Photoshop :: PS Use A Linear Shadow Segment For...
Feb 20, 2009
In the ACR forum, there was a recent discussion about linear segments for the shadows. These are official for sRGB and ProPhotoRGB but are not part of the aRGB specification, but a slope of less than 32 is allowed in the shadows for raw converters and is used by ACR for all three of these spaces.
Does Photoshop currently implement a linear segment for these color spaces and does it make that much difference in practical photography?
I don't know if this problem was already there in earlier 3ds max versions, but i cant find anywhere on the internet how to create a shadow on a invisible plane like matte shadow could :
I try to got an color gradient from the outer side to the inner side of this geometry the problem : The bandwidth of the gradient should be more or less the same in all areas of the green geometry(means the whole spectrum of the colors). And the gradient has to go perpendicular from the outer to the inner side.
We are rendering raster passes in cg which need to be added together to reassemble a beauty render.The layer blending mode being used is linear dodge.There is a dramatic difference in the result in 32bit mode compared to 8bit mode.We normally work with adobergb1988 color workspace.
What is the math being used in 8bit mode with the adobergb colorspace?The problem is similar with sRGB profile.If set up a linear color workspace icc the 8bit mode behaves just like 32bit mode.However no one in our facility nor our clients wants to work with a custom linear icc profile.I would like to preprocess the layers while in 32bit mode to compensate for the gamma space processing of sRGB or adobeRGB color profiles in 8bit mode.Ive tried simply using a exposure node with gamma 2.2 but this is clearly not right.
Simply adds the two components. But this is only correct if there is no transparency involved.
Once there is transparency involved, it gets more complex. So, what is the math behind the linear dodge blending mode if the top layer has semi-transparent pixels (=alpha less than 1)?
What I want exactly is, starting from a big title, create a linear perspective with the vanishing point on the center of the horizon and the horizon line some cms above the title. Is there any faster way to do this without doing it by tracing the perspective lines in Freehand or Illustrator?
I tried to create a Fathered Rectangular Marqee with Linear Gradient but I can't seem to get it to work properly. Everytime I try to do it, there is a transparent shade around the border and it goes outside the Rectangular Marqee too...
CC has changed how a stroke responds when dragging the line segments with the direct selection tool. No the direction point moved independently instead of maintaining the same angle from their anchor points. I simply want to drag the line segment and change the distance of the relevant directions to their anchor points.
I have scanned newspaper cuttings, stored them in My Albums. Opened each one in PS 5 increased contrast, edited out specs and marks etc, Saved, then in Slide Show the results were unreadable. Attempted to open again in PS and got the following dialoge box 'JPEG marker segment length is too short. The file may be trunkated or incomplete. Is there a way to recover or do I have to start again and will I get the same result.
While imaging with my Canon T1i last night with my astro club I took probably 75 or 80 pics. Halfway through the session, my battery low indicator came on, so I changed the battery but may not have turned off the camera....I can't remember.....as I continued to shoot and review the images, everything looked and worked fine. When I returned home and got up this a.m. to review the pics, the last half could not be be opened. I usually insert my SD card in my laptop to review first before I transfer them over. I kept getting this error on the last half of the images I took :" a jpeg marker segment length is too short. The file may be truncated or incomplete." Is there any way to recover and otherwise save these images? By not turning the camera off while changing batteries, could that be the reason for the error message?
I have 2 workstations in my suite. Both Win7...both CS5.5 ver. 12.1.x64. My "old" box (Z400) can open the JPEG no problem....My "new" box (Z820) gives me the error.
I have copied the file a few different ways so I know it is not corrupt.
I have tried to create a linear fill and it looks fine in Xara Designer, but after exporting the image as a jpeg, the gradation does not look smooth at all, it looks rather terrible. It does not look as smooth and as seemless as work I have seen which was created using software such as Photoshop. Am I doing something wrong?
I have the kind of bull/goat face in this edited out as a separate layer for adjusting, what I would like to do with it at the moment is apply a left to right brightness gradient on it to make it gradually change from light to dark so that it blends in with the background a bit better.
I have a problem regarding linear dimensions on 3D blocks.
