I'm looking for a book on Photoshop - 'Inside Photoshop".

On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 18:08:28 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Mar 23, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:39:17 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Mar 23, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 19:44:34 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:

--- snip ---

I'm sorry if that's not what you're looking for. I
just don't know what else you can find out.

It seemed clear enough to me when I wrote the original post but it's
obvious I didn't make myself clear. Thinking about it, what I need is
the equivalent of block diagrams with explanatory text. Sticking with
my original example: what goes on inside PS when one creates a
clipping mask? What graphic elements are used and how are they
manipulated behind the scenes?

I still don’t get where you are going, or what sort of thought exercise
you
are entertaining with this search into the inner workings of PS. For that
matter you might as well ask for the same information on Alienskin Exposure
X3, On1 Photo Raw 2018, Affinity Photo, etc. After all they all follow
similar principles when it comes to creating clipping masks, and other
graphics editing staples.

What are you trying to achieve other than a thought exercise?

Does it matter? I just would like to know.

This is probably all stuff you are already aware of. However, there is a
different approach (though a bit dated), and the references at the end might
lead you to the end of your rainbow.

http://computationalculture.net/inside-photoshop/

Actually, nospam, no doubt unintentionally, made a help ful remark
when he said that clipping masks start with a trace. That presumanly
means there is a hidden/temporary layer of some kind involved in the
process. This is the kind of information I am after.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:14:34 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:



I still don’t get where you are going, or what sort of thought exercise you
are entertaining with this search into the inner workings of PS. For that
matter you might as well ask for the same information on Alienskin Exposure
X3, On1 Photo Raw 2018, Affinity Photo, etc. After all they all follow
similar principles when it comes to creating clipping masks, and other
graphics editing staples.

What are you trying to achieve other than a thought exercise?

Does it matter? I just would like to know.


I'm not sure if you are the OP in this topic and I did not read the
start of this thread, but I am gonna make a comment. In the early 90s I
got Paint Shop Pro, which was shareware. I never had to read books or
anything, I just began using it and learned all it's tricks as I went
along. I upgraded it several times and some of the later versions seemed
to get a little too bloated and complicated. But PSP is a program where
more than one version can be installed on the same computer, so I kept
the older versions installed as well as the newer ones, and can select
which one I want.

Several years ago, I bought a used copy of Photoshop 5. (which is
probably pretty old by now). I installed it and to this day, I am still
scratching my head every time I try to use it. Photoshop is NOT easy to
learn or use. And Im sure the newer versions are evne more bloated and
hard to use.

I occasionally use Photoshop for a few special effects it can do, but
for 90% of my photo editing and common graphic creations, I just use my
old Paint Shop Pro. It's easy, self explanatory, and gets the job done,
without the need to read books, consult manuals and get your nerves
stressed out.

If photoshop is frustrating you, download a free copy of PSP. Go to any
of the sites that have older software, such as www.oldapps.com
Download it and enjoy it. Yes, it was shareware, so there is a nag
screen to register it when it starts up, but it dont expire or quit
working. I paid and registered on of the older versions, but did not do
so on the newer one that I dont use real often.

Note: Paint Shop Pro was sold to Corel some years ago. It is no longer
free. It's cheaper than Photoshop, but still costs quite a bit. The last
shareware version was getting too bloated for my tastes, so I never have
bought the Corel one. I'm perfectly happy with the older versions.

I dont know if PSP works with Windows 10, because I still use Win XP.
But if it does work, there is no reason to NOT install both Photoshop
and PSP.

wrote

|
| Note: Paint Shop Pro was sold to Corel some years ago. It is no longer
| free. It's cheaper than Photoshop, but still costs quite a bit. The last
| shareware version was getting too bloated for my tastes, so I never have
| bought the Corel one. I'm perfectly happy with the older versions.
|

I do the same thing, but would note that PSP5,
which I still use for most things, was not shareware.
(I did get PSP4 for free once with a router. But as
I recall, PS5 and PSP5 were dramatic changes,
providing mulitple undo for the first time.

I paid $100 for it in '99. But it can be found for free
now. It never had any kind of activation key to
begin with. Like a lot of software back then, you
just had to have a disk to install it.

I now have PSP5 and 16. I use 16 occasionally
but 5 for most basic things.

I don't think I've ever actually wanted to use a
"clipping mask". I just copy and paste selections.

It surprises me that no one has moved into the
glaring software gap that now exists: Corel makes
a usable but overly bloated and inflexible product.
Adobe make a grossly overpriced product that's
now rental only. Then there are a myriad smaller
programs that might work well for some things but
not everything. And of course there's GIMP, limping
along after some 25 years of development and still
not evn having a proper multiple document interface.
There's a wide-open slot for anyone who might
make a first-class graphics program for, say, $100.

