The current C1 approach to creating gradients could be left as it is. The C1 approach, though seeming perhaps rudimentary, is at least quick to apply and adjust by re-applying or adding final tweaks by adjusting the mask.
Radial gradients should support anything between circles and very oblong ellipses, plus of course feathering, extent, and inversion, so a radial gradient placed in the centre of an image could serve as a vignetting tool. However, for those after more artistic effects, there would be options.īTW, a more general vignetting feature could be emulated by flexible radial gradients. If you don't tweak any of the additional parameters then you only get the current behaviour. If the default setting of a more general vignetting tool corresponded to natural lens vignetting, I believe everyone could be happy. Sure, what I'm after goes beyond emulating natural lens vignetting. Would such extended functionality be common to all external Merge programs?Īs I said it has been a while since I ran with any stacking and things may have moved on. So what am I missing about stacking in the context here? What specific features would offer a lot more than PS, Affinity or whichever, are currently able to do as part of their ingestion of files for merging purposes? That's pretty easy with an Output Process in C1. Which leads me to think that, since they are the programs doing the merge work, all that is really required is for any preparatory programs to be able to deliver the required files to the location from which the merging program can pick them up. However as with many image blending programs (I have used a few but not for some years now) programs like PS (which I don't have) and Affinity (which I do have) seem these days to have quite simple ways to be pointed at a set of files to be merged and then ingest them. I have to confess I rarely stack anything so have no inclination on support or non-support of the idea. Having become used to it I rather like it and I doubt I would often find a fully adjustable version an improvement compared to the current approach for the gradient and then modifying it, is required, as one would an mask. I think it is actually somewhat smarter than it appears to be in some ways, not least because it is just creating some sort of mask that can be edited and the length of the line drawn also affects the rate of the gradient. I understand your interest in gradients and maybe it's just me but when I have used adjustable gradients I have always found myself repeating actions many times and taking ages to fail to get what I thought I was looking for despite the effort. but where does a "just like the very old film days" vignette feature stop and a local adjustment layer technique, especially now with opacity adjustment added, start? Graphically one can make one something else of course to suit modern tastes. I vignette, historically, is something to do with lens abilities isn't it? Round or elliptical depending on the equipment and format being shot. #2 and # 3 were submitted time ago as a feature request to Phase One, with no success.
Plus, the double-click action is not used for anything else, afaik. I want to be able to go back and forth with the mouse.
I can't understand why users that prefer to use the mouse instead of the keyboard must be punished using one mouse click for one movement, and the keyboard for another. Please allow double clicking for hide/show viewer.
Please allow stacking of images in the Library for all images in a collection, not just variants (i.e., for HDR purposes).ģ. Usually it takes me several selections, or additional modifications with the brush, to achieve the selection that I want.Ģ. Gradient mask is a basic tool for landscape photographers, and the usability of this tool in C1 is subpar. Most serious raw editors have been doing this for years. Please allow to edit the selection of a gradient mask, defining or modifying with precision the strongest zone and the transition zone with the mouse.