We'll tell you when you're older. ... View more

Tasty! ... View more

There's been no change in defaults. Might be worthwhile resetting your Photoshop preferences. That's always a good early step for troublshooting weird behavior. ... View more

An image that is already flat (a jpeg, for example) will open that way, with the usual "Background" as the only layer. Some PNGs are single-layer, but not all, and any image with transparency is by definition not flat, so won't open that way. If it doesn't open with just a background layer, then it was saved in a layered format. You can automate flattening it by using an Action that would just have one step: Layer > Flatten Image. Assign a keyboard shortcut to the Action (or just to the Flatten Image command). You would not want to make this a default on opening any image, because then it would flatten the rare things you don't want to change. ... View more

Not to detract from what's been said already, but when Photoshop starts doing something completely non-sequitur like this, the remedy is almost always to reset Photoshop preferences. Open the Preferences dialog, and on the General page, click on "Reset preferences on Quit." Then quit Photoshop. (Another way to achieve the same thing is to hold down Ctrl+Alt+Shift while Photoshop is loading, then choose OK when it asks if you want to delete your preferences.)   This can happen with any version of Photoshop, and if you load a new version and see weird problems, it's the first step of troubleshooting. ... View more

Try using a soft-edged selection. You can do one of the following: Make your selection and feather it (Select > Modify > Feather, or Shift+F6) Enter Quick Mask mode, fill with black, use a soft brush to paint your selection, exist Quick Mask. Use the new Selection Brush with a soft edge. ... View more

Awesome! Those frogs have a definite Sopranos look to them. I'm trying to decide whether the firefly is being daringly defiant or has some kind of kamikaze thing going. 😹 ... View more

Kirin gets this all the time. He's probably used to it by now. 😉 ... View more

I use Dimension and Stager for grande format print output, so that's just incorrect. The statement "lacks the ability to set export size and resolution" is similarly incorrect, as I already pointed out and showed you where in the UI you can adjust it. ... View more

That's very effective. Maybe make it an animated GIF? ... View more

@Sergej DAGDA This is a very common misunderstanding, so you're not alone. I've answered many questions and even published articles on this subject, because so many people are misled.   Misinformation to the contrary, there is no difference at all in adjusting contrast and color (or any other post-processing) of an image at 5 PPI, 500 PPI, or 5000 PPI, if the image itself doesn't change. You can test this easily: Open any image in Photoshop and view it at full size on screen. Open the Resize Image dialog (Image > Image Size...), uncheck "Resample" and change the PPI value to 10. Click OK. View the image at full size. Notice that it has not changed. Use Resize Image again, and change the PPI value to 1000, keeping "Resample" unchecked. View the image at full size. Notice that it has not changed.  It is now obvious that changing the PPI value does not change the image unless you resample it up or down.   PPI has meaning only for print output. In all other respects, it's just a number. The number of pixels is the only thing that determines the level of detail in a raster image. The amount of detail visible in the final output depends on three things: how many pixels are in the image (which determines how much detail the image contains), the size of the output (which determines pixels-per-inch), and the viewing distance (which determines how many pixels-per-inch you need). For a poster, typical ppi is 150; for a billboard, 15 ppi; for a gallery print, 600 ppi.   Decide what ppi you need based on viewing distance, then do the math to determine how many pixels you need in total. This is what all grande format designers do, whether we're doing subway posters or vehicle wraps or billboards. Render your Stager or Dimension or Illustrator document at that number of pixels.   It doesn't matter what ppi figure is in the metadata. If you need it to be something different, change it in Photoshop during post-processing. Just don't resample the image. ... View more

I think there's some kind of cross-communication here, because I can't make out what problem you feel you're running into. "Dimension" (of objects) has nothing to do with output resolution in Stager, or any other non-CAD 3D application, just as dimensions in Illustrator have nothing to do with output resolution. Raster content placed on a model, which includes most materials and all decals, does depend on the material resolution, which should be as high as you need but no higher.   But you don't have to do anything other than change the resolution (W x H) of the camera to get whatever output resolution you need. Of course the render time will increase if you have a huge frame; any 3D or video render requires more processing time as the output size increases. That's just how rendering works.   A camera of 5k pixels on the long side is simple to render from Stager. You can set the ppi to anything you want after the render is complete. The image will still be 5k pixels wide, no matter what ppi number is in the metadata, so if you need 240 ppi you can just set it to 240 ppi.   You can also override the camera dimensions in the Render tab. Turn on "Override camera size" in the Export Settings panel and type in whatever you need. Just think in absolute pixel numbers. Ignore "resolution" in ppi, because that's just metadata you can change anytime you need to. ... View more

Thanks for the detailed look at your process. Great concept, great execution, and a really delightful result. I'm totally stealing this for desktop wallpaper when I'm working on an article! ... View more

That's a really delightful composition, and a message we can all relate to. Just really, really creative. Love it! ... View more

Beautiful! I suppose this is the Chief Executive Zebra? (Isn't this fun? What a wonderful create!) I know zebra knitting takes a while. My grandmother used to knit zebras on weekends, but her specialty was crocheting cobras. ... View more

@Sergej DAGDA  "Resolution," in the sense you're using it, is essentially meaningless. Read @DavidLloydImageworks post above carefully to get some understanding. The only meaningful numbers from a render are the pixel dimensions (W x H), and you can make those anything you want in Dimension or Stager by changing the W and H values of each camera. ... View more

Looking good. What was your workflow after generating the original image? This isn't a prompt-only challenge! ... View more

A fox. Right. I will say no more. 🤐 ... View more

Wonderful work! That's is exactly the kind of creative thinking this challenge is about. I think a lot of folks are going to take inspiration from these. ... View more

Fantastic, Tina! That's a great workflow, too. Thanks for the detailed breakdown. (I can totally see the final result as a sticker!) ... View more

That is so perfect, and such a rich story! I immediately want to know about the huge Adobe edifice, the Photoshop splash screen on the wall, the modern Photoshop rug, and how they all relate to whatever has the mollies so fascinated. Maybe he's reading an email from Pete Green? ... View more

Way to go! He definitely looks like he's expecting a royal kiss from a passing princess. ... View more

Perspective tends to be less accurate than I'd expect from a 3D app, and the generated scene can be quite odd. For a while, I was trying to get the rabbit's reflection in the camera lens. The closest I could get was bits of rabbit protruding from the lens and the self-timer, so I gave up. ... View more

Great! The reason this is a monthly challenge is so folks have the time to work on their creations. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with! ... View more

Nice start. Where's the rest? ... View more

That is fantastic (in the literal and colloquial senses of the word). If they ever do a Sci-Fi steampunk version of "Finding Nemo," this dude is going to be one of the stars! 😊 ... View more

I'd have a hard time picking a favorite, myself. These are all great. ... View more

Quokkas are awesome, but wombats... You don't mess with a wombat. ... View more

Thanks! That's why I asked. I recognized the convention, but I was only aware of it through working with Colin. (Incidentally, his translation from the classical Chinese into English is now, at the request of Beijing University, being translated into modern Chinese. Quite a guy.) ... View more