On Mar 26, 2018, Mayayana wrote
(in article ):

wrote


Note: Paint Shop Pro was sold to Corel some years ago. It is no longer
free. It's cheaper than Photoshop, but still costs quite a bit. The last
shareware version was getting too bloated for my tastes, so I never have
bought the Corel one. I'm perfectly happy with the older versions.

I do the same thing, but would note that PSP5,
which I still use for most things, was not shareware.
(I did get PSP4 for free once with a router. But as
I recall, PS5 and PSP5 were dramatic changes,
providing mulitple undo for the first time.

I paid $100 for it in '99. But it can be found for free
now. It never had any kind of activation key to
begin with. Like a lot of software back then, you
just had to have a disk to install it.

I now have PSP5 and 16. I use 16 occasionally
but 5 for most basic things.

I don't think I've ever actually wanted to use a
"clipping mask". I just copy and paste selections.

It surprises me that no one has moved into the
glaring software gap that now exists: Corel makes
a usable but overly bloated and inflexible product.
Adobe make a grossly overpriced product that's
now rental only. Then there are a myriad smaller
programs that might work well for some things but
not everything. And of course there's GIMP, limping
along after some 25 years of development and still
not evn having a proper multiple document interface.
There's a wide-open slot for anyone who might
make a first-class graphics program for, say, $100.

You should pay attention, that slot (for photography) is rapidly being filled
by applications such as the following, all of which can be installed as
Photoshop/Lightroom plugins, or very functional standalone applications. All
use a layered non-destructive RAW workflow:

Alienskin Exposure X3.
https://www.alienskin.com/exposure/

On1 Photo Raw 2018.
https://www.on1.com

Affinity Photo.
https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/

Luminar 2018.
https://skylum.com/luminar

--

Regards,
Savageduck

In article ,
wrote:

I'm not sure if you are the OP in this topic and I did not read the
start of this thread, but I am gonna make a comment.

you should, because your comment is not relevant to the original
question.

In the early 90s I
got Paint Shop Pro, which was shareware. I never had to read books or
anything, I just began using it and learned all it's tricks as I went
along. I upgraded it several times and some of the later versions seemed
to get a little too bloated and complicated. But PSP is a program where
more than one version can be installed on the same computer, so I kept
the older versions installed as well as the newer ones, and can select
which one I want.

that's because paint shop pro doesn't do much.

Several years ago, I bought a used copy of Photoshop 5. (which is
probably pretty old by now).

photoshop 5 came out in 1998, making it 20 years old.

I installed it and to this day, I am still
scratching my head every time I try to use it. Photoshop is NOT easy to
learn or use. And Im sure the newer versions are evne more bloated and
hard to use.

nonsense.

photoshop is one of the easiest to use apps around, designed by artists
for other artists.

it does have some more advanced features, which can be ignored if you
don't need to use them.

I occasionally use Photoshop for a few special effects it can do, but
for 90% of my photo editing and common graphic creations, I just use my
old Paint Shop Pro. It's easy, self explanatory, and gets the job done,
without the need to read books, consult manuals and get your nerves
stressed out.

then you're doing something very wrong.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:


I don't think I've ever actually wanted to use a
"clipping mask". I just copy and paste selections.

what do you think copying a selection is doing under the hood?

It surprises me that no one has moved into the
glaring software gap that now exists: Corel makes
a usable but overly bloated and inflexible product.
Adobe make a grossly overpriced product that's
now rental only.

surprising as it may seem, adobe makes more than one product, some of
which can be purchased outright.

Then there are a myriad smaller
programs that might work well for some things but
not everything. And of course there's GIMP, limping
along after some 25 years of development and still
not evn having a proper multiple document interface.

that's actually one of the things gimp gets right. mdi is *awful*.

There's a wide-open slot for anyone who might
make a first-class graphics program for, say, $100.

you mean, like adobe already does?

"Savageduck" wrote

|
| You should pay attention, that slot (for photography) is rapidly being
filled
| by applications such as the following, all of which can be installed as
| Photoshop/Lightroom plugins, or very functional standalone applications.

Why are they plugins for PS if they're equivalent
to PS?
These questions come up from friends and
I don't have one good answer to give them. I
can use PSP5/16 and AfterShot Pro. But f there
were even just a better program for non-RAW
I'd buy it.

