Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family

61 Messages

 • 

3.2K Points

Mon, Oct 15, 2018 6:10 PM

In progress

Photoshop CC 2019: Transform/Resize is constrained by default - Want ability to go back to legacy behavior

When selecting a layer and dragging a corner handle with the shift (or alt-shift) key pressed, the resize proportion isn't constrained. This started with this most recent update.

Responses

44 Messages

 • 

1.6K Points

2 years ago

What the worst part about this issue for me, is that aside from it being extremely frustrating to adjust to the change, and aside from the fact that Adobe was too stupid to change how it works with other tools, The feature just plain does not work on my Imac at all. Even when I attempt to use the feature as intended, the preview jumps between constrained and unconstrained while flashing between different sizes all within a few seconds of trying to adjust the size, never showing me what the finished size will be. Whenever I click done, it  usually comes out unconstrained even though I was using the tool properly. To make matters worse, when I click outside of the box on the corner to rotate, more often than not it now turns off the transform box thinking I was finished. This "click anywhere to set transformation" stuff is an equal part if this fiasco for me.

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Photoshop 20.0 (CC 2019) = functional downgrade.

In troubleshooting some buggy behavior in Photoshop CC 2018, inept Adobe customer support told me to install the new version of Photoshop.

This solved nothing, and made things even worse. Needless interface changes disrupt productivity, I can't tell what is a bug and what is a "revision" whose only purpose seems to be to throw stumbling blocks at users.

A recurring issue with Adobe is that they like to change interface and key commands and stuff with new versions, and another recurring issue is that the engineers and programmers are NOT users who rely on consistancy.

And yet another issue is this habit of releasing buggy, clunky betas as if they were ready-for-primetime.

I got as far as the Free Transform filter, only to discover that they reversed the controls. Selection is now constrained when you grab a side or corner, it won't transform freely. Unless you press the Shift key - which is what you used to do to constrain proportions. It;s like they switched the gas and brake pedals on a car!

TWF is wrong with these guys?

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

I agree that those engineers do not use Photoshop at all, simply realise great plan of those others that have some ideas what to change in Photoshop that was interesting to purchase / download it. Too bad Adobe visionaries don't use Photoshop as well :(

2K Messages

 • 

35K Points

<<I agree that those engineers do not use Photoshop at all,>>

And I'm fairly certain that's just not true.  The engineers do use PS. You're not thinking high enough. The guys that help us out here in the forum are not just glorified help line workers, either. They know what they're doing.

But in a big corporation with millions of customers, you get a management that is supposed to be expert in some things—statistics and demographics for Marketing, for instance, or finance—not in any of these apps. And they sit near the top of the food chain. They are trying their best—I'll say because I have no reason to believe otherwise—to figure out what people are asking for all over the world, or at specific locations that they think are "typical," or looking at the competition to see what people like there— and anything that the engineers and product managers would like to do has to get past Marketing and Finance, at the very least. Someone has to okay the cost and someone has to agree they can sell it to the public (or stockholders).

I am willing to guess that some of these features meet the broadest wish list of the greatest number of users, and meets their timetable (that I wish they would ignore more often), and comes in at or under budget for a first pass. Then they get very real feedback, and now the engineers have something solid to take back to those on high and try to get permission to "fix" or enhance it. Sometimes yes, sometimes no, but taking it out on the rank and file seems to me to not be seeing that there's a whole lot of people involved better placed than engineers and product managers to call the shots.

As for "visionaries," I've never met one of those. Are they like faeries and leprechauns?  <g>

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Those seconds are ironicaly people who come with ideas, but it doesn't seem try them in practise. Regarding first issue testing the product happnes for sure, but if that was also used by people who made this stuff we had not so much inconsistency refered to only one feature. If you agree to be a beta tester in alpha phase then okey, pay for it, but I wouldn't expect everyone is going to follow you. When I screw up that I done for others, a man that pays for it, is only me, not my customer.

