Yes, we seem to be saying the same thing. While you could pursue this as a theoretical exercise, in reality we are on a whole other and much lower level of precision. The added precision is an illusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_precision  ... View more

With a color space as big as ACES AP0 - half of it is imaginary colors outside the visible spectrum - I can imagine that 32 bit depth could be a sensible safeguard against quantization.   With that said, I think all of this is massive overkill. If these are color transparencies, it will be well contained within Adobe RGB. If color negatives, you might need ProPhoto just for processing headroom (not the finished result).   In reality, film technology is severely limited compared to modern digital sensors, both in terms of color gamut and dynamic range. In other words, any current workflow for digital cameras will handle film with no problems (tone curves are quite different and its own separate problem, but you don't need a bigger color space because of that).   Don't know if you're scanning or photographing, but the latter is often much easier to work with if you have a good repro setup. ... View more

That's a defective monitor profile, most likely from the display manufacturer distributed through Windows Update.   The proper way to deal with this is to use a calibrator to make a new profile, but if you don't have one, use a standard profile that corresponds with your type of display. That's sRGB IEC61966-2.1 for a standard display, Adobe RGB for a traditional wide gamut display, or Image P3 for a DCI-P3 type display.   You set this up in Windows Settings > System > Display > Color Management.   Relaunch Photoshop when done, it loads the monitor profile at application startup. ... View more

I did not see this at 100% By @kkrip   That's the giveaway.   Whenever something seems to change when merging layers, it's because you are not viewing at 100%. The merged result is correct. The preview is misleading and incorrect. 100% has nothing to do with size. It means one image pixel is represented by exactly one physical screen pixel. For performance reasons, all blending and adjustment previews are calculated on the on-screen sample of the image. When you are zoomed out, that means a resampled and softened version of the image. Pixel levels are averaged out. You get a lot of intermediate values that aren't there in the full original data. When you merge, commit an adjustment etc, the numbers are re-calculated on the full original data, pixel for pixel. Viewing at 100% is the only way to avoid this, and get an accurate preview of the final result.   There is a feature request to calculate all blending and adjustment previews on the full pixel data. The problem is that this slows Photoshop down considerably, and would lead to a load of other customer complaints. So what we want is an option, transient and non-sticky, that allows this while also stating clearly what the implications are. ... View more

@IncredibleHat  "4 is aweful and 5 is too large"   Jpeg file size is more than anything determined by image content. Flat areas compress much more effectively than busy high frequency detail. It can be a factor of 10x or more.   If file size is critical, the level of sharpening plays a huge part. Dial down a little bit on the sharpening, and you can cut size in half.   Here's 48 kB vs 426 kB - exact same dimensions and compression level: ... View more

As the others say. The 4060 is perfect for Photoshop. Performs extremely well at a reasonable price. You might want to see if its possible to stretch it to 12 GB VRAM, though.   The higher model numbers will be faster, but for Photoshop use it's not worth the rapidly increasing price.   Stay away from Intel GPUs. Yes, they make splendid CPUs, but their GPUs have never been up to the standards needed for serious advanced use. ... View more

You need to post a 100% screenshot so that it's possible to read the UI. ... View more

Settings are stored under your Windows user account (not in the program files). Photoshop needs to access these settings to operate properly, and needs full read/write privileges to every relevant folder.   ... View more

Yes, I posted an old screenshot, the panel is slightly changed now. Anyway, I retested and it still works without issue on a7r v raw files.   What is your GPU status  in ACR preferences > performance? ... View more

@john sanderl65775692  Does it look like this in ACR? Or is it grayed out?   Also, double-check the raw file type. That's the only thing I know of that will prevent reflection removal from working. ... View more

It still sounds like permissions - but one other possibility, assuming you're saving to the desktop:   As far as I know, it is now possible to have your desktop in the Microsoft/Apple cloud. This is something you set up when you install the operating system (and I always make sure to avoid that). The marketing fluff is that you can then access your desktop from any unit.   If you're saving big files to the desktop, it's easy to see how that could fail.   Unfortunately, the Photoshop Save dialog will just identify "Desktop" as the save path, it doesn't give the full path. So try to save a small file to the desktop, and then look for it in Windows Explorer, under your user account. If the desktop is on your local physical drive it should look like this: ... View more

These are totally different processing engines, so this is an impossible and unrealistic ask. Camera matching profiles is already stretching it (and I never use them for this reason).   Keep in mind that anything you see on the camera screen is the result of raw processing. The raw sensor data are exactly the same in both.   If you prefer the Sony rendering, you just need to use Sony's raw processor. As long as you use Lightroom/ACR, you need to accept that this is different raw processor. It's up to you to weigh the pros and cons of each processor. In principle, anything you see on the camera can be replicated in LrC/ACR.     ... View more

I don't think this is about color management. The way the OP describes it is entirely consistent with preview rendering at less than 100% view, on a very noisy image. This effect is well defined and well documented. ... View more

That looks like the red channel, with a gradient map on top.   The effect at the bottom is probably just a drop shadow and reduced opacity. ... View more

It has always been like this. But as I said, you only notice it on a certain type of images.   BTW - this isn't a bug, it's normal behavior (irrespective of whether one thinks it's desirable). Can a moderator move this to "Discussions"? ... View more

You get this dialog if you hold shift as you launch Photoshop. Perhaps your shift key is stuck? ... View more

