Non-destructive image warp

Hi all,
Several Photoshop assets in the Adobe CC market have warped elements (usually a smart object), where the original seems intact - I can double click and edit it without distortion - but there's a copy of the layer that has some kind of warp effect applied.
I can't work out how this is done. Can someone tell me what this is called, or what to look up in help, so I can learn how to do it?
Thanks.

You'll need to post a picture of the image so we can see it.

Similar Messages

Interesting technical paper on Non-destructive Imaging

John Nack references a useful technical paper in a recent
blog entry. The paper titled
Non-Destructive Imaging: An Evolution of Rendering Technology by Peter Krogh covers a number of topics and one in particular illuminates the essential difference between file browsers (such as Bridge) and cataloging software (such as Lightroom).
With a file browser the truth is in the file; with cataloging software the truth is in the catalog. With cataloging software the raw image file need not be updated (now or in the future) and it is the more compact and transportable catalog that becomes the dynamic object and at all times containing a repository of the image "truth".

>Jao - Sure, that shows you the images as edited just fine... wooopeeee!
Unbelievable, I show you more than what you asked for but hey whatever...
This database has all that in it. The database schema has the standard XMP in it. You can directly get that from the database and use those in ACR. It is simple to do so and not at all opaque. The command in SQL is simply: "select xmp from Adobe_AdditionalMetadata;" It also has a link to where the preview jpeg is stored, all in completely open, industry standard database format. Nothing tough or obscure about it. Adobe should be commended for using SQL lite and making the format so accessible. Making it so easy to access increases its usability quite a bit as the neat little focal-length histogram trick shows. Just a few lines of code!
>Go ahead, put all your eggs in one basket... they are your photos... do whatever you want with them... but when your catalog corrupts and you lose all your edits (or press CTRL-Z and undo all your work), don't come crying to me...
I won't because I am not that dumb. But my backup and timeproof strategy has nothing to do with Lightroom's database not being good enough for the long term because it is. It is just pure common sense to "not put all my eggs in one basket." I backup original RAW files with associated xmp and on separate disks, developed high quality jpegs or even tiffs for those very special images. Even with that, I have never needed those backups but it does give me a good fall back. Nobody in their right mind that professionally depends on photography would rely on a single program, no matter the provenance.
>Heck, create a catalog and wait a couple of years to use it again... odds are you won't be able to open it because of version changes.
Extremely unlikely. If you have this much distrust of Adobe products then what are you doing here. It is certainly not constructive to be seeding so much utterly unfounded FUD. Also as I said, it will not hurt me at all if such an apocalyptic vision comes to pass. Presumably I could simply open it with the current version of Lightroom (which doesn't magically stop working, neither will ACR) or even if I had misplaced that and somehow would have forgotten to back up xmp files on my backups, I would simply extract the xmp files from the sql lite database using open source tools and use those in acr or something similar. I could even extract the preview jpegs that Lightroom stores alongside the database file.

How can I tell if a non-destructive crop has been applied when opening an image?

I've wrapped my head around how to reclaim the stripped-out portion of an image that has been non-destructively cropped in CS6: click the image with the crop tool, or select Reveal All from the Image menu. Short of doing this every time I suspect that I may have cropped an image, is there anything in Photoshop's interface to tell me at a glance if the image has been non-destructively cropped? I guess I could check the document dimensions in the pop-up status display at the bottom of the window, but I'm looking for something more direct that doesn't make me search.
2009 iMac 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo; OS 10.8.1
Jeff Frankel

If you primarily edit files from a particular camera, then your idea to set the status box at the lower-left to show the image dimensions is a good one - just watch for dimensions that are not the norm.
You shouldn't have to set the readout to Document Dimensions more than once, though... Open one image, set that field to read Document Dimensions, then close the document and quit Photoshop gracefully. From now on it ought to read Dimensions when you open a new document.
I wasn't aware 10.8.1 was out.
-Noel

How do I non-destructively sharpen, re-size and save my images if I'm using both LR & CS6?

