Paintshop Pro - Wishlist for version X7

[Muriel]

Hi..

I would like to see the feature that enables me to fill a shape or selection with a specific text. I know this is available in Photoshop and should not be a huge challenge for the good folks at Corel..

So.. c'mon, folks! At least think about it!

Muriel!

[laundromat]

Add 'gradient map' adjustment layer to version X7 like shown in this video tutorial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BzWXecHZ1g . You can create the gradients already today in PSP but you cannot see the results right away like you obviously can in PS.

[Alejandro]

I would like it to have:
- Surface Blur filter.
- Vivid Light blending mode for layers.
- I would like that the Unsharp Mask filter had an option to be applied just on the red channel. Maybe something as it can now be done for luminance.

[hartpaul]

"I would like that the Unsharp Mask filter had an option to be applied just on the red channel. Maybe something as it can now be done for luminance."
There is a workaround for that.
Image >Split Channel > RGB (or HSL or CYMK), Apply your Unsharp mask to whatever channel you want and then recombine with Image > Combine Channel (from RGB, HSL, CYMK)

[Alejandro]

"I would like that the Unsharp Mask filter had an option to be applied just on the red channel. Maybe something as it can now be done for luminance."
There is a workaround for that.
Image >Split Channel > RGB (or HSL or CYMK), Apply your Unsharp mask to whatever channel you want and then recombine with Image > Combine Channel (from RGB, HSL, CYMK)

Thank you Hartpaul for your input.

I have tried what you suggested and it works.

It is a workaround for that, as you say.

The only thing is that if you want to keep on editing the original image after having applied a sharpening just to the red channel, you ought to copy the image which resulted from re-combining the RGB channels (the one from the new window that will appear) in order to paste it as a new layer where you were originally editing the image (I hope I managed to make myself understood). Well, it can be done and it is not that I am wishing to do that kind of sharpening all the time (most of my photos are not portraits for which this manner of sharpening can come sometimes be useful or result being appropriate).

Anyway, there is a workaround for this whilst I don´t think there would have been one to do the sharpening just for luminance if that option wouldn’t have been included as it has been done (not a simple one at least). What they came out with I think was very smart and turns to be very handy and comfortable.

[Nok]

May we have bigger brushes - the current maximum size of 999px is too small.

[Rick_R]

MERGE VISIBLE / ALL TO NEW LAYER

I have recently learned how to use adjustment layers, which I find particularly useful for enhancing old newspaper images. Here are the steps I wind up going through:

• 1) Create a Levels Adjustment layer and do the adjustments.
  
  2) Duplicate the background layer.
  
  3) Rename the duplicate background layer.
  
  4) Duplicate the Adjustment layer.
  
  5) Rename the duplicate Adjustment layer.
  
  6) Hide the original Adjustment layer.
  
  7) Hide the original background layer.
  
  8) Merge visible.
  
  9) Duplicate the merged layer.
  
  10) Rename the duplicate merged layer.
  
  11) Hide the original merged layer.
  
  12) Use high-pass adjust to sharpen the duplicate of the merged layer.
  
  13) Save the image as Whatever-layers.pspimage
  
  14) Save the image as Whatever-merged.pspimage
  
  15) Delete all layers except the sharpened one.
  
  16) Resave as Whatever-merged.pspimage

The one I'm working on at the moment has two adjustment layers. So that is even more complicated!

Instead of just Merge Visible or Merge all (flatten), I would like the option to "Merge Visible to ..." or "Merge all (flatten) to ...", which would put the results of the merge into a new layer.

BENEFITS:

* Eliminate the need to do all the duplicating, renaming and hiding.
* Fewer steps, fewer saves, much faster editing, less chance for mistakes.

[photodrawken]

Instead of just Merge Visible or Merge all (flatten), I would like the option to "Merge Visible to ..." or "Merge all (flatten) to ...", which would put the results of the merge into a new layer.

Just record a script to do that. If you're unfamiliar with creating a script from PSP's History panel, you can use this one:

CopyVisibleMergedToNewLayer.zip

(812 Bytes) Downloaded 175 times

Place the script in your user directory's "Trusted Scripts" directory. Once there, you can even attach an icon to the script and add the icon to your main toolbar so it's always available.

[Cassel]

If you're unfamiliar with creating a script from PSP's History panel, you can use this one:
CopyVisibleMergedToNewLayer.zip
(812 Bytes) Not downloaded yet

And i was just about to do that, thinking it was a good idea!

[LeviFiction]

I would like a "Merge Selected" option now that we can select multiple layers. Much handier than Merge Visible.

I've technically made a "Merge Selected" script, but it's a bit much. Actually, correct that, I used to have a script that worked for this. It doesn't work as expected in X6. (Either that or I've just never used it on a group before, and this error has always been there)

Although I can do this with a script but I would prefer it just be built in. Maybe with a modifier key like 'Shift + Click" copies the result to a new layer. But a normal click performs the full merge. Something like that.

