Interesting. it's been a while since I used it, but in my CS6, setting width and height without setting resolution, using the crop tool gave me the expected response - it did not resample the image, just redistributed the pixels. Are you using the Width x Height x Resolution option for the tool, and leaving the resolution blank? (I assume you are). If that's the case, may I assume you've tried resetting Photoshop's preferences? Or, maybe it's an OS thing (sometimes Windows and Macs and versions matter). Please clarify which OS you're using for this. ... View more

It sounds to me like you're using duplicates of the pixel contents for each layer, so the top layer is completely opaque, thereby covering the pixels of the underlying layers. If you work on that top layer, you'll only see the changes on that layer, and the layers underneath won't show through the opacity, nor will they be affected. You would have gotten this, if you'd used Layer>New>Layer via Copy, or by duplicating your base layer or by cmd/ctrl J. Depending on the changes you're making, you may be wanting to work on New Blank Layers above your original layer (hit the foldy piece of paper icon on the bottom of the layers panel). Then you end up with completely transparent pixels on which you can draw or add items (and where there're no pixels, you'll see through to the layers underneath). Then, to adjust or work further on each of these layers. you'd be sure to click on the layer you want to manipulate, in the layers panel, make sure it's highlighted, and you'll have focused Photoshop's attention on just that layer. ... View more

JJMack​ is truly giving you correct information. If the computer has to "invent" pixels that don't exist, you're going to get all sorts of blurriness and random pixels - it's never a good idea. However, sometimes, it HAS to be done (eg: I did a job for a lawyer who needed iPhone images to print at poster size for court). Since Photoshop's algorithms aren't great for that purpose, I used a 3rd party plugin. I had really workable results using On1 Resize 10.5 (I actually preferred their version 9 product, but that's not available anymore). It gave me control over sharpening and the resizing algorithm. OTOH, I must admit that some of the images wouldn't look good close up, BUT at poster size, they weren't meant to be viewed that way. You may get very good results doing much smaller enlargements. To the moderator: Please delete this, if mentioning another company's product is unacceptable. ... View more

I'm very familiar with the "Resolution Myth", but in explaining these concepts to a newer user, I find that breaking it down to these concepts help people start to grasp the idea of pixels for web vs print, and I believe that using that analogy will answer the OP's question of how to clarify for her coworkers. If you have a cleaner way to answer her question, please do offer it, so she can work more easily with her coworkers, with less confusion. While it's true that a browser will interpolate an image to any view size it needs, by simply displaying pixels themselves larger and smaller, it's good practice to optimize image size/quality/compression. ... View more

Except that it matters for file size/download size. Although the browser doesn't care and will only display any image based on the code for the frame size, if one resizes the resolution and height and width to an optimal size, the download will be faster with a clearer image. Nowadays, with people accessing the internet on devices, using available bandwidth that may be limited, this can be a huge timesaver. I used 72ppi as an example - a general basic size. Nowadays, with different monitors capable of much higher resolutions, it's just a rule of thumb. but file size still matters. Ask anybody who pays for their cellular data. Back to @katv6352670's point, they can make the choice whether they wish to optimize for download speeds, I was suggesting a method to clarify what her coworkers can use to distinguish what they want. ... View more

I hadn't ever looked at ExifTool before, although I'd heard of it in the past. Thanks to your link, I was reading the documentation and one of it's "Features" is listed as "Decodes a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma"! That makes this a MUST HAVE! ... View more

One way I look at it is that 300dpi is a print measurement, so when someone mentions that, I expect height and width measurements in inches (here in the U.S.). If they want pixel measurements, I usually assume they're talking about something for screen usage (like web). So, then the resolution only needs to really be 72ppi (generally). So - you'll likely need to send them 2 of the same item - one for print at the right H (in) x W(in) x 300ppi, and one for screen at the right H(px) x W(px) x 72ppi. I think if you tell your colleagues to specify inches for print and pixels for screen, you'll maybe help them to tell you what they need... ... View more

I do like the Image Processor as well - it saves you from having to make an action - but I'm just a bit more of a control freak, and like to specify my export settings for something like a PNG. @Stephen_A_Marsh's suggestion is faster though- if you don't need to alter any export settings. ... View more