Hi guys {and gals}...
Ok... here is my dilemma. I am having an incredibly difficult time understanding the best way to sharpen, re-size and save my images for both posting on the web and giving them to clients. I completed my first paid photo shoot (yay!), but as I finished editing each image, I re-sized it and posted it on my FB photography page. I later learned from a fellow at my local print shop that this is a destructive and irreversible edit (not yay! ).
So... before I pull out every last strand of hair on my head, I REAALLLYYYY need to get a good grasp on how to do the following things so that I can establish a good workflow: 1. Sharpen my image well {w/ Smart Sharpen}. Does this have to be done on a flattened image... and isn't flattening irreversible? 2. Re-sizing my images for both web display and client work/printing. Is it true that once I set it to 72ppi for web display, that I lose a great deal of the detail and quality? Do I need to create a copy of the file and have 2 different image sizes?
I am self taught, learning off the cuff through tutorials and constant error... and I just want so badly to have a smooth and beneficial work flow in place.
Currently, my workflow is as follows... 1. Load images into LR and convert to DNG files 2. Quick initial edit & then send into PS CS6 3. Perform detailed/layered edit(s) 4. {I know I'm supposed to sharpen now, as the last step, but am afraid to permanently flatten my image in case I want to tweak the layers later..} 5. Save the file (unflattened) 6. Go back into LR and Export the file to the appropriate place on my hard drive
So... at this point, my image is still at 300ppi {not appropriate for web display}, unflattened {I'm told flattened images are ideal for client work and printing} and not as sharp as I want it to be {because I don't know when to apply Smart Sharpen filter}.
HELP!!!!!!!
Thanks in adavnce for "listening" to me ramble...
~ Devon

There are a lot smarter guys on this forum than I so will let them give you ideas on the sharpen workflow.
Is DNG the same as RAW in that all the edits are non-destructive? With RAW all the edits are put on a separate XMP file and believe with DNG the XMP file is written to the image. In this case would suggest you save the DNG then create a jpg to send to clients or on web. A jpg will not save layers so it is by its nature flattened.
Since you are new to this try this test to understand ppi. Click on Image/image size.
      Change Document size to inches.
      Now uncheck "unsample image" as if this is checked all the pixels will be modified to adjust to the new size. Unchecked no pixels will be changed.
      Now adjust the resolution from 72 to 300 ppi (pixels per inch). Note that the Image Size in pixels does not change, but the document size changes. This means resolution is unchanged.
      Now click "resample image" and change the resolution. Note how the image size changes and document size stays the same.
Bottom line quality of picture is the image size in pixels. THe larger the numbers the higher the quality.

Are .jpg images non-destructive editing?

If changes to .jpg's are non-destructive in LR, how can you migrate the changes /w images to another copy of LR on another computer? I've noticed Exporting .jpg's export the changed .jpg's, which must mean that they undergo another round of compression in the copy, no?

I want to straighten up some issues with jpeg files in LR 1.0
1. By importing a jpeg file into LR you will notice that you can use the develop module but certain features are just not as good as they are with real raw files.
White Balance: It's there but without presets and without Kelvin readings. It is still better that everything else I saw so far in other applications to rescue a jpeg file with wrong WB settings applied
Camera Calibration: Only the Embedded Preset is available
Overall the adjustment sliders feel less subtle and precise because there is no additional headroom of 16bit (actually 12bit with most cameras) files compared with the 8bit jpeg offers
2. When you write back changes you have made in LR either by using "Metadata->XMP->Export XMP Metadata to File" in the menu or automatically with the Preference setting "Automatically write changes into XMP" the pixel information of the jpeg is never changed. There is solely an update of the metadata section of the jpeg file. This is what I refer to as 'Non Destructive Editing"
3. You need to use an application which is able to interpret LR adjustments to see changes of the jpeg file you made in the LR develop module. In the moment only LR and Photoshop CS3 beta (using ACR 4.0 ) are able to do that. For all other applications which can display jpeg files the changes are not visible because the pixel information didn't change.
4. If you use the LR Export function in the Library Module you can render a new jpeg file where the changes are reflected in the pixel section of the file. This is of course no longer non-destructive because the original compressed pixel information in the original jpeg file has been decompressed, changed according to the develop settings and then recompressed again in the jpeg format. This is just what you did all the years before with jpeg files.
5. You can also use the LR Export function to export a jpeg file as DNG file. Here it is important to understand that the JPEG file will only be compressed with a lossless algorithm resulting in a file which is roughly 5 times the size of your original file depending on your initial jpeg quality settings. This option allows you to open the file in Bridge/Photoshop CS2 and to see the adjustments there but it does not give you any real advantage compared to 2. if you use CS3 and I don't recommend it in the moment. Perhaps we see here more options in the future.

