It's something every single person using Photoshop today has battled with, and although it has become easier to use over the years, it's time-consuming, tedious, and often difficult to do well depending on the image you're working on. Making selections is the tool we use to isolate certain parts of the image. To either reuse or edit in a different fashion to the rest of the image. Using machine learning, an update coming to Photoshop makes it possible to click and select. That's right, no more pen tool, or magnetic lasso tool or the selection of the negative space to feather and smooth the selection. This video shows how it will work, and in my opinion, it can't come soon enough.
Adobe's AI platform, Sensei, has grown to great strengths. With the Adobe Max conference, we were able to see how a lamp post can be edited out in video, and how we can use someone else's face and mouth and narrate to it, almost like that one episode of Netflix's Black Mirror where the character wins the election.
The downside is that there is almost no more skill involved, and just like anyone can now take photos because everyone has a camera, now everyone will also be able to select objects in their photos as they want, edit it and create their unique style and look. It's going to make it easier to express our visions through the work we do, but there will also be a lot more graphic artists and photographers who want their voices heard. It's an interesting time ahead.
In my opinion, technology and tools must become as easy and user-friendly as possible. Why not. I'm looking forward to using it. Adobe is really making some exciting developments happen in their software. What do you guys think, what tools will you like to have updated or changed?
I think you're right... It will be easier for just anyone to use these tools. But, one thing I'm seeing through some of the photography competitions I'm doing, is that while anyone can take a picture, it still takes a lot of work and ability to master true artistry. I think the industry continues to change and yet it doesn't. Nothing takes the place of dedication and hard work, no matter how easy the software makes the process.
She wrote "master TRUE artistry", not that subjective BS.
I didn't think I was being sarcastic. To me, art is kinda like sex. There's intentional sex as God and nature intended it and then there're many substitutes with similar results. Real art is NOT subjective. You might not like it but it is what it is and nothing else is it. Of course, other objects can inspire you to action, cause you to weep for their beauty, or provoke deep consideration but they aren't art. Smearing poop on a statue is NOT art! The vast majority of photography is NOT art!
The key words here are, "to me". Anyone else is, of course, free to maintain their own erroneous view of the subject.
I said it doesn't matter if you like it or not. In the same way you don't have to like pizza, it's still pizza and nothing else is. They make pizza flavored Pringles but they're not pizza.
I knew you would ask what "real art" is. :-) I wish we lived near each other. I think you'd make a really interesting neighbor! Interestingly, but not coincidentally, my criteria for real art is similar to my statement about sex. Art should be an honest attempt to convey thoughtful reflection on beauty, social issues, ideas, etc.
While it's a hyperbolic example, smearing poop on a statue of Mary isn't an honest criticism of religion or Catholicism and, therefore, not art. It's the visual equivalent of saying, "Fuck You". An honest approach, and worthy of being considered art, might be something like a painting of Inquisitors torturing people while, in an adjacent room, their similarly clad brethren are baptizing children. Sorry. It's the best I could come up with after only a few moments thought. BTW, I'm not against Catholics. I was merely trying to provide an extreme example of art. In the context of the article, most photography isn't art because there's no intent at all. Taking a photo of something you think is pretty isn't intentional of anything beyond wanting to capture and/or share something that caught your eye. It would become art had the photographer put time and thought into maximizing or calling attention to whatever it was that attracted them to the scene. Further, they should attempt to convey their feelings about the scene. Otherwise, it's photojournalism. Nothing wrong with that, but it isn't art.
I know God's intent (at least God as I understand Him) through what's written in the Bible. Nature, being incapable of thought, "intends" sex which provides a benefit to the species. Heterosexual sex is necessary for its continuation. Homosexuality encourages behavior which inhibits its continuation. Kind of like scientists who try to control a species, harmful to man, by introducing sterile members which, due to engaging in non-productive sex, diminish the total number of individuals. While you could successfully argue there are some benefits to homosexuality (Bonobos come to mind), masturbation, sodomy, etc., those same benefits would also be realized through heterosexuality, with the added benefit of reproduction.
I could go on, and in much greater detail, for a very long time but this venue is not ideal for such intercourse. (Pun intended) :-)
While an interesting intellectual exercise, your question is disingenuous. Next you'll want me to define "sex" and "is". :-/
Maybe it's better we live in different parts of the country. ;-)
Actually what features like this do is make it easier for companies to put non-graphics trained people to do production work, and pay them peanuts for it. This way you have one graphics pro overseeing group of button pushers. I see this already in some studios.
