TiagoRocha
Engaged
TiagoRocha
Engaged
Activity
‎Feb 08, 2025
07:28 AM
I have this script that someone shared with me a while ago to add guides to a selection, but when working with artboards, it creates document guides, not artboard guides. Is it possible to change that? // Add guides to selection.jsx
//@target Photoshop
if (app.documents.length) {
// Get doc.
var doc = app.activeDocument;
if (doc.selection) {
// Get bounds of selection.
var bounds = doc.selection.bounds;
doc.selection.deselect();
// Add guides to match bounds of selection.
doc.guides.add(Direction.VERTICAL, bounds[0]);
doc.guides.add(Direction.HORIZONTAL, bounds[1]);
doc.guides.add(Direction.VERTICAL, bounds[2]);
doc.guides.add(Direction.HORIZONTAL, bounds[3]);
} else {
alert("Make a selection");
}
} else {
alert("Open a document");
}
... View more
‎Feb 08, 2025
03:08 AM
I just asked ChatGPT to create a script for that, and after some trial and error, it seems to be working: // Photoshop Script: Copy Selection to New Layer and Delete Original (Preserve Position)
var doc = app.activeDocument;
var activeLayer = doc.activeLayer;
// Get selection bounds
var selectionBounds = doc.selection.bounds;
var x = selectionBounds[0];
var y = selectionBounds[1];
doc.selection.copy();
var newLayer = doc.artLayers.add();
doc.paste();
// Move pasted selection to original position
doc.activeLayer.translate(x - doc.activeLayer.bounds[0], y - doc.activeLayer.bounds[1]);
activeLayer.remove(); I would still like it to be natively, but in any case, for someone looking for the same thing, here it is. I'm not an expert in scripts, so if there's something that can be improved, please suggest. With the script, we can always assign a shorcut to is, so it's perfect. Anyway, if someone can show me a way to resize a masked section by not showing the boundaries of the whole image, that would be great.
... View more
‎Feb 08, 2025
03:02 AM
Thank you for the reply, and I don't want to sound "rude", but you just pointed out all the obvious things I already now, but didn't answer my questions: Why would Adobe not include this as a shortcut or a tool? Is there an obvious reason besides "this is how it works since the beginning and they are not willing to change"? I understand the whole "non-destructive" approach, but if that's the case, why give us alternative ways to destructively do it with the Select>Invert>Delete, or even the Eraser tool? So I don't think that the "non-destructive" logic would apply. Unlinking the mask doesn't do what I would expect, though. If my image is 100px by 100px and I create a mask that's 25px by 25px, and I want to resize the visible portion (masked), how would I do that? When I use the Transform option, it's showing me the whole 100px by 100px boundaries. How can I just resize the 25px by 25px using the Transform tool? This is what frustrates me the most in Photoshop, to be honest. I totally understand that having the option to resize all can and is useful, but isn't it also useful to have a visual cue of what my actual masked section is being resized to? Also, as I mentioned, the solution you provided isn't perfect. When the image is bigger than the document, using the Select, Invert, Delete, will only delete the visible postion of the image, not what's outside the canvas. Again, not trying to be rude or anything, I'm just looking for some clarification, without getting answers and "solutions" to things I already know and stated in my post. Thank you.
... View more
‎Feb 08, 2025
02:07 AM
This is something I also struggled with in Photoshop for years. Can't we just crop a single image that we have in our document? Using the layer mask is not ideal, because if I then want to resize the image, it includes the space taken by the mask (unless I'm missing something?) Yes, I can select, invert, delete. But why so many steps? Also, if the image goes beyond the document's borders, it only deletes what's visible. What I usually do now is I select, create a new layer only with that selection, delete the layer underneath it. Again, why so many steps for something that could be achieved with a single tool or shortcut? Why is it that Adobe hasn't included a tool or shortcut just for this? Any idea? This seems to be such a basic thing a lot of us use, that's why I can't really wrap my head around why it isn't possible.
... View more
‎Nov 29, 2023
07:54 AM
My bad. I thought you created it. Anyway, that script worked like a charm, so thank you for sharing!