Adobe does it other way, with their own caveat for situations they are guilty but accordingly to regulations not responsible for that they did wrong.

Defending or explaining them saying of marketing and all other sections means for me only that they are not able to do it right way. I agree everyone makes mistakes, but it happens to them too often, while million users has to deal with. Someone on their side should think to be replaced immediately, or that's simply their way for unrespectful bussines.

1K Messages

 • 

16.8K Points

They have made stupid, unnecessary, default changes to a lot of things in the past few years and every time gotten hammered for it. Its like someone just can't learn from their mistakes.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

I guess they don't listen to. It's their product and we can use it the way it's provided or not. All since they have monopoly so they don't have to care how 'much' we like it.

68 Messages

 • 

2.2K Points

Unfortunately, you are correct.  I uninstalled PS CC 2019 and just use 2018 to get my work out.  I hate jumping through Adobe's hoops every time some "genius" at Adobe has a digital orgasm.

Champion

 • 

625 Messages

 • 

14.6K Points

2 years ago

I started a separate thread specifically for a better standard FTUE experience for when defaults are changed. If you think it's important that Adobe address future updates like this before release, go "Me Too" that idea.

"All changes to default behaviors in new releases need option toggles and FTUE blocker dialogs"
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/all-changes-to-default-behaviors-in-new-relea...

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

Okay: 

ME TOO.

Hey, guys at Adobe: STOP F*CKING WITH THE DAMN INTERFACE!

Change for the sake of change is NOT a good thing.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Thank you for linking to your topic. These Photoshop section forum is so busy for past week that the latest topics I see on main page are just few hours long. So that is not possible to find enough time to browse all of them!

60 Messages

 • 

2.2K Points

And please also talk with teams across other CC apps so we get consistency. 

e.g. SHIFT to constrain is such a fundamental change to the way ALL graphics apps work, and changing it requires you to make it CC-wide, announce it properly, and provide a one-click fallback.

Making a fundamental change like this, and the way it's been done, is arrogant. Arrogance breaks commercial trust and we already have more than enough arrogance to deal with in the form of Apple.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

it's not company - customer relation anymore by any means, but more like:

Angry and Arrogant Antique Absolute Autocrats against Amorphous Ants :/

Something like Ancient Grecian Gods versus weak humans with their fate!

We need our Prometheus, and maybe not new Ps, but new Pr application!

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

The tech support supervisor kept defending it by saying they included notes about these changes. Funny, I have yet to see these notes, and even if I had them available, I didn't have time to read them since the forced upgrade was Adobe's attempt to "fix" a corrupt preferences file (which, BTW, it didn't).

It's not clear he even understood that he was basically saying "well, we changed it to make it better and we posted some vague note somewhere about the changes, so that's your problem".

I had to explain that it was like switching the gas and brake pedals on the latest model Camry and mentioning it on a post-it note somewhere, and then acting surprised when they get a pile-up of new cars where they drive off the factory line.

A true "but ours goes to 11" moment...

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Loll I was giving other examples like enforcing left handed to act like right handed after whole life beeing that first or running forward from now on while you're turned back to your usual direction.

btw what do you mean by 'A true "but ours goes to 11" moment...' ?

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

"btw what do you mean by 'A true "but ours goes to 11" moment...' ?"

Reference to a gag in the movie This Is Spinal Tap.

One of the musicians points out how most amplifiers go to 10, but theirs goes to 11. When interviewer points out that that just means their "10" is louder, the musician says "but ours goes to 11".

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

It's a stretch to say the engineers / propellerheads don't use Photoshop at all.

The problem is that they are not professional end-users. They have basic understanding of the software they are coding, enough to dabble, but they are not graphic artists using Photoshop (Illustrator, etc) as a graphics tool, so they don't understand the disruption they cause when they change interface, delete a critical feature (like Artwork Mode in Illustrator 5 back in the 90's), etc.

