dong_pn's profile

20 Messages

 • 

394 Points

Sun, Mar 4, 2012 4:04 AM

Photoshop: node based editing

Why do not photoshop ues flowchat to control layer? If I have a lot of layer cannot fast chosen.Why don't like Unke ,Dfusion software with flowchat.

Responses

20 Messages

 • 

394 Points

9 y ago

I wish photoshop add node mode!

20 Messages

 • 

394 Points

9 y ago

I wish Photoshop add a node mode.!

15.1K Messages

 • 

195.8K Points

9 y ago

Because it's not user friendly?

Because it can easily lead to horrible performance? (tree graphs are much easier to manage and optimize than arbitrary graphs)

Because user studies show that node based compositors confuse even the people who use them every day? (honestly, I think the only people who use them effectively are the authors, and the few users who could have authored the software)

1 Message

 • 

84 Points

9 y ago

Chris, can you please provide links or references to the user studies you refer to? Also, are you attributing horrible performance to both tree graphs and arbitrary graphs, or just tree graphs, or just arbitrary graphs? Also, can you please define your use of the word "effectively"?

Thanks!

2 Messages

 • 

110 Points

9 y ago

Chris,
Its jaw dropping to see such a ridiculous opinion coming from a Photoshop employee!
Node based workflows (not only in compositing but also in 3d) are constantly used "effectively" in the VFX industry.
More and more software is try to become node based. In fact, this way of working is quickly becoming a standard.
Photoshops workflow is behind the times (and if your opinion is anything to go by) it doesn't look like it will catch up any time soon!

1 Message

 • 

100 Points

9 y ago

As an artist in the games industry I have to say that a Node based system would be a dream come true, working with Photoshop at the moment isn't a particularly trying process I must admit, there isn't much for me to complain about. However, node based systems can be extremely useful when attempting to work with something non-destructively, which is important in my line of work. I have to say that it's probably not something a great deal of people will find a use for, it's one of those things that a majority of people will simply glance over; you're hardly going to need a node based system to crop family photos or when doing digital paintings. However if you're working on textures it would be a very useful feature.

For example, using a node system for adjustments and filters on individual layers or groups would be useful, admittedly adjustment layers already exist essentially allowing you to do this already, however for filters there is no such option, why isn't there a real time sharpening layer? Or, if it were node based, you could simply plug a node into a layer or group that sharpens them, and in no time you have a completely non-destructive workflow which would aid in the iteration process.

Just my thoughts, a node based system would be a nice addition to Photoshop but by all means shouldn't replace the tree system that already exists, but rather run in parallel.

18 Messages

 • 

278 Points

8 y ago

This is just laughable, but not really that surprising. Node based imaging tools are used in the VFX industry because they're the best tools for the job. Shake, Nuke, Eddie Fusion all came to the movie industry well after Photoshop had firmly established. They were developed because there was a need for them that Photoshop couldn't or wouldn't fill. Photoshop, as it stands, can't handle the huge amounts of data movies need and it doesn't shoehorn into workflows and pipelines well. The way it handles mattes is dubious at best.

Chris's observations quite simply belie what I've see on an almost daily basis during almost 35 years of working in high end TV & movie VFX and animation. Node based image editing programmes have been the tools of choice for high end VFX compositors for many years and with good reason

Chris has a reputation for belligerently arguing that black is white with people who really do know what they're talking about and for removing perfectly reasonable comments here on these forums simply because he disagrees with them. It's a continuous cause of frustration.

I fully expect him to have this post removed too. I'll just repost if you do, Chris; you shouldn't censor your customers' opinions the way you do, it's bad for them and it's bad for your product.

18 Messages

 • 

278 Points

8 y ago

This is just laughable, but not really that surprising. Node based imaging tools are used in the VFX industry because they're the best tools for the job. Shake, Nuke, Eddie Fusion all came to the movie industry well after Photoshop had firmly established. They were developed because there was a need for them that Photoshop couldn't or wouldn't fill. Photoshop, as it stands, can't handle the huge amounts of data movies need and it doesn't shoehorn into workflows and pipelines well.

Chris's observations quite simply belie what I've see on an almost daily basis during almost 35 years of working in high end TV & movie VFX and animation.

Chris has a reputation for belligerently arguing that black is white with people who really do know what they're talking about and for removing perfectly reasonable comments here on these forums simply because he disagrees with them. It's a continuous cause of frustration.

17 Messages

 • 

150 Points

8 y ago

Congrats, Chris, on removing posts that point out how poorly you're moderating the forum, and how wrong you are on this topic.

Thanks for contributing.