[Rick_R]

Instead of just Merge Visible or Merge all (flatten), I would like the option to "Merge Visible to ..." or "Merge all (flatten) to ...", which would put the results of the merge into a new layer.

Just record a script to do that. If you're unfamiliar with creating a script from PSP's History panel, you can use this one:

CopyVisibleMergedToNewLayer.zip

Place the script in your user directory's "Trusted Scripts" directory. Once there, you can even attach an icon to the script and add the icon to your main toolbar so it's always available.

WAY too complicated to do all that. I may have more than one adjustment layer and they may not be in a particular sequence. For instance, when I stopped to write the suggestion I had a background, a levels adjustment layer for the whole document, a selection I had just promoted, and an adjustment layer for the promoted selecton. Normally I wouldn't have a separate selection layer and second adjustment layer. But then again, sometimes I have two promoted selections with those adjusted. Trying to create a script that will take into account all the possibilities would be a mess.

On the other hand, obviously the program first performs the merges and then deletes the various source layers. My suggestion would basically just mean that after a new "target" merge layer is created ... don't delete the source layers that were merged. It would basically mean setting a "Delete-source-layers" flag in the merge routine and then setting that flag to Yes or No when the routine is called, and putting the part of the routine that deletes the source layers in an "If Delete-source-layers, then" conditional construct.

[photodrawken]

I would like a "Merge Selected" option now that we can select multiple layers. Much handier than Merge Visible.

Agreed. Having to do the visibility thing always seemed like a kludge to me.

Although I can do this with a script but I would prefer it just be built in.

In PhotoLine, I recorded an action that merges the selected layers, and the couple of mouse clicks needed to run it isn't onerous in the least. I really don't miss having a built-in function for it with an assigned key combo....

[Rick_R]

I agree about "Merge selected".

I think a "Merge Selected to ..." would be a good additional option that the two I suggested.

Most likely, the best way to handle these would be that when you right click, the options include a checkbox possibly called "Delete merged layers" (or "Keep merged layers"). So if the box is checked, Merge Visible, Merge all (flatten) and Merge Selected leave a single merged resulting layer but if it's unchecked they create a new layer and merge into that.

One question would be whether the default should be to delete source layers or keep them.

Also, users would probably want to be able to set in Preferences whether the checkbox defaults to checked or unchecked.

[kamalo]

I've been using PSP since version 7 was out and I REALLY miss Animation Shop. I saw Photoshop has an animation feature. Could this be implemented into version 7?

[Rick_R]

I've been using PSP since version 7 was out and I REALLY miss Animation Shop. I saw Photoshop has an animation feature. Could this be implemented into version 7?

Awhile back I thought the same thing, but I changed my mind for the reasons listed below.

I suggest you check out Photoscape, available free at http://www.Photoscape.org Also search http://www.sourceforge.net, http://www.CNet.com and http://www.softpedia.com

Here are problems with adding an animation feature:

• Adding any feature to any program involves a cost/benefit analysis:
  
  1. How much will it cost in terms of money, personnel time and other resources to do all the coding, debugging, writing user manual sections, help screens, training videos, etc?
  2. How much demand is there/will there be for the feature?
  3. How likely is it that most potential users would consider lack of that particular feature to be a serious problem with the overall product?
  4. How much benefit will there be to the users?
  5. What other features could be added instead with that expenditure of money, personnel time, and other resources?
  6. What is already available from other sources that can perform the task?
  7. Is lack of that feature likely to cause potential customers to choose a competing product instead? (If you buy PSP, Corel really doesn't care if you also by Adobe Photoshop Elements.)
  8. How much value would the new feature add to the overall product for most users?

Specifically regarding animation:

• It's not simple coding. It would require a large amount of code.
• The mechanics of animating an image are not something fairly intuitive to users of image-editing software, the way "brighten" and "adjust contrast" are. It would require a substantial amount of help screens, user manual text and training videos.
• It's limited to GIF's, which only allow 256 colors. Most folks now want many more colors.
• There's already a lot of good free software specifically for GIF animation.
• Because of previous patent issues and the 256-color limit, use of GIF's on websites was strongly discouraged. Although the patent issues were resolved, the negative attitude has persisted.
• It's not an area where new features can be added. So ten-year-old animation software will contain all the features any new program could have.
• Animation is generally wanted mainly for web pages. Years ago pretty much anyone who does any significant amount of web programming learned Flash, which can do realistic video.
• Folks who can do Flash development will already have on hand a variety of image editing software, including animation software.
• Folks who do professional graphics design, etc., almost all use Photoshop. Corel's $100 entry-level product aimed at low-end hobbyists is never going to be able to compete with a $900 product aimed at professionals.
• PaintShop Pro is really aimed at hobbyists, and those people primarily do photo editing. The vast majority of PSP features mainly facilitate that kind of work.
[list]For instance, I basically do no photography at all. But for genealogy purposes I do a huge amount of retouching images of census records, old court records, pages from City Directories (precursors of telephone directories) and photos of people I've found on the Web.

[/list]