I create a set of 3D blocks and add linear dimensions to these in paperspace. When I want to edit a block the line origin of the linear dimension loses its original set point and I have to spend a lot of time changing the annotations in paperspace.
Am I using the wrong type of annotative dimensions or have I chosen the wrong angle to add dimensions to my blocks altogether?
I am following the following tutorial:[URL]....... I create a new page in Paint .Net and select the gradient tool. Once i have the page with the gradient colors i've chosen, i select the Line tool and create a wavy line.
The issue im having is fading out this line. The tutorial states "and fade out the far end with a linear transparent gradient" I cant find this tool or not sure what action to take.
I compile all of my data in Arc and get my data referenced and looking good. Once all of the data I need is in place and ready to be exported, I export the map out to an AI file. This has worked fine and still does. I am new to AI and have great Arc Knowledge. Here's where my issue begins:
- Once I bring in the map to AI, the roads look horrible and nothing like they did in Arc. I exported it at the small scale (county) and the linework looks horrible. Roads that were straight in Arc are all zig-zagged and did not convert over smoothly. This would not be an issue if there were only a couple of them, However, I am dealing with thousands of unsmoothed roads. The smooth tool works, however, one line at a time and then it leaves loose connections. So this tool is not really an option for me.
- My next attempt at smoothing out the lines in the masses, was to select the area in question, then Object>Simplify>Smooth. This works on some, but did not produce the output I was looking for. It smoothed out all of the selected roads, but instead of keeping them all together and just smoothing out, It moved some of the longer roads and long story short, the roads became inaccurate and did not shown what was really on the earths surface.
- is the scale of exporting out of Arc. At the small Scale, the map is rough, nasty and needs some smoothing. However, when exporting on the larger scale, the roads turn out fine, just as they are displayed in Arc. I have been messing around with this idea since it produces the output I am looking for, however, scales and whatnot are all out of wack creating more than wanting distortion as well as gridding out my map to export, then reassembling it. I could do that, but this map will need to be accurate and an error in this that could mess up the coordinate system.
There are multiple ways to smooth out data in Arc, however, the data looks fine in arc, it only has conversion errors when brought into AI.
Experienced this error with linears and scales? I am going to locate a new road shapefile and see if it will come out better in AI, but if there is a workaround.I have tried other files that I have, and some are better than others, however, all have large areas that will need to be smoothed.
I'm wondering if any effort will ever be made to fix the issues surrounding the "Linear Working Units" preference in Maya.
There are many persistent bugs surrounding the use of this feature. Locators change size, NURBS tools go haywire, etc.
Just today I discovered another very bizarre problem. With Linear Working Units set to centimeters (the default), then ordinary, normalized NURBS curves have a U parameter space from zero to one. It's axiomatic that the U parameter is the distance along the curve, measured not in linear units, but expressed as a decimal of the total length. I.E. halfway along the path, the U Value is 0.5, regardless of the actual length of the curve.
So that all makes perfect sense. But if we change the Linear Working Units to anything other than centimeters, everything goes to hell. With Linear Working Units set to Feet, then a normalized NURBS curve has a U parameter space from zero to 0.033. This can be clearly seen if attaching a Motion Path to a NURBS curve. The keyframe at the end of the curve shows a U Value of 0.033.
Obviously, a centimeter is 0.033 of a foot. But what does that have to do with NURBS parameter space? Absolutely nothing. Changing the working units should have no effect on the readout of the U Value.
I'm hoping the developers 1) know about this, 2) care, and 3) have the freedom to do something about it. Because this is, to put it bluntly, crazy-making. I know that the Linear Working Units feature was bolted on to an existing unitless system, so there are bound to be problems. But why on earth are NURBS parametric values affected by the choice of working units?
How I can edit the default appearance of a Linear Dimension Style. Basically I want to change the default placement of the actual value over the arrow.
I´ve attached two pictures that shows what i mean.
I have created a simple L-shaped dynamic block with a lookup table for its height and length. In addition to the ability to pick the right value pair using lookup table (HxW) I have added the ability to stretch the height or length using a stretch grip and a list of values. Is it possible to make the length automatically adjust to a corresponding value from the lookup table if the height is changed and vice versa?