I Dislike the Terms "Destructive" and "Non-Destructive" Editing

Some folks in the Photoshop realm use the terms "destructive" and "non-destructive" to describe ways of using Photoshop in which transforms are applied directly to pixel values vs. being applied via layers or smart filters or smart objects or other means.
Do you realize that the term "destructive" is actually mildly offensive to those who know what they're doing and choose to alter their pixel values on purpose?
I understand that teaching new people to use Photoshop in a way that doesn't "destroy" their original image data is generally a good thing, and I'm willing to overlook the use of the term as long as you don't confront me and tell me what I'm doing when I choose to alter pixel values is "wrong" (or when I choose to advise others on doing so).
For that people who claim editing pixel values is "destructive", I offer this one response, which is generally valuable advice, in return:
Never overwrite your original file.
There. The "destruction" has ceased utterly.
It's common sense, really. You might want to use that file for something else in the future.
If you shoot in raw mode with a digital camera, then you actually can't overwrite your raw files. That's a handy side effect, though some don't use raw mode or even start working with digital photographs.
In any case, when you open your image consider getting in the habit of immediately doing File - Save As and creating a .psd or .tif elsewhere, so that you can subsequently do File - Save to save your intermediate results.
There can actually be many advantages to altering pixel values, if you know what you're doing and choose to do so. But sometimes even the most adept Photoshop user might find that a given step created a monster; that's okay, there's a multi-step History palette for going back. I normally set mine to keep a deep history, to give me a safety net if I DO do something wrong, though I tend to use it rarely.
And for those who would tout the disadvantages to editing "destructively", there can be huge disadvantages to doing it "non-destructively" as well... Accumulating a large number of layers slows things down and can use a lot of RAM... With downsized zooms the mixing can yield posterization that isn't really there, or gee whiz, just TRY finding a computer fast enough to use smart filters in a meaningful way. Just the concept of layers, if one hasn't worked out how layer data is combined in one's own mind, can be daunting to a new person!
So I ask that you please stop saying that the "only" or "best" way to use Photoshop is to edit "non-destructively". There are folks who feel that is offensive and arrogant. I think the one thing everyone can agree upon is that THERE IS NO ONE OR BEST WAY TO USE PHOTOSHOP!
You go ahead and do your editing your way. I prefer to do "constructive" editing.
Thanks for listening to my rant.
-Noel
Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt man doing it.

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
Aegis Kleais wrote:
When you alter image data in a manner that cannot be reverted, you have destroyed it.
Really?
That's one of those things that one is not supposed to question. It just sounds so right!
Problem is, it's insufficient in and of itself, and misleading... It's a rule of thumb that's way too general.
What IS "data" anyway? Arrangement of magnetic spots on a disk? My disk is still whole, so we're not talking about physical destruction here.
One could argue that all the data is all still there in many cases of pixel-value-change editing (e.g., where there has been no resizing). The image file is the same size! Same amount of data.
Upsampling, or making a copy of an image is actually creating more data, not destroying data. Thus there is no general "destruction", but the terms "construction" or "creation" could be used.
But wait, perhaps you're really talking about destroying information, not data... Well...
As it turns out the term "destructive" is still off base. I have altered the information, possibly even adding important information. If I make a copy this is a no brainer. Even if I don't, depending on a person's skill in editing, the altered result could still carry all the original information that was important plus information added by editing, and be quite possibly better for its intended purpose (human consumption) than the image before the edit. That's the goal!
So now we're talking about important information vs. unimportant information. And of course we're talking about fitness for a future purpose.
As with anything, there are multiple ways to get there and multiple ways to interpret the words.
The term "destructive" in my opinion was invented to further someone's agenda.
-Noel