Yes, you do have a point - but to be realistic, there is no such thing as "accurate" below 100%. Pixels have to be resampled on screen, there is no avoiding that. A group of pixels have to be reduced to 1 single pixel.   Where I do agree with you, and this has been requested many times, is to give us an option to do all preview calculations on the full pixel data instead of the screen sample. The answer we usually get is that this would slow Photoshop down unacceptably. That is probably true, it most likely would - but if it was an option with all implications clearly stated, and it was a one-off, non-sticky setting, I don't see why not.   Many versions ago it was possible to do this by setting cache levels to 1 in Preferences. That is no longer possible.   In a "normal" photograph this isn't a problem. This happens with very noisy or binary data where you have sharp pixel-level transitions. It's these transitions that are averaged out to middle values that aren't really there in the data.   In practice, I live quite well with this, but it's important to understand what's happening and why it's happening. ... View more

Whenever something seems to change when merging layers, it's because you are not viewing at 100%. The merged result is correct. The preview is misleading and incorrect. 100% has nothing to do with size. It means one image pixel is represented by exactly one physical screen pixel. For performance reasons, all blending and adjustment previews are calculated on the on-screen version of the image. When you are zoomed out, that means a resampled and softened version of the image. Pixel levels are averaged out. You get a lot of intermediate values that aren't there in the full original data. When you merge, commit an adjustment etc, the numbers are re-calculated on the full original data, pixel for pixel. Viewing at 100% avoids all this and renders the whole issue moot. You see every pixel before and after, and so nothing changes. ... View more

Well, this is relative, I suppose. I have a lot of custom settings in Photoshop, and it takes me perhaps ten minutes at most to set it up. But it must be said that I'm very familiar with all those settings and know where to go.   Still, I think that's ten minutes well spent.   Just me. ... View more

It also goes into detail about how to completely disable the integrated GPU when necessary. That's basically only applicable with laptops where the screen is hardwired to the motherboard, and the GPU configuration set by the laptop manufacturer, inaccessible to the user. On a desktop it's not an issue. ... View more

Do not move files from one machine to another. You can copy files as backup on the same machine, but don't bring them into a completely new environment. That's inviting problems. The same setting may have a different meaning in the new context. I suspect that's the reason this was removed.   Things that can be saved out and reloaded, like actions and brushes (.atn and .abr files) are safe.   There's another very good reason you should not migrate preferences. The preferences contain a lot more than your own user settings. It's the entire application configuration, including lots of hidden parameters and system-dependent parameters. Crucially, they are rewritten on every application exit - as opposed to read-only program files. If the shutdown sequence is disturbed or disrupted in any way, this can corrupt settings in subtle or not-so-subtle ways. Errors will accumulate, and with new application code that could cause latent problems to surface.   Corrupt preferences can cause weird and inexplicable behavior that is often misinterpreted as application bugs.   Take this opportunity to start with clean sheets. ... View more

My solution is to continue to create artboards at 144dpi By @7billionbuddhas   That's irrelevant in this context. The ppi value isn't used on screen. It could be 1 ppi or 1000 ppi and it would display identically.   Pixels per inch, ppi (not dpi!) is a simple formula to translate pixels to a physical size where that's needed. It's not needed on screen. It's needed for print, and a few other things that involve physical units like font sizes. But not screen.   Do not upsize your images. The browser will do it atomatically anyway. If you send 2x, it will ultimately display as 4x.   There are ways to code websites to allow for high resolution images to display at native size on high resolution displays - in other words, they are coded to override the automatic scaling. But that's not something you can rely on. ... View more

It would be nice if you could separate the pathways like this, but unfortunately that's not how it works. In reality, two GPUs will only cause conflicts - they do that all the time in laptops where this configuration is common.   But there's no reason to use the integrated GPU at all. An RTX will handle all of this without any problems.   I'm assuming this is a desktop machine? Then this is really simple. Just install the RTX into the motherboard PCIe slot, and connect your display to the back connector on the GPU itself. Don't use the connector on the motherboard back panel. Then the RTX runs everything and the integrated GPU is out of the equation. ... View more

When I view at 200% the dimensions are correct By @7billionbuddhas   The dimensions aren't actually "correct" - they just agree with the automatic scaling to 200% that all web browsers and consumer-grade photo viewers do when they detect a high density display. This uses four screen pixels to display one image pixel.   This automatic scaling is the industry standard workaround to ensure that the same material can be used regardless of what screen technology the user happens to have. Without this scaling, we'd need two separate internets.   Photoshop can't do any automatic scaling - it's used for a whole lot of other purposes than web. But you can call that scaling if you want to see it the same way as web browsers/photo viewers display it.   As I'm sure you know, a digital image doesn't have a "size". It only has pixels. The correct way to display an image is one image pixel represented by exactly one physical screen pixel.   I'm reposting the screenshot I posted earlier in this thread: ... View more

DirectX12 is an API, application programming interface. Your GPU is able to communicate through that API, that's what "DirectX12 support" means.   However, the feature level is the actual, physical capabilities of the GPU. The feature level is what the GPU can do. That's a hard physical limitation, not something that can be updated. ... View more

The plus sign is the name you have given the layer. You have apparently done this by double-clicking the layer and typing + in the highlighted field. That's how you name a layer.   Aside from that - for a beginner, this seems like an extremely complex layer setup, and it's not even clear what they're supposed to do. Why do you need to clip standard pixel layers to an underlying empty layer?   I would strongly advise you to start with a much simpler layer structure to get a feel for what they do, before starting to build up these towers of layers.   In any case, if you need to add/subtract/intersect masks on the same image, it's easier to do with grouped layers or smart objects, instead of stacking them on top of each other. ... View more

This has nothing to do with "single core". Denoise runs exclusively in the GPU, it doesn't even touch the CPU.   Denoise is a complex AI based operation, it takes a bit of time even on high end systems. It will never be instant. 10 seconds sounds about normal, depending on the size of your raw files. The timing is directly proportional to the megapixel count. ... View more