... View more
‎Nov 28, 2023
06:11 AM
3 Upvotes
Using Actions doesn't help and I'm not familiar with scripts. So basically I have to resize 300 layers to 3000px using the largest size (width or height, whatever is bigger). I saw scripts to resize images (not layers), so that won't do the job. I saw other solutions for very particular scenarios, but not what I'm looking for either, and since I'm familiar with scripting, I won't be able to adjust it to my needs. Any chance that someone can help me with this? I would really appreciate it, as this would save me so much time for this very tedious task and I need to deliver this asap EDIT: I found the script that does this, but it needs a subtle change as described by the script's author @Stephen Marsh (thank you for your contribution, Stephen). Use the following script (the original script used "Math.max" and I changed it to "Math.min" to fit the largest dimension to the canvas): // https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1968642
// https://forums.adobe.com/message/8022190#8022190
#target photoshop
var oldPref = app.preferences.rulerUnits
app.preferences.rulerUnits = Units.PIXELS;
var doc = activeDocument;
var iLayer = doc.activeLayer;
doc.activeLayer = iLayer;
var scale = Math.min(doc.width/(iLayer.bounds[2]-iLayer.bounds[0]),doc.height/(iLayer.bounds[3]-iLayer.bounds[1])); // Optionally change Math.max to Math.min to fit canvas short side
iLayer.resize (scale*100,scale*100);
iLayer.translate(doc.width/2-(iLayer.bounds[0]+iLayer.bounds[2])/2,doc.height/2-(iLayer.bounds[1]+iLayer.bounds[3])/2);
app.preferences.rulerUnits = oldPref; To make it clear what the Math.max and Math.min do:    
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
12:33 PM
Solution: 1) Duplicate both shapes: 2) Select the 2 at the bottom: 3) Select this option: 4) Select the 2 top shapes: 5) Select this option: 6) To convert the top layer (the intersection) into an individual shape, select that layer and go here: 7) There you go (moved the intersection to the side so you can see it):
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
11:09 AM
Thank you for the screenshots, but it seems you didn't quite understand my goal. I wasn't trying to subtract one shape from the other as you did on your last image. When you overlapped the circle and the rainbow square, the idea would be that the part that's common to both, would create a separate shape. If you go back to my post here: https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-discussions/shape-layer-via-cut/m-p/13052685#M655886 you will see what I mean. It really is not a hard concept to understand, in my opinion. Shape 1: bottom shape Shape 2: top shape Overlap them Whatever's common to both, get converted to a new shape. Shape 1: the common area (overlapped content) between both shape 1 and 2 is removed Shape 2: disappears, because it was only used as a reference (again, pretty much like when you have a rasterized image, you use the marquee to create a selection and use the New Layer Via Cut. It creates a new layer with whatever was inside the selection and that selection gets removed from the original image). The only thing I really got from this thread so far was the different options to subtract, merge, etc, shapes, but my question wasn't asnwered. I appreciate your time, anyway.
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
07:23 AM
But you still haven't clarify what that shortcut is I think I already explained that in post 1, see the screenshots. The cutting removes the selected subPathItem from the Vector Mask of the original Shape Layer and creates a new Shape Layer with the selected subPathItem as Vector Mask. Thing is, you shared the final result, but I have no idea how you got there. I have a shape (circle). What's next? I see you have the Pen Tool selected on your screenshots. Did you use that? Did you use the Rectangle Tool? When I use that tool, it creates a new shape. If I use any of the options you mentioned (other than (New Layer): I don't get the result you have. That is cutting a subPathItem, not pixels. Its removal from the Vecor Mask has no effect on the existence of the remaining subPathItems. I guess someone else is fixated on pixels, not me 😉 Let's move on from the pixel issue, because that's not what I mean. 🙂 Instead you could »Shape Layer Via Copy« and then change the Path Operation of that subPathItem in the Vector Mask of the original Layer. This may seem simple and obvious to you, because you know how it works, but the way you are trying to explain, doesn't make clear what the steps are. You are pretty much saying "you can have a steering wheel and some tires and you can build a car". Ok... but how to assemple everything? In what order? What other steps do I need to take? Right now all I have is a screenshot of the final result and the shortcut highlighted.
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
06:40 AM
I'm not "fixated" on pixels as if I was thinking shapes are pixels. What I mean is that I'm looking for a way that mimics the same behavior as the marquee on pixels. So again, I'm looking for a way to have a shape, overlap another shape, and whatever area common to both, will become a new shape, removing the area from the original. But you still haven't clarify what that shortcut is, regardless of me being "fixated" or not on pixels. The shortcut is there... what is it for? If it doesn't mimic the behavior of "New Layer Via Cut", what is the purpose of the shortcut at all? I can't find anything about it online.