Bypassing the non destructive editing for emptying trash

Hey.
I am completey at my wits end over this. I have footage imported to three separate imovie projects. I have to try and combine these on the one timeline. However everytime I try to move anything it tells me I don't have enough memory. Fair enough so I empty the trash but it is restoring no memory to my hard drive or iMovie - From looking this up it seems to be because of the non detructive editing feature but I don't want to go back on any cuts or keep anything I've deleted just in case. I really need the space so I can begin to move clips around again and finish the project. Is there anyway of telling the programme to just empty the trash and ignore the non destructive editing feature?

Then I open a new blank iMovie project. I drag the desired clips to that project and save.
That, too, preserves the total lengths of the underlying media clips.
iMovie 5-6 dropped the ability to trim unwanted parts of the media clips. iMovie 1-4 allowed the user to do this at the expense of a more fragile project structure.
The workaround to trim the media clips is to:
1. export to tape and import back. Pros: preserves separate clips. Cons: clumsy & slow. Occasional dropped frames may make the process lossy.
2. export to Full Quality .dv and import back. Pros: No dropped frames -- truly non-lossy. Faster. Cons: clumsy, you have to manually break clips into scenes after import.
Cons for 1&2: effects are permanently burned into the image.
Regarding #2 see also this import shortcut:
http://www.sjoki.uta.fi/~shmhav/iMovieHD_6_bugs.html#quick_DVimport

Non destructive crop preserved when you "Edit in Photoshop"

I hope that there would be an option in the future to crop an image in lightroom, then when you open to "edit in photoshop" the image would be cropped using photoshop new non destructive crop. So that i can tweak color and retouch the whole image then close and i can do final cropping back in LR.

Sometimes, people crop pictures in LR before making many adjustments just to see if the image works, then go on to the next image etc... then batch export to psd or even edit in PS one by one to retouch. Its painstaking to make a virtual copy, reset the crop, export/edit in psd, then copy the original crop from the master raw, then paste it to the psd file. Another way, adobe can make this work is to have an option to have "Edit in Photoshop" command to not apply the crop from LR. Open the full image, then when it imports it back to LR have LR apply the non destructive crop.

Cropping non-rectangular image

Hello,
I need to crop a slightly non-rectangular, four-sided image (a photo of a picture in a frame) and end up with a rectangular image. I've tried cropping and lassoing but nothing seems to do the job. Most grateful if anyone can tell me how I might do this on PSE.
Thanks
Michael

Witteboomen wrote:
Plse excuse Dunn question, Michel, but what is ACR?
Best
Michael
ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) is the module of PSE which is used to first convert raw images so that they can be read and edited in the Editor.
This module can also be used to open jpeg files:
In the Editor, menu /File/Open As
you select a jpeg picture and in the line'Open As', just under where you enter the file name, you must choose the 3rd option :
Camera raw...
This opens a new dialog window in which you can do the main edits to your image by adjusting a few sliders.
Of course, raw file will benefit more from being processed in ACR, but it's also interesting for jpegs.
How can editing through ACR be a 'non destructive' process ?
It's because the principle of ACR (also used in Photoshop CS) is to store all editing commands and settings separately from the original picture data which are never changed. In the case of jpegs, the settings are stored in the metadata section of the jpeg file (where the camera name and settings are kept) without changing anything in the way pixels are represented. The 'recipe' is stored, but the pixels stay unchanged. When you straighten and crop, if you click 'Done', the settings are saved. If you want to do some editing or print your file, you click 'Open' and the result of your edits in ACR is opened in the Editor. If you do changes in the editor, of course, those edits will be 'destructive' (as usual in the Editor) so that you'll have to save the file with another name to keep the original. If you do no edits in the Editor, but only print or convert the file to another format, the original picture data is not changed.
In that last case, you don't need to re-open the picture with 'Open As', the Editor will know the picture has to be opened in the ACR module with the usual 'Open'. But it you want to re-open the same picture in another application like Picasa, the Adobe editing data will be ignored and you'll see the original version.

