until the next update which turns on scrubby again, as I have just experienced and had solved after 1hr on phone to one of those tech support peeps who are tricky to understand the language and have zero experience of pshop ! I wish settings of users WERE NOT ALTERED with updates, THAT IS BANG OUT OF ORDER, AND COSTLY, 1 hrs lost work time solving one issue that turned out to be something called scrubby that had been turned ON. BEING USED TO DRAG A BOX WITH MAG GLASS, AND NEVER EVER USING SCRUBBY I WAS NOT KNOWING THE CAUSE OF LOSS OF ZOOM BOX AND SHE ALSO DIDNT KNOW !   Merlin. ... View more

Thank you Merlin3 I Thought, that I was alone. I used to use ACR to edit jpg´s too. Now all adjustments are flatted to file, and I cannot edit again and again the way that I can allways go back to orginal file.  ... View more

Hi @Merlin3:   Is Photoshop installed on a local drive, or are you accessing it via a VPN?   ~Barb ... View more

Yes, I know what you mean. If you move a path and stop, it turns dark blue. It does this on both black and white backgrounds.  It won't return to cyan untill you click away from the guide.  It does not respond to the Enter or Escape keys.  Sometimes they might appear to go Majenta, but I think that is Smart Guides popping up. ... View more

This is 26.2.0 I have not yet updated to 26.3   ... View more

You can apply mask from another file, in the current version of camera raw, opening the files directly into it. Can can sync the corrections and just unchecked all except for masking. ... View more

Again, the masks in the raw processors (Camera Raw and Lightroom) are designed differently than Photoshop masks. Camera Raw and Lightroom do not currently offer any direct tonal control over the mask itself, such as Levels, Curves… Instead, in the raw processors, all the control you have is for how the mask is created. That control is either in the Masks panel itself, or in the darker (lower) mask refinement controls in the Edit panel stack.   When the Edit panel stack is shown for a selected mask, the mask editing controls are in the darker area, and the controls that affect the image through the mask are in the lighter area below that. So…if you adjust Contrast, Curves, etc. in the lighter area, you are always applying the edit to the image through the mask — you are not editing the mask itself. So you can’t use Contrast, Curves, etc. to edit a mask, at least for now.   In the upper darker area of the Edit panel stack, the Refine controls are available only for range masks, because they refine the range that you specify. Other mask types may have other controls there that are specific to the mask type; for example, that’s where the Radial Gradient mask offers its Feather option.      What I’ve found in the Adobe raw processors is that when viewing the mask overlay in a high contrast view such as Black On White, mask edges created by the AI masks (sky, object, people) often aren’t as precise as we might like and look a little disappointing. But there are a lot of times when that imprecision doesn’t always affect the final result in a noticeable way and ends up being OK. What my earlier example showed is that sometimes, using Add/Subtract/Intersect with a range mask can help clean up that mask, if the image content can be range-masked in just the right way.   But that doesn’t always work. There are times when the best mask you can make with Camera Raw/Lightroom still isn’t acceptable. If you have such an image, where you must have pixel-level or tonal-level control over a mask to really do it right, this is when you send the image over to Photoshop and finish it off the way you’re used to.   Again, although the Camera Raw/Lightroom nondestructive and parametric masks have many advantages over the Photoshop masking model, they’re still not ideal. I’d like to see direct tonal refinement of Camera Raw/Lightroom masks. But this is how it works for now. ... View more

Jane's answer above is spot on here. Drag your gradient from B to C not A to C. If you still need a different gradual transition between A and B then add a second gradient to the mask using the Add or Subtract buttons.   Dave ... View more

Hi, method 1 made a pigs ear of things, nothing lined up, colours remained same.   method 2 https://www.photoup.net/learn/how-to-match-a-color-in-photoshop how can one judge if the sliders are matching the target image when the target image is a 1inch square on the screen ? Impossible to do at that size. yet that article shows such.   Is there no way sampling the same area of colour in both images can be used to say match that to that and have the brains of Photoshop do it ? trying to fiddle around by eye is somewhat primitive.   Method 3 is about evening up differences in darkness.   My photos have differences in colour, scans from negs, a 4 set panorama across an airfield of grass, taken seconds apart starting off at the evening sky and panning left from it. first is a bit yellowy, the next seems to have gone a bit violet, then the last two are about same and a tad bluey for the grass. The grass thoughout needs to match. Such colour variations can get in during the scan of the neg. I just wish one could set the pipette size to 51x51 or 100 x 100 and click the grass in each shot and have it all marry up colour balance wise. In Raw 17 there is not even an indication of the pipette size for when using the neutral colour pipette. I wish the colour sampler pipette had an indication of size, move it a fraction and the RGB values change. I have been trying to adjust tint to get the one picture match the rgb of the grass in another. but just getting the sample to give the RGB values of the target photo is not easy, it needs to be of an average sample like the pipette in photoshop provides. even that is dodgy as its not 51x51 of the image but of the 'monitor' so if you ar zoomed out it can pick up on adjacent colours !   Merlin ... View more