I'll watch for updates. I wanted to do a video, but I'm sorry I can't right now... ... View more

To me, actions are far easier to make than scripts (i'm just averse to coding, when I can help it). Unfortunately, my Quick Export doesn't work in an action (on my Mac - haven't checked on a Windows machine), so you'd create an action that Opens files and exports via the Save for Web- Legacy and choose the PNG settings you want. Then, record the Save option (you'll change the save to location in the next step. If you don't need transparency, you can just use Save As, and select the PNG format and Save. Then, you'd go to File>Automate>Batch - Select your action. Choose the .psd file folder you want to convert, check all the boxes on that left side (so it can run without you being there). On the right, you'd choose a Save Destination and a method of naming. I find it very important to change Errors to Save to File, so it'll run through any errors and report back, instead of stopping. Then you just hit "OK" and walk away... For more information on making actions, if you need, you may want to check out Create actions in Adobe Photoshop ... View more

This is really nice! I believe I'll borrow it too, if you don't mind. I certainly don't have as many path needs as @MaDPROpHet But I can see this as being very handy! ... View more

If I read that correctly, once you create your original images, you'd want to likely batch output (save) them as static images and then use the exact same data-driven variable technique you used to create the first ones. ... View more

Hi. You're so lucky to have the last of the iMacs that CAN have the graphics card upgraded without soldering! Not sure if you've seen it, but there's a really long thread about that year's iMac on MacRumors.com (and the content near the end is really recent): 2011 iMac Graphics Card Upgrade | Page 27 | MacRumors Forums Seems the biggest issue is for people to get the faster card's EFI flashed. Perhaps macvidcards.com has the resource to do it for you? Otherwise, these still seem to work (if you can get them), but you lose your boot screen. Today, I upgraded the GPU on my 2010 MacPro. Tested a bit. After Effects rendering was improved, but you may find that you After Effects uses the graphics card CPU less than you think in previewing - but it did speed my render. Premiere Pro - THERE I saw a difference in preview and render... Wish you luck on this endeavor! ... View more

So, I have another thought, that may help us to determine if the problem IS with the Graphics processor... Perhaps if we turn off the use of the GPU (hence, using CPU power for processing, we can see if the initial idea of the GPU and your drivers or device are the problem. May I suggest that you go to Preferences> Performance, and turn OFF the "Use Graphics Processor" checkbox? Then try the image again? If it works with that turned off - then perhaps turning it back on and fiddling with the "Advanced Settings" options would help. Yours may look a little different from mine, but only because I'm on a Mac. The settings should still be similar. If the problem is STILL a problem with those items turned off - we know it's a problem with the app, and not likely the GPU. And, then my next suggestion would be to reset the preferences (shut down Photoshop, and then hold and KEEP holding Control+Alt+Shift while Photoshop starts up, until you see it ask if you want to reset preferences). ... View more

This is an issue that's occurred when an image thinks it's using the CMYK color space. If you change the image to RGB, you should see all your filters available. See this (quickly made) video, and I hope it helps. ... View more

Or, File Place Embedded or Place Linked, if you're adding it to an already existing image. ... View more

That's a great idea for a script - I'd never thought of it, but I like it. Unfortunately, I haven't ever heard of a script that does that (perhaps some coders on here might get interested?). In the meantime, I'd look into making a single action that does what you suggest, and giving it a keyboard shortcut. You'd still have to select each path individually, but then just... I dunno... Shift F11(or anything else) to make the channel, convert to selection and fill? Yeah - a script would be better, but at least this can take out SOME of the tedium. ... View more

When using the Add-On manager, the add-on actually notes which versions of the application it'll work with. Here's a screenshot of the AnimDessin 2 add-on's page, which shows it works with CC -CC2015... ... View more

@Kurt - rebuke accepted! I hadn't realized you'd posted that several posts above! My apologies! YOU did the great work there! (Not to take away from @Ton, his confirmation did help - but YOU do deserve the praise!   And - praise should be accepted and expected when you do something excellent - despite all the other priorities in life! Sorry for the boo boo........ ... View more