Non-rectangular image cells

Can the image cells in the print module only be rectangular in shape?
I thought about doing diagonal slices for a series om images, but came up short in trying to create one.

Witteboomen wrote:
Plse excuse Dunn question, Michel, but what is ACR?
Best
Michael
ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) is the module of PSE which is used to first convert raw images so that they can be read and edited in the Editor.
This module can also be used to open jpeg files:
In the Editor, menu /File/Open As
you select a jpeg picture and in the line'Open As', just under where you enter the file name, you must choose the 3rd option :
Camera raw...
This opens a new dialog window in which you can do the main edits to your image by adjusting a few sliders.
Of course, raw file will benefit more from being processed in ACR, but it's also interesting for jpegs.
How can editing through ACR be a 'non destructive' process ?
It's because the principle of ACR (also used in Photoshop CS) is to store all editing commands and settings separately from the original picture data which are never changed. In the case of jpegs, the settings are stored in the metadata section of the jpeg file (where the camera name and settings are kept) without changing anything in the way pixels are represented. The 'recipe' is stored, but the pixels stay unchanged. When you straighten and crop, if you click 'Done', the settings are saved. If you want to do some editing or print your file, you click 'Open' and the result of your edits in ACR is opened in the Editor. If you do changes in the editor, of course, those edits will be 'destructive' (as usual in the Editor) so that you'll have to save the file with another name to keep the original. If you do no edits in the Editor, but only print or convert the file to another format, the original picture data is not changed.
In that last case, you don't need to re-open the picture with 'Open As', the Editor will know the picture has to be opened in the ACR module with the usual 'Open'. But it you want to re-open the same picture in another application like Picasa, the Adobe editing data will be ignored and you'll see the original version.

How to create a non-destructive luminosity/b&w mask for (de)saturation?

Someone asked me this question: CG renders (created in Modo, Max, Blender, Maya, Vray, Octane, etc) can be made to look more realistic by desaturating the colours in the highlights. It was also requested that this move would be done in 32bpc as well (something that is often required in a CG compositing workflow).
This is easy enough to do: create a selection based on luminosity (or a black and white version of the image), and use that as a layer mask in the Hue/Saturation adjustment layer, and turn down the saturation.
However, this is a destructive action: suppose we want to import an external file as a smart object, and then we need the option to have the file automatically update with any change we make to the original artwork.
In that case we would have to recreate that luminosity mask again and again as well.
Ideally, an update of the external file will result in an automatic update of the entire layer stack.
Now, in Photoline this is easy to do:
Since layer masks behave like regular layers in PL, and layers can be virtually cloned (not unlike smart objects), it is a mere case of cloning the original external file layer twice, and adding adjustment layers. Finally, that one instanced layer is used as a layer mask for the adjustment layer that controls the saturation. Done.
Replacing or editing the original source will then automatically update and cascade the changes through the entire layer stack.
This is a very handy technique to have! Since I teach Photoshop classes, I thought this would also be handy to know how to do in Photoshop, and I tried several methods (clipping masks included), but I cannot seem to achieve the same non-destructive result. Clipping masks do not work with adjustment layers. Groups cannot be used as clipping masks. Layer masks cannot reference a smart object.
I have a feeling there ought to be a reasonably straightforward method to achieve this, but how?
Would anyone have a suggestion how to solve this in Photoshop in a non-destructive way?