Often times files like your jpgs that won't open in Photoshop directly because of an error will open in Camera Raw. You can try from within Photoshop CS6 by going to File>Open As, then click on the jpg, select Camera Raw from the Open As drop down and press Open.   ... View more

Hi, I have shots of same wall same distance same lighting taken seconds apart, with foliage behind me (pic on right) and wall a few feet away (pic on left), a bit of a greeny tint I feel when first working on the wall at right. It’s a scan of a35mm neg and such things change over time, especially if in a sleeve which is not acid-free ! I know the bricks from other pictures and by being there from elsewhere on the same land built at the same time etc etc. Those taken close to the wall were seconds apart, no light change.  I adjust as best I can, the first is done by eye, I see a small dark shadow where the mortar was missing ! so make that neutral on RGB values. Next in the sequence I see a grey (?) walled building through the leaves, and pipette that with the neutral pipette, and all looks better, so apply that to the first one starting over and using ‘use previous settings’ in raw mode,  now two look same . I do a third that way. But then the 4th photo is taken further back, having stepped back to outside of the foliage, (pic on left, though I have zoomed into the wall for this post), more grass and foliage in the picture now, with the wall visible in places, choose ‘apply previous settings’ and eeek its a bit pinky looking everywhere. So instead I use 'auto' and it looks correct, now I need to match the colour balance of the close up wall pics to the wall in the image at left, I wish to click on A and B and C at left then click the areas A B C at right and tell pshop to make that at right match the colours at left, then I can make the picture at right brighter as it currently looks, I am using the picture at left to tell me what the coloir balance is, not what the brightness is, as its in shade, if I were to make the wall at left as bright as the wall at right, the scene would appear over exposed.   so A B C to match between both pics on colour balance ! Just how do I do that ? Surely Pshop has a match colour tool for this ?   I am not wanting to match the greyscale, that is a need at the same time, though I would expect the wall visible in the bushes to be a bit darker than that taken 3 feet away, BUT this is about the colour. Its such a basic task. Else what have Adobe been up to this last 30 years ? Merlin   ... View more

It certainly seems difficult to mathematically determine the transformation of a rectangle (as the bounds of a Layer always are rectangular) depending on the position and target position of three points if the difference is not limited to scale and rotation.  ... View more

We pay monthly.   We rarely see new features.. where is the multi-clipboard support ? Honestly, it is not rocket science. It's clipboard array.. If windows pipe in correct info. ... View more

You might try downloading the free Spatter pack of brushes from Kyle Webster: https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/brushes.html   The brushes should work in Photoshop CS6. ... View more

Hi jane-e,   The file seems to be fine opening in Photoshop 2025 after saving it from Photoshop CS6.   No warnings or anything. ... View more

Further thoughts, what this is doing is making an average colour and applying it by brush to a layer best set to mode colour. But the result then lacks the variety of colours that make up the apparent hue, the trees or tarmac need more than a solid colour painted over them, also its impossible to darken that area or improve the contrast, generally to give it the p'zazz of the area beside it. I have opted to grab the area as a selection and paste it in as a layer, then do the pipette thing, over that. Then its  contrast, levels etc can be adjusted, then one sees the effect of that a bit more. Still a struggle, as in hours of struggling. We need a means of sampling the area beside the target area, saying copy the appearance of this area, to the afflicted area. That means copying the coloured composition, the levels, the contrast, etc replacing those of the afflicted area. See the attached, a tarmac area, here I have sampled the area, positioned it over the afflicted area, and want to transfer through the appearance of it. a layer mode setting that lets through the appearance, If I alter opacity the orange shows through. How can that be done ? the pipette and paint method is somewhat dead pan for it, results are any shade of grey and thats it, no colours other than grey.   Merlin3 ... View more

Hi, I have 26.2 set up as CS6, correct greyscale for 18% and to not give false sense of image brightness, and that is 2nd grey value from right in preferences. I work with colour matching and use holes in cartridge paper of a 18% grey value as is correct, and have pshop as its working with colours, set same way, always have done. it was not good in CS6, it was great before then, but now its bad. there is NO difference AND THERE SHOULD BE. So Adobe need to fix this as I cant see what I am working on !   and for windows 10 as wild horses will not drag me to 11. designed by a company who dont have to do actual work with a PC. Merlin3 ... View more

Wiothout images to work with it's like 3 blind guys in a dark room:   " I feel a big head"  the other says "I feel big ears" and the third says "I feel A long hairy tail- I think it's a horse".   A man who can see walks in and turns on the lights, to see they all just described a zebra. ... View more