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
06:26 AM
Also, even if I can achieve the result I want using the method you described, I still don't understand what the New Shape Layer Via Cut actually does...? How would I be able to select a portion of the shape then use the New Shape Layer Via Cut shortcut and it actually creates a new shape layer using the portion (like the marquee on a rasterized image)?
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
06:23 AM
That helped with other things I didn't know I could do, but my issue is still there. For example let's say I have this (2 shapes): Now what I want is the red shape to act like a "marquee" where the area on the black circle that's underneath the red shape, will become a new shape, just like a rasterized image would be cut into a new layer. So I would have this, but as shapes (vector):
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
06:08 AM
Thank you for the reply. I'm a bit confused, because I don't know what you mean by "subPathItems" I noticed that you have the Pen Tool selected and when I tried using it to create a closed path and use the shortcut, that worked. Now the issue is: what if I want to create a perfect square/rectangle or ellipse the way I can using the Marquee? Using the Pen Tool to achieve this is not the best and fastest workflow. How can I do it?
... View more
‎Jul 06, 2022
05:38 AM
When a layer is a rasterized image, using the New Layer Via Cut is pretty obvious what the function is. Now when it's a shape layer, I see the New Shape Layer Via Cut, but it doesn't seem to do anything (or maybe I'm not using it properly). It doesn't show me any error when I have portion of a shape selected using the marquee and use the shortcut, but nothing happens. Can anyone explain what this is and how to use it properly? EDIT: The issue of knowing what the shortcut does isn't solved yet, but I was able to achieve the result I wanted with the workaround below. If anyone actually knows how to use the shortcut, please share a step by step reply so I can test it out. Thanks!
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
09:56 AM
No problem. I don't use Illustrator or InDesign, but now everything is clear (my panel was not tall enough, so I couldn't see the extra options to link corners and all that)
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
09:54 AM
No worries 😉
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
09:15 AM
That's what I thought... I also saw an article showing them in InDesign (almost at the end of the page) Thank you for clarifying.
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:43 AM
EDIT: the window was not tall enough so I couldn't see the link button along with the 2 bottom corners buttons. This is what I see now: Now it all makes sense. My bad...
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:42 AM
My bad, Dave. The window was too small in height so all I could see was the 2 top corners. Found the link button along with the 2 bottom corners.
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:38 AM
There's no such thing as a diamond... it it anything I need to activate?
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:15 AM
Not sure I understand what you mean... This is what I see: And yes, I understand that this is to make the corners round, but my question is: if those 2 buttons at the bottom do the exact same thing (they both change the radius for all 4 corners), what's the purpose of having 2? As you can see, the link button at the top is not even ticked (which shouldn't make any difference anyway, because that's related to the Width and Height).
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:13 AM
Using SHIFT doesn't make any difference. I'm on a Mac as well. Once I do that, it just starts a new shape. The blue border I was refering to is this (at the bottom): I don't see that menu you have for the type of corners.
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:08 AM
I don't see any link symbol next to these buttons: Also, when I press ALT, I'm not able to change individual corners. The cursor changes to the cross with a minus next to it and when I click and drag (while still holding ALT) it just creates a new shape.
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
08:03 AM
Hi Myra, Thank you for the suggestion. I also thought that was a good alternative, but after testing, it's not. For example, if you move a layer up or down, all comps will reflect that order. The same if you delete a layer. Another test was adding a LUT to a layer. After saving different comps and changing the LUT for each, the latest LUT was also reflected on all comps. I'm sure there are probably other disadvantages to comps over snapshots and the method I just described, but these are the ones I tested and I believe those are big ones compared to principle of snapshots. I would assume that for particular cases, comps are useful, but I don't see them replacing snapshots. I just really think Photoshop could have that option where people could save the snapshots inside the file. Let the user decide if they want a huge file or not. Not all projects are super heavy to begin with anyway.
