no opaque masks

Similar Questions

• Circular opaque mask

  Hello

  I tried to solve this problem for a few hours now.

  I want to make this scene, which is in the dark, have a light function. Windows emit light, and I want to make sure the light reveals the colors of the surrounding area. I tried the gradient masks and opacity, but I can't make it work.

  If anyone has any idea how I can go about this please tell me, I'll be eternally grateful

  

  

  I want to make sure the light reveals the colors of the surrounding area

  It doesn't look like there is any color in your vicinity. Here's what I'd do: create the scene in color and then reproduce them on a separate layer. Use to redefine with global adjust to change to a dark grayscale version. Set the blending mode of the blackened version to multiply. Then use a radial gradient opacity mask to hide the part that you want to make it bright.

  

• Maintenance of Photoshop Dec2015 cc is a clipping mask may not be 100% opaque / less transparency to 0%

  Since the update of December 2015, the clipping in Photoshop mask does not display 100% of the image, if the mask is white.

  It's like I painted gray on the clipping mask, instead of white.

  The image should be partially transparent.

  Seetings:

  Brush: 100% opacity

  Layer: 100% opacity

  Mask: 100% opacity

  System:

  Win7, Photoshop cc after Dec2015 update, German version.

  Why is it happening and how to fix this?

  I tried reseting Photoshop with CTRL + SHIFT + ALT imidiately after photoshop starts, but it does not result in a window that gives me the ability to reset all settings. Instead, I can see a list of the most recently worked on files.

  Hi nicolasw,

  Please reset the Photoshop preferences preferences > General

  

  Let us know if this helps

  Concerning

  Assani

• How to create a mask of cutting?

  I'm trying to create something that seems like it should be relatively simple, but no. (I'm on Macbook pro (mid-2014), Yosemite 10.10.5, Creative Cloud Photoshop and Illustrator).

  I have a photo that needs to have a hole punched in it can then be printed on the top of a reflective surface (i.e., mirror) and the mirror will show through the hole. In ADDITION, the manufacturer wants a cut created the photo with the hole, so they can print a blank field under the photo but not print white where there's the hole, so the mirror will show through. I created a mask to the PS and failed to achieve the 'hole', but I can't understand how to fill its inverse with white (or any other color besides). Super frustrating.

  

  I think that's what call for specs.

  The top row:

  1 mirror. Probably very reflective Mylar flexible (Fig 1)

  2. the 4 c process inks / being transparent, must be first an opaque white or silkscreen on the Mylar. It's Fig 2. The result appears below see Figure 2. This Photoshop layer is white on a transparent layer (in preparation, the lithographer may ask you to make a spot color (fifth). Do not be afraid. It will be printed in white. Check with him)

  3 fig. 3 represents 4 c/processes within the area using the same transparent area removed from the image as white channel. When the image overprinted white looks like below figure Fig. 3.

  4. the last item in the top row is the rule die it will cut steel on the image 4/c.

  It's the finished piece:

  

  In preparation, start with a transparent background, the size of the Mylar, followed by the 4/c with knockout mask, followed by the white layer using the same mask of knockout, followed by the layer of cutting.  (Die cut instructions are usually in red). Forward to the lithographer as a psd file.

• Masking of the scale on the adjustment layer issues

  Hi all

  First of all I'm new to Premiere Pro. but I ran into a few problems that resemble bugs for me.  But if someone can put me right I would appreciate it.

  For example, I have a static image on a layer, revised downward to more small as the size of the total composition.

  I have an adjustment layer on it with an opacity mask, subtract blending mode, reversed.  The resulting crop all away from my picture out of the mask.  So far so good.

  If I then add keyframes to the scale of my image, I get a zoom effect, while the size of the image is the same (the size of my mask), that's what I want to achieve...

  However, a further review, there is a very faint line that shows outside of the mask, expanding outwards, which seems to be the contours of the image unmasked.  :-(  That is the number 1 issue.

  If I also add keyframes for opacity on the image, at the same time, I have a weird effect, almost as if the mask is ignored, because the image grows and becomes more opaque, but then finally catches up with the mask.  Almost as if, opacity, scale, and hide is just too much for the program to process.

  I tried rendering the project, but both of these issues show on the finished film.

  While experimenting with ideas to try to overcome the problem I also tried the feathers at the edge of the image... but giving still more bizarre results, with the edge to feathers, showing outside the masked area.

