Photoshop Q: Gradual Effects
- Started
- Last post
- 30 Responses
- Noggin0
I have no joy and Im not intelligent enough to write the plugin.
- zarkonite0
How about you make 4 layers.
One layer is the original and the others are copies with the filter applied to it but each has the filter applied at different strengths.
Then you could use masks on each layer to transition from 1[no-filter] -> 2[filter strength 1] -> 3[filter strength 3] -> 4 and so on... maybe with a little tweaking of the gradient masks it could look ok. Thoughts?
- Technically that could work by shifting the same gradient mask a little bit on each iteration. I'm not doing it.monospaced
- monospaced0
Mask
- Quick Mask?Noggin
- No...create a layer mask and make it a gradient, or any pattern or cutout.monospaced
- lumedia0
i think that is what you are looking for.
- bored2death0
don't they have google in india?
- BIGGESTDOGINTHEWORLD0
_
No sensible way of doing something so basic, yet another shortcoming in photoshop... yet the dev team still insist on spending time on shit like 3D when it can't even do basics.- Your image editing software is better than Photosho...oh wait, you whining prick.monospaced
- After Effects can do this fucking easy you cunt, so whats Photoshops excuse?BIGGESTDOGINTHEWORLD
- Yea you cuntHAYZ1LLA
- How would you do this in After Effects? Because if you have it, just import the PSD and do it there.CyBrain
- deitzign0
Not sure if you figured this out yet but, you can just use quick masking to do what you want. Switch to quick mask mode, select the gradient tool, drag a gradient and then switch out of quick mask mode. The selection you now have will allow you to make a gradated filter. This only works on flattened layers.
- <HAYZ1LLA
- we've been over this...nomonospaced
- jesus. read the frickin thread.bigtrickagain
- lukus_W0
You need to use 'calculations' to do this.
The basic idea is, you have your (1) beginning image, (2) final image and the (3) gradient mask that you'll use for for the fade transition.
You then use 'calculations' dialogue to merge the images (using the gradient mask to control what's being altered). This feature can be used to create new channels - which can then be reinserted as replacement channels.
This allows you to do things like gradually fade into a gaussian blurred version of yr image, giving a faked depth of field. It's really useful.
- If your image is full colour, you need to produce the replacement channel for each colour individually.lukus_W
- (1), (2) and (3) should all be individual layers in the same image.lukus_W
- I'm trying this later...I might need more help with this "calculations" dialogue.monospaced
- HAYZ1LLA0
Is this it?
Flatten Layers
Duplicate Background
Add Mask
Add Gradient to Mask
Hold CMD and Click on Mask Gradient
Flatten
Apply filter to selection like Pixelate > MosaicDoesn't that fade the filter strength?
- ^HAYZ1LLA
- no...that's exactly what we're saying is not itmonospaced
- Besides, Never flatten layers.CyBrain
- inteliboy0
did you guys even read the first page? jesus.
- no. was the true answer there?HAYZ1LLA
- jesus.HAYZ1LLA
- jesus!bigtrickagain
- Noggin0
The layer mask approach (unless im doing it wrong) will only affect the opacity...
Thats not the effect Im looking for, say im pixelating an image, id like the strength of the pixelation to be gradual, make sense?
I guess its kinda like key-framing on a static image.
- i know what you're talking about. i'd be interested in the solution also...bigtrickagain
- monospaced0
Exactly. If you have your regular image on one layer, and the pixelated one on the next layer, you could use the gradient layer mask to fade between the two. If that's not what you're looking for, then sorry, I'm not a Photoshop guru.
- bigtrickagain0
he doesn't want to vary the opacity of the effect, but rather the strength. like, if he were to apply a gaussian blur, he'd want one end of the image to have a blur of 200 pixels, and the other end of the image to have a blur of 0 pixels. subtly different from having an overall blur of 200 pixels and a variable opacity on that blur.
- baseline_shift0
use a soft brush or feathered selection to make the transition in the layer mask mode. this will make it gradual.
- bigtrickagain0
(cont. from above) in the middle of this image, what Noggin wants is a gaussian blur of 100 pixels since 0 < 100 < 200. using the layer masks would only get him a half-visible 200px blur in the middle of the image.
- bigtrickagain0
Noggin: I've done this manually before - I've set up multiple layers with varying strengths on the effect, then used the layer mask on each layer to progressively reveal more and more of the effect across the image.
Did that make sense?
- monospaced0
I just ran some tests in Photoshop and I see your issue, Noggin. I once wanted to create a fake depth of focus and tried overlaying a blurred image with a gradient mask. The effect was less than satisfactory and I gave up. I hope you find the answer and share it with us here.
- Yeah I thought that would be the most common use for this process.Noggin
- fresnobob0
I don't think you can do that what you want without writing your own filter
- epic_rim0
this could be scripted if you had the time/energy
something similar to bigtrickagain's approach, but automated with finer resolution.