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
04:48 AM
I never used snapshots before, but today I was doing some research and it seems like a great feature, but the issue is that it doesn't save them with the file. If the idea of a snapshot is that we can compare multiple versions, it would make sense that we could come back a few hours/days/weeks/months/years later and maybe make some changes, after not looking at it for a while (fresh perspective). Some could argue that this approach would require too much memory, the file size would increase, etc, but let's be honest: would you rather have that "huge" file, but being able to have access to early edits or instead always live on the "edge", because your computer could freeze or Photoshop suddenly quits, etc, and you lose all the alternatives that took you so much time to create? Sure, you can create a new document based on a snapshot, but you will end up with the same space being used on your drive, the only difference is that it won't be on a single file, but now you're jumping around documents/tabs. To me, this is not a good workflow. Just my personal taste anyway. So my workaround, which creates an alternative to snapshots, but allows us to save them as "snapshots" is to create a smart object as soon we create a new document (snapshot #1), then work on that smart object as if it was our main document. Once we want to take a snapshot, we go to the main document, right click the smart object and choose "New Smart Object Via Copy" (snapshot #2). Open that smart object (snapshot #2) and work on it. When we want to compare different snapshots, we just go to the main document and while holding ALT, we make each snapshot visible, which pretty much mimics the same behavior as the normal snapshot feature. This approach also has another advantage: you can update the current snapshot, instead of creating a new one (if you don't want to) with slightly different modifications, so again, you have the behavior of the default snapshots (you can create a new one), or you can simply make the changes and save that single "snapshot" (Smart Object). This is just my workaround, but I'm happy to know if there are any disadvantages to this, other than the file size and the memory it takes, of course. Let me know your thoughts
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
03:58 AM
1 Upvote
When I create a square with rounded corners and I go to Properties I see these buttons at the bottom: Whether I click and drag the one on the left or the one on the right I get the exact same results and it just changes the rounded corners of all 4 corners. Is there a different situation where those behave different? Also, what are those rectangles in between the buttons? If I click them their border turns blue, but that doesn't seem to do anything. Also, I can't double click and type anything, which seemed to be intuitive when seeing those boxes.
... View more
‎Jun 29, 2022
02:15 AM
1 Upvote
10 years later, still no feature. I doubt this will ever be implemented (unless it is already on a recent update). Anyway, for those struggling with this (like I was), the workaround is to do what I just saw on a YouTube video. 1 - Scale your layer with the transform tool and pay attention to the percentage at the top. Let's say you make it 50% smaller 2 - When you're done, go to the layer and right-click where it says "fx" on the right hand side of the layer. Pick "Scale Effects" 3 - Type in the amount of percentage from step 1 (in this case, 50%) If by any chance you are trying to scale the styles on a layer and you don't remember the exact percentage, you can always click the word Scale on the preview window and drag left/right to change the percentage. Since there's a Preview option, you will see the effect change in real time. Not the perfect solution, but it's "a" solution. Better than modifying the styles one by one. Hope it helps other people with the same issue. Meanwhile, will keep my fingers crossed for an update from Adobe that adds this option when transforming a layer. Either way, this technique of using Scale Effects is useful, because you may change your mind and decide that scalling the styles by 50% when scalling the layer by 50% is not enough and you may want to change it maybe to 30%, so you always have that option.
... View more
‎Jun 22, 2022
01:55 AM
2 Upvotes
Thank you for the clear explanation, Dave. It makes sense now 🙂
... View more
‎Jun 21, 2022
01:10 AM
1 Upvote
"Increase the resolution of the image, apply the filter, and resample back to the previous size." I tried that as well, but the issue is that when you increase the size to something super big, you introduce blur and all that so when you create the effect you will be applying it based on the bad quality of the image, right? I was thinking if it could just reduce the size of the dots. Apparentely, it can't. "In addition to having the correct screen angles, you also need to view at 100% (1:1) magnification for evaluation." The images I shared were actually at 100% and they were CMYK. I started with RGB and didn't looked good, but then I decided to change to CMYK and what a difference! I mean, it also depends on what look you want. Maybe sometimes RGB will create a different effect that isn't supposed to look good or realistic. But yeah, CMYK is great for this, especially because I'm working on a macro that let's me pick custom colors for each channel, for creative effects, so CMYK is best! Thanks 🙂
... View more
‎Jun 21, 2022
01:03 AM
Let's say I have this image: And that I have this reference color: Now if I pick a pixel from the image with the eye dropper it will give me a color, right? Let's say that I pick a color from the sky and I get this: Now I would like Photoshop to grab the values of the first blue, compare them to the values of the second blue and then modify all colors in the image based on that difference. In this case with this image of the beach, there would be some crazy colors, but this is just an example. When I posted my original post, I was working with a vector image where that color change wasn't relevant at all. I just wanted the blue to match a blue I have as my brand's color.
... View more