  Suggestions as to how I can get the result of desire would be appreciated.  (Who is to have an image, most smaller than the whole of the composition, but that remains the same size, zooms.  I would also like to be able to fade in).

  Thanks for reading and I look forward to your comments.

  Tim

  Running first Pro CC 9.1.0 (174)

  Mac OS X El Capitan 10.11.1

  27 "iMac

  3.2 Ghz intel core i5

  16GB 1600 Mhz DDR3

  NVIDIA GeFprce GT 755M 1024 MN

  Whenever I have similar problems, they are usually resolved by nesting the clips to force the order of effects.

• CC 2015 Photoshop layer mask does not?

  I've recently updated to CC in Photoshop, but I have problems with layer masks, I created the mask layer, and when I paint with my black brush, it does not block the area completely, it will leave the remains of the image essentially, it leaves an opaque shape. I check that my brush is set to normal and my layer is set to normal. I have reset the brushes, I tried implementing new photoshop documents, but it makes no difference. Can anyone help please see the example below, the Red is a layer below the layer of the image that has applied the layer mask.

  

  Reset preferences: opt-cmd-shift at the start of the PS.

• Layer mask groups converted from work plans to the size of the artboard in older versions of Photoshop

  I wanted to start this post as an idea, but I couldn't choose communities (it wouldn't let me), so here it is posted...

  ----

  Just came across this with a customer...

  I use for a mobile design project work plans, and I just got a screenshot with some texts asking why among work plans were really great. Way bigger than a phone. (I'm under NDA and cannot post the screenshot, but imagine there are a lot of iPhone size work plans and two of them seem to be at a right angle)

  I opened the file and on my end, everything is the right size. Remembering the weeks ago to tell the customer that they need to update their version of Photoshop for all this work correctly, I have take a look at the screenshot and see that they are on CC2014 - none of the work plans.

  What I'm asking here, is that, since we have data, plans of work are objects of a defined size and 'alive', why not just use these data to hide layer groups at the opening of the PSD / PSB (PSB in my case) in older versions of Photoshop?

  It could save you a TON of hassle and confusion.

  Hi Zack,

  High level to your query response is: no, there is no conduct business case for a general solution to what you are suggesting. So I don't see what is happening.

  I say that as someone who likes to give back and forth and backward compatibility.

  There are two parts of the problem that you raise. They are related and somewhat intertwined.

  1. Having the version previous (2014) do something reasonable with the data from the version the most recent (2015). Either the old version should be taught on the most recent data so it can make a decision about what to do, or the newer version must put additional data in the file format for consumption by the older version.
  2. Back and forth between versions. As you say, a much more difficult problem. In fact, we do a good job of that today. But we must be sure that whatever we do for (1) not to damage and back the wrong way.

  Let's be very clear: 2014 will not be touched, except for critical bugs, absolutely. And even before 2015 is released, it would have not been corrected to make it behave better with work plans. There is no way that I could see what is happening. So all we have done for better backward compatibility had to be entirely done within 2015.

  For the round trip, the general problem is something like this: we want to 2014 to read an object that has properties of 2015, he does not understand. While we might learn ch to keep these properties as opaque property, must also have rules for when these properties are not valid and thrown on the floor. Probably, if the object is changed. But not always. And sometimes when another object parent is changed. And so on. Right now, we destroy them unknown content from their reading in the old version. Make us and record what we understand. As a user, you receive an alert telling you that we are do this. It's the safest thing to do.

  There are special cases where a developer can see an opportunity to preserve a level of backward compatibility and back and forth. We try to do if we believe that it is safe. But this scenario happens only occasionally.

  In the case of work plans, made us really think about this: If we added a mask to the group for backward compatibility, it should do something with this mask reading around 2015. And what would happen if the user edited this mask in 2014 and opened upward in 2015 - and who edited mask do not align with the structures of the artboard? Things started to get dark quickly. We started to see traps. The workflow together to sheath special round trip had to be tested and verified. The cost was rising and this expense must be filtered through a cost/value trade-off. And then what happens when we add a new property to the structure of work plan? At these efforts for nothing?

  So we compromised with what you have today. Work plans become groups in 2014. The Group and the layer structure remains intact. Doesn't secretly add us and remove masks for the round trip. You can safely change the groups to your heart's content. When return you this document in 2015, you redo the work plans of the groups. Was not clear and safe way to do more than that given the time that we had.

