Photoshop already prepares an image of correct size based on the clipboard contents when you say "New image." If you hit Return at that dialog, you get a new image containing the clipboard contents. And that's what should happen with "paste as new image." The necessary code is already there; you can see it in action.
As I mentioned, this is not some quirky feature that caters to a minority. It's a standard feature in other graphics-editing and even audio-editing applications.
If they're not going to do it, then they're not. But the portrayal of every request as somehow absurd doesn't hold water.
»I wouldn't make any estimates of engineering time without some basis.«
Good to read that you are not so inclined; but I sometimes suspect others in these Fora are more liberal in passing their unqualified judgement, so you hopefully forgive my inquiry.
No problem! You're probably right.
The necessary code is already there; you can see it in action.
I don’t want to contest the validity of your request, but I think one piece may be missing yet – while the new document-dialog uses the dimensions and resolution of the clipboard’s content it proposes the working space instead of the clipboard-content’s profile.
I would welcome it if this behaviour could be changed to honor that profile right away.
Well, all that arguing was a waste of time for an average reader here. Anyway, I for one am certainly bemused as to why there is no load button in the keyboard shortcut dialog. This is the workaround for this problem (written for Windows):
0) The folder for the default new keys is at C:\Users\USER\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5\Presets\Keyboard Shortcuts\ (or similar)
1) In your new Photoshop (Edit -> Keyboard Shortcuts) save a dummy set, say NewKeys.kys
2) You can stay in the dialog, don't press OK
3) Get your good old GoodOldKeys.kys and copy that over NewKeys.kys (in explorer)
4) In the dialog select the Photoshop Defaults key and then re-select the NewKeys.kys (this loads the replaced NewKeys.kys)
5) Press OK and voilà!
For a reference to Adobe Photoshop's keyboard shortcuts, take a look at the new Photoshop CS6 Quick Reference Guide. It is in its beta form, but it is a great way to find shortcuts, as well as find a menu location that might have changed from CS5. We are looking for your feedback, which you can contribute on the site as well.
EIGHT YEARS later, and still not fixed.
So much for the lie that Adobe's software-rental program was to going give them the budget to fix bugs.
I just found if you double click the .kys file it will open in Photoshop and it will automatically set the shortcuts you saved in that file. I hope this help you.
Thanks! Most users wouldn't do that, but I guess for now it's the most convenient workaround for Adobe's petulant refusal to fix this.
I love that I am reading this in 2020 and it's still not fixed 😄
It's funny how people can jump to defend almost anythng, including a giant corporation with honestly almost monopoly on the graphics market when someone makes a very valid complain about a nonsensical user experience which breaks all the rules established by not only adobe itself but also kind of the rest of the world doing softwere ever: the rule that if you can save a thing, you usually can load a thing and the two icons tend to be close by. Adobe markets as a professional product that is also user friendly. That is absolutely not a user friendly solution we are talking about here. End of topic 😄 Come on, people.