Repeat your test. Set the hardness at 100% and make a black circle
which will be exactly the diameter of the cursor. Now set the hardness
at 25%. Align the cursor edge with the edge of the black circle you
just created. Now clone repeatedly 4 or 5 times in the same spot and
watch the "overspray" get larger and larger and merge into the black
spot. The point is that one cannot precisely control where the paint
goes unless using 100% hardness. But 100% hardness and "feathering" an
edge are not compatible. I consider it distinctly not useful. I also
don't see the use of layers as a very useful fix to the problem since
that only allows fixing what shouldn't have happened in the first place.
One can also constrain the paint by cloning into a selection but
that's tedious for working on hundreds of small areas when a simple
real-time view of where the paint is going (inside the cursor circle) is
all you need.
Chuck Norcutt
On 1/23/2015 7:30 PM, Paul Laughlin wrote:
I do see what you mean, Chuck. Here's what I see. I made a new image
with half of it black and the other half white. I then cloned a black
circle on the white area with the hardness set to 100%. Then I changed
only the hardness to 80% and placed the cursor over the original cloned
spot. The diameter of the cursor has increased and the area inside the
cursor is now larger than the original spot and the outer circle on the
cursor has become fuzzy looking. The diameter of the cursor changes
with the hardness setting. I think that the fuzzy cursor could be
intended to indicate that the brush edge is no longer as definitive as
at 100% setting. As you would expect from a "soft-edged" brush.
In CS6 and before, the outer circle of the cursor does not become fuzzy
when reducing hardness. The diameter reacts the opposite of the way it
acts in CC. As the hardness is reduced, the cursor diameter
decreases.In both cases, the brush size in pixels (as seen in the dialog
box) stays the same.
I do see a bit of overspray with reduced hardness. Looks simple to me,
if you want sharp definition of the edge, use 100 % hardness. VBG
And for what it is worth, I worked like that at one time. Then I found
layers. LOL
Paul in Portland OR
On 1/23/2015 5:28 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Moose and I see it but you don't. What's different? I may have to go
back and check again (later). Right now I don't know if I was testing
with CC or CS6 but I've never known any version of PS clone tool to
behave differently than what I described. It goes way back to PS7
because I can remember being upset over the way the clone tool worked
after I converted from PW Pro. In fact, I used to go back to PW Pro if
I had extensive cloning work to do as in restoration work. It took me a
very long time to learn about setting 100% hardness to control the
diameter of the brush. But even that is not a complete fix.
Chuck Norcutt
On 1/22/2015 10:54 PM, Paul Laughlin wrote:
That clone stamp tool brush seems to do crazy things. In CC, when you
reduce the hardness setting, the brush gets larger, although the size in
pixels, as seen in the brush panel, seems to be unchanged. In CS5, the
brush outline gets smaller as you reduce the hardness size and the size
in pixels seems to stay the same. I still don't see it going outside
the outer circle as seen when stamping.
Paul in Portland OR
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|