  Take a step back and think about your problem, it doesn't seem to be a value to a script that converts group work plans + layer masks for your workflow to have your documents that is consumed by the customers of 2014. This would be carried out in 2015 because she would need understand the work plans. And maybe vice versa from 2014 to 2015, assuming that the documents were not published in a hostile way. We're not likely to write such a script as a generic tool, but someone competent with script might be able to do this.

  More that I intend to write, but hopefully, it gives you additional insight in the compromises that we have faced.

• Just a color masking, or make a mask degraded?

  Hello

  I don't know if I have the right terminology, but what I have to do is make the part white/grey clear a transparent shadow (therefore the layer textured behind can be partially seen), blocking the dark grey part of an opaque shade. The shadow is an object cut out from a flat image with a white background.

  Clues? Thank you!

  You make your selection by using the range of colors and then apply it to a layer mask. C, you can refine the layer mask using levels or curves to adjust the opacity of which has been selected.

  

  

• Display problem in 16-bit mode of layer mask

  With the new version of CC 2015 of Photoshop, I came across a weird problem in layer mask mixture. Here is an example, what it looks like:

  

  I opened a raw file (.dng) from Lightroom (16 bit, ProPhoto), created a black layer mask and began to paint with pure white. As you can see, the transparency model in the background is always visible, even if the density of the mask is 100% and the white brush was normal and opacity and flow were both 100%. The white layer mask doesn't seem to be completely opaque.

  But it's more weird. Then, I put two rectangles in the image. This is the checkerboard disappear, but the color of the rectangles has no effect on the image on the top. So the white layer mask is opaque and not fully opaque at the same time!

  I then saved the image in jpeg format and the picture looked like it should be there:

  

  Apparently, the question has something to do with rendering on screen, not the content of the actual image. I also noticed, that changing the picture mode to 16 bits to 8 bits makes the disappearance of the problem. But as I also pay for the 16-bit mode, I would use it...

  Everyone found this and you are able to reproduce this behavior? Or am I missing some setting somewhere? Can anyone suggest a solution, or should I just wait patiently as the bug fix?

  Layer masks and alpha channels are all 8 bits, regardless of the number of image bits.

  What you have tried to solve this problem?  Your video card driver is entirely up to the site of the manufacturer of the card?

  What operating system do you use?

• Gum changing from white to black on the layer mask, leaving the image transparent.

  I used the following method in CS5 to erase parts of a layer/bring these pieces back again if necessary. It works in the same way after that I upgraded to CS6 (not sure if the version difference plays a role or not.)

  What I'm doing here is blend two layers that overlap in one of the other

  1. create the layer to the top layer mask

  2. Select pure white in the color selection window

  3 select the Eraser tool, set the opacity to 30%, 50%, flow 100% hardness

  4. Select hide, erasing the edges of the image where there is overlap to eliminate hard edges and merge the images into another

  5. when I need to highlight an area of the image at the top (one mixed), I pass the color pure black opacity set to 100%, hardness 100% and paint over the areas that I want to "undo" my deletion.

  -Sometimes happens a lot after my initial deletion, so a simple cancellation or who goes back in history is not a possible solution at this moment here.

  -Another note: I have to move over the other layers to align as much as possible, make the story do not brush useful in this case.

  Previously, this would simply restore the image to where it was originally for this place, by removing completely all masking. Now, when I do this procedure, the area that I'm trying to "undo" is however, as if the opacity is set to a level lower than 100%. This poses problems because I want to have the completely opaque image at this stage.

  Some other notes I hope to answer some questions that may arise in advance:

  I haven't settled the opacity of one of my layer masks

  I tried to do the same operation by using the Brush tool (with 100% opacity and hardness, using the opposite colors), with the same result

  As we have earlier I don't know another effective way to achieve the same goal. I'd be happy to do it differently but if necessary.

  All the layers in these documents are dynamic objects

  Thank you!

  I'm sorry it's so confusing. I guess the only reason why I use the Eraser tool is a vestige of when I was actually erase the image - and also I get the brush and Eraser different opacity value to quickly switch between them.

  @Theresa actually, I didn't watch only the mask. Of course the mask was gray in the areas that I was talking about. But that lead me to realize that while the color picker looked purely black and white, I was working with a grayscale image, and it was in fact color and converted to looked at pure Grayscale black and white. I need to set the color of the brush at a certain point, when working in RGB (which I rarely do) and not realised.

  Sorry for posting something with such a trivial response, but you all help me to understand thank you!

• Masking procedure?