2K Messages

 • 

35K Points

> but they are not graphic artists using Photoshop (Illustrator, etc) as a graphics tool>

Probably not, as most of us aren't programmers who understand what it takes to keep this creaky old tub afloat.  But are you saying that those closest to all of us, those engineers and product managers whose job it is to listen to us, haven't been paying attention to our ranting about changes release after release? I can accept that they might not be able to judge accurately the disruption one change will bring versus another, but they do know we're likely going to complain about it.

And if 75% of their reports on "usability" say that Shift to constrain goes against all the other apps out there and disrupts  workflows with people (of whatever skill level)  trying to remember what to do, then they might think they should address it and not continue to be the outlier. Get it over with now and in another version, we'll all be used to it. Of course, I know I still remember things they took away or changed, along with what they've never done at all,  but . . .  '-}

IMO, it would have worked out a bit better if all the Adobe apps adopted the change at the same time, and if there weren't so many inconsistencies, and they even still gave us an opt out box to check — but my opinion is worth what they pay me for it.

I'll still say these engineers and product managers are pretty knowledgeable, and very likely use the software a deal more than we might think.  As long as I've been using the software, some 20 years now, I often get in a rut with the methods I use—after all, I'm trying to get something done and don't always want to take the time to find what might be a better or more efficient method. I don't want to take the time to learn and train my my wee brain and weak muscles to change direction.

And when I'm reading about a problem someone is having, I read an Adobe person giving them a solution that I knew about, but had forgotten or not bothered to fully work through, or didn't realise worked that way at all. I'm learning from them still. So they might indeed think they're doing us a favor when we don't feel it's a favor.

I knew a designer who never had the time to learn to use Curves, but she could find time to pile on Levels adjustments that got her there in the end. It was actually faster to her to be using the least efficient method than time taken to make sense of the most efficient. Most of us, if we're honest, can relate to that on some level. Do we all use Vanishing Point to its fullest potential?

26 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

"IMO, it would have worked out a bit better if all the Adobe apps adopted the change at the same time, and if there weren't so many inconsistencies, and they even still gave us an opt out box to check — but my opinion is worth what they pay me for it."

It'd work out a bit better if someone at Adobe who actually used the program often enough and deep enough or consulted with those who do really thought about WHY they are about to make a sea change in the way certain tools work. So far  I have yet to see a single explanation that passes the smell test - y'know - one that's not from someone linked to Adobe that tells us WHY someone thought this was really a good idea, where it came from and who approved it. When I see Adobe employees defending the indefensible it just reminds me of the presidential press secretary doing the same. 

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Yes, it is how that works. I'm coder too so I do my job, but when that is done I test it so long I know that's perfect. Of course that's me, single person, not a company that have people for every task in the long process. But when I have occasion I engage people who do that for me, who are freaks or everyday users that will do use that was made, and used so far in the previous form if that wasn't avialable yet in other version. Big Adobe could learn much from small, weak companies, but powerful by their profesionalism, as in their case that is be or not to be in the bussines.

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

This wasn't such a problem when Adobe had a formal beta program.

26 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

This should show up and be fixed in Alpha - long before it ever gets to Beta.  That it made it all the way to final release tells you a lot about the internal workings of the Ps team these days. There used to be something like fourteen or fifteen Alpha testers - y'all know the names - Andrew Rodney, Jeff Schewe, Bruce Fraser before he died, etc. How many are left and how many are active. 

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

They have beta vers., I know it. Selected users are in, but maybe everyone is focused on something important only for himself, not on each feature Adobe introduces to Photoshop, or else not each of features is provided for those beta testers. Then is there some other inner group of people who test it as well but fail? Probably not.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

How you got to know names of those testers?

2K Messages

 • 

35K Points

> This wasn't such a problem when Adobe had a formal beta program.>

And the cycle was at minimum 18 months and the whole industry moved a little slower and sometimes it seems that gave them time to do it better. Hard for me to really remember that accurately.