I do some RAW work, but in that case I'll
typically optimize it and then save it out as
BMP/TIF for work in PSP. I also do a lot of
trying to optimize poor photos, for things like
website work. I might need to sharpen, brighten,
remove background, etc. And I do a lot of simple
diagrams for work.

PSP5 is OK for most of that except that functions
for things like sharpening are outdated. PSP16
is up-to-date but is bloated and poorly designed.
(I can't even choose to not have a black window!
And it has a silly 3-part interface. One part is a
file explorer window. One is a quick-fix window.
One is the normal edit window. All I want is edit,
but I have to wait while it loads all 3. That kind of
bad design is evident throughout the program.)

So what I'd like, and would recommend to others,
would be an intuitive, lean program with all of
the basics to deal with drawing, color, contrast,
layers, etc. Personally I don't use the gimmicky
plugins. But a program that can use them is nice
to have, I suppose. Who knows when I might
want to make a 3-D button or render "colored
pencil" style for a birthday card.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| You should pay attention, that slot (for photography) is rapidly being
filled
| by applications such as the following, all of which can be installed as
| Photoshop/Lightroom plugins, or very functional standalone applications.

Why are they plugins for PS if they're equivalent
to PS?

read it again, this time slowly.

These questions come up from friends and
I don't have one good answer to give them.

imagine that.

I can use PSP5/16 and AfterShot Pro. But f there
were even just a better program for non-RAW
I'd buy it.

there is and you wouldn't.

I do some RAW work, but in that case I'll
typically optimize it and then save it out as
BMP/TIF for work in PSP.

*completely* negating the advantages of raw.

I also do a lot of
trying to optimize poor photos, for things like
website work. I might need to sharpen, brighten,
remove background, etc. And I do a lot of simple
diagrams for work.

you're clearly using the wrong apps.

On 2018-03-26 14:11:29 +0000, Mayayana said:

Why are they plugins for PS if they're equivalent
to PS?

You can use them in layers. They often works with the perpetuate, low
cost licence Photoline too.

https://www.pl32.com/

LightZone is a free alternative, both in cost and approach to editing
but you have to do without plugins.

https://github.com/ktgw0316/LightZone/releases
--
teleportation kills

On Mar 26, 2018, Mayayana wrote
(in article ):

wrote


You should pay attention, that slot (for photography) is rapidly being
filled
by applications such as the following, all of which can be installed as
Photoshop/Lightroom plugins, or very functional standalone applications.

Why are they plugins for PS if they're equivalent
to PS?

Nobody has said they are equivalent to PS. However, as standalone apps they
provide many of the editing features found in PS just as they are found in
PSE, PSP, and GIMP.

They are available as plugins for PS/LR because they offer some features
which produce effects which would take time, and a deeper knowledge of PS.
They also offer features such as the excellent film emulations/simulations
found in Exposure X3. Doing that adds to what can be done when using PS, or
LR as primary photo editing software. They each have different algorithms for
tools such as sharpening, and making selections for masks, sometimes some
folks feel that the different rendering is better for the sort of results
they are trying to achieve. Of course, many times it isn’t going to make
much difference at all which you choose to use.

....and then the withering on the vine (with suspended development), free NIK
Collection is still available for those folks looking to experiment.

These questions come up from friends and
I don't have one good answer to give them. I
can use PSP5/16 and AfterShot Pro. But f there
were even just a better program for non-RAW
I'd buy it.

Each of the programs under discussion will work just fine on standard
graphics file types, and add some of their particular stuff to results.
However, as with Adobe there is much that can only be done with RAW files.

I do some RAW work, but in that case I'll
typically optimize it and then save it out as
BMP/TIF for work in PSP. I also do a lot of
trying to optimize poor photos, for things like
website work. I might need to sharpen, brighten,
remove background, etc. And I do a lot of simple
diagrams for work.

Well, you are going to do what ever it is you do. Personally I have a RAW
LR/PS workflow.

PSP5 is OK for most of that except that functions
for things like sharpening are outdated. PSP16
is up-to-date but is bloated and poorly designed.
(I can't even choose to not have a black window!
And it has a silly 3-part interface. One part is a
file explorer window. One is a quick-fix window.
One is the normal edit window. All I want is edit,
but I have to wait while it loads all 3. That kind of
bad design is evident throughout the program.)

Makes you wonder why you choose to suffer so.

So what I'd like, and would recommend to others,
would be an intuitive, lean program with all of
the basics to deal with drawing, color, contrast,
layers, etc. Personally I don't use the gimmicky
plugins. But a program that can use them is nice
to have, I suppose. Who knows when I might
want to make a 3-D button or render "colored
pencil" style for a birthday card.

Yup! Who knows?

--

Regards,
Savageduck