  I want to add a static object to some existing footage. The object will not move in the scene, but you will need to cast a shadow on the ground plane. The unit or moving the focal point in each clip. I'm a PShop pro Retoucher, but a noob PP. In my view, there are decision-making tools in PP, but I'm used to creating elements of the layer in PShop. Can I hide an object in PShop, add a layer of shadow cast on a transparent BG, export it as a video, and import into PP? Or the transparent sections of the elements PShop would become opaque white?

  If the above is NOT possible, if I could make the overlay using vector masking tools PP? (there is a lesson on the masking of Lynda.com, but the pen tool on PP seems less accurate in the lesson than PShop, and there is no info on the shadow of the object coming to overlap)

  The ability to add the object will save me from having to remove the entire scene.

  Thank you!

  Yes, just make the image with the shadow you want on a transparent background. Save as PNG file, enter the body and you should be good to go.

  You can export a substantive reference of the video image, take this framework in PS and put it on the bottom layer. Build the item that you add with the drop shadow on a layer above the layer frame of reference, then just to turn off the layer frame of reference and put in PNG.

  MtD

• mask quick change of behavior?

  Windows 7 Pro 64

  PS CS6 thanks CC2014...

  Lightly scratching my head on this...

  Is there a change in behavior of the quick mask?

  The situation:

  By default the quick mask preferences: color indicates areas masked, 50% opaque red.

  I open a file (background or base layer), I have no active selection and I press Q for QuickMask, or press the quick mask...

  I present QM - "Quick mask" mode in the file tab, my layer in the layers panel goes gray...

  .. but it's no red overlay.

  Yes - I can paint or fill to create one, but in this State QM will use a red full image overlay...

  I'm sure this used to be the case...

  Thoughts please...

  As far as I know or that you remember old versions of photoshop, you always have an active selection before you enter the Quick Mask mode or no overlay is displayed because there is no mask created without a selection active.

  Of course, as you say, it can be created after entering the Quick Mask mode.

  more information

  https://helpx.Adobe.com/Photoshop/using/create-temporary-quick-mask.html

• Mask - dotted line Illustrator CS3 to clipping

  Hello world

  Ive done some digital banners in Illustrator using a triangle shape with a dotted line serrated sharp Bunting. I want to fill the shape with a paper I did. I used a clipping mask worked fine except it does not have the race which means that the document is not going in the Scalloped edges and it's just a triangle shape.

  Any workaround for this in Illustrator that it has another suite application?

  Thank you

  

  I'll make a quick run through some opacity masks.

  

  Here, I did what I think, it is an orange fax of your form. It has an orange dotted forming large BLOB objects and the same orange as a fill.

  

  I'm in the race and complete white RGB. you understand why in a moment. Then I have the form and the photo back and select "Make opacity mask" in the transparency Panel.

  

  here! It is now masking (and clipping) the underlying picture.

  

  If you check "Invert mask" and uncheck the box "Clip" it's going to do the opposite. the white mask an area of the photo.

  

  the opacity mask depends on the values of color; White and black are absolute (except if you check "Invert mask", black is opaque and white transparent), mask varying amounts of colour between the two. Here, I made the blue line. You can see some of the background through it, but it is not totally transparent.

• Masks, being not retained by printing

  Hello

  I created a logo in Illustrator (CS6), then used a mask to cover some of its parts.

  Then, I placed the logo in the flyer on InDesign.

  

  Everything works fine until I have to export it to a PDF file, where the part that is hidden will appear as opaque.

  

  I checked in Acrobat - the mask is preserved there. My concern, however, is that I want to publish the flyer digitally as well. I looked everywhere online but quite impossible to find a solution to this problem. Any help you can give would be greatly appreciated!

  It is related to the construction of the color of the mask object. See what it is and change. Work in CMYK or RGB? This also affects the results.

  The selected master object, try to change the color of 'Gray' and set it to 100%.

  Moreover, it looks like a simple clipping path will work very well in this case.

• Use a layer as map alpha (mask) for another - how?

  Hi, I do not understand how to do this in Photoshop. In After Effects, which I use a lot, it's easy. For example, I have a layer with semi transparent, transparent opaque areas. I can then say AE to use this layer as a map of alpha channel for another layer. But how to do this in Photoshop? I understand how to use a layer mask and draw on the same layer to create spaces treansparent. But I want to use a layer of separante, or even a separate image.

  I use Photoshop CS 5.

  Ingvar

  Get the clipping mask.