Scaling the image...

petelms

petelms

Well-known member
Hello!

Could someone tell me how can I scale layers in Photoshop without doing any permanent changes to the layer? I mean, if I don't want to flatten the layer and want to keep it in the original scale if I want to change it again later...I tried to make an adjustment layer, but it doesn't seem to have the scaling option...

This is much easier in After Effects...

Hope you understood the question. :beer:

:dankk2:
 
Photoshop is destructive editing, After Effects is not. No way around it other than what sink said. Watch your file sizes balloon quickly though.:beer:
 
Yep, thanks guys. :huh: Outs, I'm little surprised...I thought that I could do it also in Photoshop some other way...It would be so cool to have that kind of 'non-permanent scaling' option...
 
petelms said:
Yep, thanks guys. :huh: Outs, I'm little surprised...I thought that I could do it also in Photoshop some other way...It would be so cool to have that kind of 'non-permanent scaling' option...
Click to expand...


True, but in Photoshop, think of the dimensions you are working. My humble D70's pics at only 6.1 megapixels are 3008X2000. I've worked with photos from the Canon Eos Ds-Mark II at 4992X3228 (I don't know if that is even that cameras full resolution), and with After Effects, typically we work with 720x480, or 1280x720. That's one hell of a step down in resolution, and when you double resolution, you quadruple (or near enough) file sizes. Since Photoshop does all its editing in uncompressed format while the file is opened, file sizes are massive. Hell, every time you make a new layer, you add to the file size. If you have a 30 meg file as a targa, you open it up in photoshop, and dimply duplicate the background layer. You now have 2 uncompresed "pics" in there, and your file size just jumped. Some of the photos I work on have in excess of 20 layers, not counting adjustment layers, each holding additional image info of some sort. I have single .psd's that are 500+ megs. And that is still relatively low res photos.

So that's why I figure the folks at Adobe don't have non destuctive editing for Photoshop. You would run out of ram in a very swift fashion. But yeah, it would be cool.


You CAN however work with Layer Comps:

http://veerle.duoh.com/blog/comments/layer_comps_in_photoshop_cs/

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...t=result&cd=1&q=Photoshop+Layer+Comps&spell=1

Which while not really non-destructive editing, is a closer step to it.
 
Can't you convert your layer to a smart object? I think that option is in the menu somewhere. I believe it is a new feature of CS2. Basically, I think it is non-destructive editing.
 
chud13 said:
Can't you convert your layer to a smart object? I think that option is in the menu somewhere. I believe it is a new feature of CS2. Basically, I think it is non-destructive editing.
Click to expand...


Yup, but it only allows for downscaling the object, from what I understand. It also allows for Vector based editing in a non destructive way from Illustrator. It's not much use for chaging perspective or scaling (stretching) an object in one direction only. I may be off on the streching, so I'm gonna look that up.
 
Matt, there is no way mathematically possible to upscale a raster image without interpolating and losing resolution.

With a smart layer, you can downscale it then upscale it back to 100% of its original size without losing rez. You can make any layer a smart layer, raster or vector. You can hit Apple+T and transform it much like any other layer, with a few limitations. But you can horizontally and vertically stretch it, skew it, and rotate it. You CANNOT paint on that layer when it is a smart layer.

Yes, if you stretch it beyond 100% of it's size, it will start losing rez. If you find the magic algorythm that can blow up a raster image without being lossy at all, let me know, because we can become very rich men, blowing up thumbnails to 4k files.

That's about the best you are going to get with a raster image. Even if you duplicate a layer and save it, you still can't upscale it. larger than 100% without losing resolution.
 
zoostory said:
Matt, there is no way mathematically possible to upscale a raster image without interpolating and losing resolution.

With a smart layer, you can downscale it then upscale it back to 100% of its original size without losing rez. You can make any layer a smart layer, raster or vector. You can hit Apple+T and transform it much like any other layer, with a few limitations. But you can horizontally and vertically stretch it, skew it, and rotate it. You CANNOT paint on that layer when it is a smart layer.

Yes, if you stretch it beyond 100% of it's size, it will start losing rez. If you find the magic algorythm that can blow up a raster image without being lossy at all, let me know, because we can become very rich men, blowing up thumbnails to 4k files.

That's about the best you are going to get with a raster image. Even if you duplicate a layer and save it, you still can't upscale it. larger than 100% without losing resolution.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's pretty much what I thought. And if I had an algorythm to uprez without losing rez, i'de be keeping that puppy all to myself. Millions for me!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top