Maybe I'm missing something. It looks like it only simplifies the initial selection, which isn't really that big a deal. A little time consuming, yes, but nothing compared to creating the final selection.
Also, I agree with Cherlyn. Technology chips away at those who depend on it for the bulk of their results but has a much smaller effect on artists.
Well that was extremely underwhelming.
And they still can't figure out why even the new Super Lightroom Classic Deluxe 4k HDR CC is even slower than the last version.
My latest update is a lot faster... Not CaptureOne speeds but still a lot faster.
Are you running other programs and processes in the background? I have a similarly equipped PC and I don't have this issue with the 24 meg files off my D600. I do have a better graphics card than yours, but not by much (960).
Did you try turning off Graphics processor Acceleration?
Lol because you're using a craptastic Mac. Try using a real computer.
Yes mine was faster for about a week on both my machines (iMac 32gb ram SSD, Macbook Pro i7 16gb ram SSD), then out of nowhere just scrubbing through images will bring it to a halt, sometimes taking 5 seconds or more between photos. Did everything adobe support told me, same terrible result. I've been wanting to switch to Capture for a while think this makes it official
I don't know that this will be a gamechanger... Probably more like one of these updates that get added and is hardly functional or near unusable quality output like their last refine "update" was.
Or it could be the next content-aware fill, who knows
Still. Hate. Photoshop.
I think I'd rather have my eyes sewn shut than sit for hours and hours doing editing in Photoshop. Long live the simplicity of Lightroom.
I am looking forward to the day that there is a worthy competitor to Lr Classic that will even allow you to import Lr catalogs with their adjustments. Luminar looks promising, but it doesn't have the kind of editing and exporting features I need (specifically export presets with watermarks built in).
Simple problems, simple solution (LR). Complex problems, complex solution (PS).
I get it if people enjoy doing complex stuff in Ps, but the kind of masking described in this article is usually the sort of thing that commercial photographers hand over to their studio lackeys to do.
The first ever commercial pack shot job I did involved deep etching thousands of books I had to photograph. It cured me of any desire to ever do that sort of work again! It's definitely not what I became a photographer for...
Totally agree on the masking. I HATE masking!
Vast majority overall or by user? Overall, I agree completely. In my case, I have a lot of complex problems. :-/
Oh yes, that's I think the reason I hate it so much. Nothing is logical w.r.t. the design of the interface. It seems to be a perpetuation of their legacy interface design from inception. The problem though, is that there is so much human capital invested in figuring out their shambolic interface, that to ditch it for something new would certainly result in pitchforks and flaming torches at the door of the company by those who have been indoctrinated with "the Photoshop way" from day 1.
But why re-size in Photoshop when Lightroom does it so much easier? I have various export presets specifically for this. Different sizes and different watermarks for my various brands and social streams.
Guys I think your forgetting that Photoshop isn't purely for photo editing, its a pixel based design program. If you used the other main Adobe design programs like Illustrator and InDesign you would know that the user interfaces are all very similar and as a designer this makes my workflow quick and easy.
I agree, except they are intent on dumbing down Lightroom with this latest version of CC. It doesn't bode well for the Classic version if they insist on pushing everything to the cloud.
It won't make much of a difference (at least for my workflow).
Shooting on medium format I tried each automation method for making masking more easier. But still the best AND fastest way to a perfect mask is the pen tool, combined with painting semi transparency using a Wacom.
"The downside is that there is almost no more skill involved, and just like anyone can now take photos because everyone has a camera, now everyone will also be able to select objects in their photos as they want, edit it and create their unique style and look."
I don't know about the rest of you, but, if given a choice between shooting and editing photos, I'll take shooting any day! Since editing is almost a necessity to help the image portray what I felt at the time I took it, any effort at making the editing process easier and less painstaking will be welcomed.
Yeah none of my clients have ever said “Wow, I really like how you used the channels to create a complex mask here.” I just need to get my work done, it might be nice to get it done faster.
Maybe none of them thought you did such a good job using channels to create your masks!? LOL
Once I start making real money at this, I'll probably hand off the bulk of editing to a retoucher. I'll handle my personal interest projects.
If you cant cut out a selection without the update you should uninstall photoshop immediately.