Reading the OP again, I am wondering how @Merlin3 intends using this proposed soft brush?  If you use a soft in a layer  mask and feather the mask, you get a softer effect.  Hmmm...  You would not have a fully opaque core doing this.   If you define a brush from a black to white radial gradient, it does appear to be progressive . This is the gradient   And this is the brush preset made from that gradient. Not an exact match — I used guides to mark the positions — but PD close, and it is still progressive with close to fully opaque centre and transparent edge.   If @Merlin3 tells us more about how he'd like to use his proposed preset, I wonder if we can come up with some sort of workaround. ... View more

If I can find the suggestions method I will suggest we are returned to what we once had for active tab.   Merlin3 By @Merlin3   ... View more

worked ... View more

Need to be able to store more file types.  Illustrator, PDF, possibly more. Phtographers have projects and need to keep assets together. Think.  You are also renting storage space. Let us store more. ... View more

ooooops - my bad. Thanks for letting me know 👍 ... View more

I create simple app for windows users, that add to the context menu new option to fix every image/s with this problem. Here is a link to the app: https://mendish.com/product/ic-for-adobe-licence/     See image attach:   ... View more

Hi, @jane-e  I clicked that link and saw a non english alphabet all over the page, and hit the back button within a second, have I infested my pc with spam ? That person, single cell amoeba, lowlife, must be legally tracked down and eliminated from posting, will that be done ?   Filter >distort >shear and add in a lot more nodes has given me this. If the grid was larger one would be able to place more nodes where needed to match the water, its far too small, why not give us a decent sized box. its 30mm wide which at 2ft from the screen is very small to move a mouse about in. Also try zigzag but no manual control over where the zig and zag go, I need them to coincide with the water patterns. Frustrating no decent controls so user gets the pattern to match where the distortion has to go.   Wave has what looks to be controls, BUT after some playing around none gave the number of ripples I needed . needs an extra slider.   Bottom line is Pshop needs a tool where as one clicks and drags, where one needs the wriggle to go,  it warps just that area with the limit decided by a radius around the click point when starting. Smudge smudges.   Also none of these preview on the image so I can’t see if the distortion is where the waves are. They preview in a piddly small box and its only showing the selection layer and not the layer below it.   Wish these things were designed by actual users.   Merlin ... View more

Hi, I can add my two pennuth on selecting edges, I am no expert but been doing such 40 years, perhaps in a wrong way ! Extensis used to make add ons for photoshop I recall that managed to make a soft edge that cleverly took out the adjacent colour so no halos existed, also could deal with selection of hair. I seemed to think such clever tools were then added by Adobe themselves. Being a CS6 user I have to do it the old way, 1. paste the T shirt picture into the recipient picture and scale it to size. 2. make the eraser have the same soft edge as the edges of objects in the receiving picture.  3. duplicate the image and save as pre trimmed,turn it off, just incase you goof ! 4. erase round the edge with edge of circle of the eraser  half way across the fade edge. (caps lock toggles gunsight/circle). Tip.. I prefer to paint with black in quick mask mode, hit Q for quick mask, black becomes red as you paint, gives the chance to filter > gaussian blur that quick mask if need be, and a good visual on where you are. hit Q again and save the selection etc. Finish off in Channels. Tip. when in channels and the b/w image, my saying is, exit channels via top RGB layer, (i.e. click on top layer, before going back to layers.) 5. delete using that selection 6. with eraser nibble away any darker halo. I feel there is no perfect auto tool, nothing like the manual touch. 7. loss of a few pixels wont show on a big item.   I wish when altering brush size that the width of the soft edge remained constant, one is always after same feather width when painting into small areas yet Adobe want to make the edge feather less as you choose a lesser diameter. so end up with harder edges. Does my head in ! maybe CC has now overcome that failing, has it ?   Also one needs to match the grain in the image to the recipient image, ( I have started a thread on that) https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-discussions/what-method-match-noise-in-existing-photo-to-added-image/td-p/14890087   as well as the degree of blur. and direction of light.   As for altering colours, I tend to use HSL as an adjustment layer tick box to apply to previous layer. sometimes I end up using colorise. tick box as well in that interface for HSL. also Colour balance.   No doubt others have better ways. I am keen to know of such !   Merlin   ... View more

Here is a very quick example of artificial noise, in this case with a 4:1 sized noise layer. Perhaps 6:1 or 8:1 would be better... But the idea here is to magnify the noise, blur it etc. Adobe Camera Raw or the Camera Raw Filter can also add noise/grain to scale.     Is it a 100% match? No! Is it better? I would say yes...   My background is prepress, when printed using an AM or FM screen, the noise result is closer to viewing at 25% than it is at 100% in Photoshop where 1 image pixel is mapped to 1 monitor pixel.   I have attached a layered PSD for clarity. ... View more