Oh - Woah! LOL! Never saw that one! I guess I got lucky! How'd you resolve it so the good one worked? That is SO weird! I guess since I never had that happen to me, what my Daddy used to tell me applies to me on this issue - "it's better to be lucky, than smart"! ... View more

Yes! I do that all the time - for a quick way to get my files off the card and into the computer. My older Nikon uses SD cards, so I have a fast SD card reader, and just plug that in and copy to a folder on my hard drive - no real need for a secondary drive, unless you want one. There's one disadvantage to that though. The files lose their creation date/modification date. NOT in the EXIF - that's fine, but on the computer it only records the date the file was created in the folder. That may not be a big deal for you, but I use this program that lets me correct the dates (and when I forget to change my camera's timezone, the times, too) to match the EXIF data, so it's quick and easy and done. In fact, when doing it this way, I also use a related program to rename my files in batch as well (although, you can do that with Bridge, too). So, instead of DSC_5634, I can name it by date and event. The programs I've liked for this are A Better Finder Attributes (for changing dates and times), and A Better Finder Rename. They're by publicspace.net. I find them SUPER helpful for my personal less-than-on-top-of-things workflow. ... View more

Interesting theory, Kurt. Nice find on the Outline Object, Ton - that seems to work every time on mine. But the zigzag and roughen seemed to work only MOST of the time on mine (too many fonts to count). And, I tried old-style postscript fonts, truetype fonts, opentype and synced fonts. It's also really quite a good workaround, but not quite as complete as the Outline Object method, which seemed to work on every font I tested. Also - just so you know - my working vs not-working font list differs from both Kurt's and Ton's list - even with the Opentype Brush Script. Italic was TERRIBLE, but Medium was perfect. I'm sure there're others that're like that too, but I have lots of installed fonts so just tested what you guys listed, that were also in my system. I do see the merits of your (Kurt's) idea of the virtual anchorpoints. It would explain why it's so specific to type on my system - 'cause even the weirdest shapes seem to work fine with clipping mask matching... btw - on my system, I was never able to duplicate that blob issue you're referring to. Oddly always seemed to work fine. Even on smaller calligraphic looks... but who knows - it's SUNDAY! That seems like it may be different from what it was last Wednesday (if we go with the changes we all had from yesterday to today!) Hmmm.... overnight changes - automatic font cache clearing? I'm on a Mac and that's part of it's background maintenance cron jobs. Wonder if that had an effect on everybody... ... View more

Without being clear on what you're describing - for example, you mention that they layer you'd moved into your image, but later you say that you can't make layers again. Did you flatten the layers without addressing the pixels of what you pasted it? Or perhaps, the settings on your clone stamp tool are set wrong? All I can suggest is that when you're trying the clone stamp tool, please try to make sure the settings look lke this. ... View more

Yeah - oddly, some fonts were WAY worse than others.... Seems we may all want to enter this as a bug report - I'm going to do that now... Feature Request/Bug Report Form ... View more

LOL! I'm so glad that helped! I always tell people that the only way I can sometimes tell when someone's making an error in Photoshop is because it's an error I've made tons of times over the years - so don't feel bad - I STILL do it! ... View more

Try changing the OS System Preference for changing the system mouse size. Go to Apple>System Preferences - choose the Accessibility icon and in the Display area, you'll see the ability to change the Cursor size. Please note - it won't change the actual pixel size of a brush - when you paint, the icon'll be bigger than the pixels you brush - but at least you'll be able to see the cursor. It takes a bit of getting-used-to. ... View more

Can you take a screenshot that shows your image with the problems and one with the setup of your layers panel? Also, maybe the settings you've tried (the Options bar settings), when you've tried to use the tools? ... View more

Are you sure you mean CS3? Adobe does offer free downloads of old versions, so I assume that's the newest one for which you have a serial number that works? Please note - that version was from 2007. If you meant CS6, even that version does not run well on Sierra at all. Adobe says that ONLY CC2017 will work completely properly with Sierra (although, I know previous versions seem to, but not that far back). See: Photoshop & Lightroom compatibility with macOS 10.12 Sierra ... View more