csuebele wrote:
I'm still not seeing it. Your example does not have a pixel based layer clipped to the group which is causing my problem. I hope I can explain this. See below. the layers in the group create the "mask". In this case a b&w adjustment layer was added to control how the "mask" is converted to b&w. You can see what these layers look like in the mid section top section of the image. any color showing though is from the very bottom layer, as the group has a blend if on it allowing the shadows to come through. The top image has a curve layer with no adjustment, while the bottom image has a curve layer to clip more of the shadows. You can see this change in the upper right corner of both images. The curves are allowing more of the image to be clipped in the area is masked out on layer "Layer 0 copy 1", as more of the color of the base layer is showing though. However, that b&w areas are suppose to be just the mask and you should see the b&w, just color as seen in the bottom image. However, the curves are not changing the transparency in the areas that have the layer to return the color.
I don’t get it – what good is the pixel Layer ("Layer 0 copy 2") clipped to the Group supposed to do? Don’t you want to use the Mask on an Adjustment?
Edit: Maybe this can help clarify how I suppose the issue would be approached.

Non-Destructive Lighting Effects in Photoshop Touch | Learn Photoshop Touch | Adobe TV

Add dramatic lighting effects to your Photoshop Touch images non-destructively. Russell Brown demonstrates a technique for adding lighting to your image using a separate layer – thus allowing for infinite edits.
http://adobe.ly/AmWZ7t

Brilliant series. Love the app on nexus 10.
Many thanks

Elements 9, not non-destructive?

I'm using the trial version of Photoshop Elements 9. MacOS X 10.5.8. I imported some test photos from a folder into the Organizer. I rotate the photo, and Elements rotated the actual photo! I can't undo it! I check the file on finder, and it's rotated permanently. Now I never use Elements before, but I have Lightroom. In Lightroom, everything is non-destructive. Why is it not the case with Elements? Isn't this dangerous, the fact that Elements is targeted for lay people? Any other photo organizer program like iPhoto and Picasa are all non-destructive. Am I missing something?
Oh, and I press the Auto-fix, tried to undo it, Elements gave me an error, saying it's not possible to undo. ????

For all edits, Organizer 9 creates a version of your photo.
Rotation may be an exception to this rule. In case of rotation, a new version of file may or may not get created. For rotation, it depends whether your preference "Rotate Jpegs/Tiffs" using orientation metadata" is checked or not, whether the aspect ratio of your images falls in multiples of certain image dimensions or not to meet lossless rotation.
In case of rotating a file using orientation metadata tag, the version would not be created as the rotation of files only happens through metadata and in windows browser, you would see the file unrotated unless your file is read only and a new version has to get created.
Yes, LR and organizer are different. LR does non destructive editing while Organizer creates separate version on editing.
Hope that clears a bit!
~V

Non destructive editing in ACR.

Many of the promo videos describe ACR editing as being 'non-destructive', is this meant in the way of not destroying the original file in any way, i.e. leaving in in tact, or that the changes made in ACR are not degrading the newly created image as opposed to editing in Photoshop? Is there any way / any Adobe plans to indicate which edits in Photoshop actually degrade the image, however slightly? Maybe for future Photoshop updates there could be an indicator of which edits would have been better to have been done previously in ACR?

Destructive is the wrong word. It gives negative connotations in cases where what is really happening is pixel values are being changed. This is not always a bad thing!
If you paint your house, do you consider that destructive? Sure, you may be destroying its old look, but isn't that the point?
However, the word seems to have stuck, and I guess we have to use it. Sigh.
Always keep this in mind:
Nothing is EVER truly destructive unless you save over your original file.
With some kinds of files, e.g., camera raw .CR2, .NEF, etc., you simply CAN'T save over the original file. With others, TIFF, JPEG, etc. you can - but no one says you have to!
Make a habit NEVER to save over your original file, and you will never destroy your ability to start over again.
-Noel

Non-destructive text cutting

I have been trying to find a non-destructive way of cutting text from an image and have come up with nothing.
The only way I have been able to create the effect is by deleting a selection of the text layer from the image which is not something I can then change in the future.
Any advise or tips would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

The best way I have found to do what I want is to just re mask the text each time I want to change it. It isn't too time consuming and It should suffice if no quicker solution is available.

Non-destructive image warp

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for