Personally, I wish the cycle were 18 months and we could get more features  enhanced every release so they weren't a V1 for so long, and more little things fixed. Even though some of the stuff they've showed off at MAX would be awfully nice to have someday. If the one year cycle is working, or even needed by us users, I'm not seeing it. All the companies seem to have gone there, though. Apple releases an OS every year now, and drops support for older versions even faster than it used to.  '-(    I can only say that I also am not an insider, so don't know what's really going on.

I don't even know if they still have an alpha program. I have to wonder when they'd have time for that these days? But those who haven't died no doubt still have someone's ear.

2K Messages

 • 

35K Points

> How you got to know names of those testers?>

Adobe stopped being so secretive. When they were hard at work, what they were working on, when a release was scheduled—all that was a secret, but those big names, along with Katrin Eismann, were at least an open secret in the Creative Suite era. I just can't remember exactly when.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

They overuse CC program. When they are sure we are in with our money they don't care to release good product (one of those of CS era), so like politics after beeing elected forget their promises.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

The most protected secrets these day is how many bugs we'll have to deal with ;)

26 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

I knew Rodney in school thirty-five years ago. I used to talk to Schewe once in a while back in the late 90's. There used to be a ColorSync newslist I subscribed to (maybe there still is) and a lot of those folks would be on it. You could figure out who the Alpha testers were pretty easily. Being a Beta tester was pretty much a wasted of time as almost all the real work had been done in Alpha. Adobe got volunteers, and I emphasize that word - to Beta test for free. They expected that you'd put a certain number of hours a week basically looking for bugs and there were crappy little door prizes if you found one. A complete and utter waste of your time if you were a working pro, but I suppose it gave some a sense of prestige. I mean, if you were really lucky you might win a free license. Whoopdeefrickingdoo. If you just worked all the hours you put in for free, you'd have bought the thing many times over. The biggest point is that Beta testers had no say whatsoever in the feature set. That was done by the time it got to Beta. Bug chasin' was pretty much it. I was signed up somewhere around Ps 7.0 I think - y'know I think when you could first do layers in 16 bit and never participated because I immediately saw what a complete waste it was. But hey, they got a lot of folk to work for free. Good work if you can get it.

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

Them's aint bugs.

Them's Undocumented features.

Intended to keep our productivity in check.

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

Slower development cycles lead to releasing better, more reliable software.

Enough with this planned-obselescence crap already!

26 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

But. But. But... They have to do SOMETHING with my $53.00 a month that they suck out of my wallet. Before moving to subscription there was some corporate motivation to put out a good product because a crappy release could affect their bottom line. Now there's no reason at all and this is exactly what a lot of people predicted and why so many were so vociferously against subscriptions.

204 Messages

 • 

4.1K Points

If 500,000 users go back to cs6 for three months while cancelling their subscriptions will have a HUGE (approx $10mil per mth) impact on their bottom line - I bet we will have an update within the first three weeks with all the 2019 bugs fixed and within the next month all the years old issues attended to.

I am prepared to fire up cs6 tomorrow if neccessary. heck, I still even have cs5 32bit running on windows 7 for times when I need some old plugins.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

I thought the same yestarday, but those users had to still have CS6 (that I stil use only, thoug have buggy newest one). It is generally still the same Photoshop, we could live with. But I think that wouldn't be enohg as CS6 is at bottom of their Ps releases, so we are still stuck to CC program.

4 Messages

 • 

176 Points

2 years ago

This drives me nuts.

It's like a car building the clutch in the middle.

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

A lot of these so-called smart filters etc don't seem to reliably or consistently perform as advertised, it's almost as if they're one-trick ponies that don't behave predictably outside the scripted demo that I've seen repeated verbatim at product launch demonstrations.

24 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

2 years ago

CS6 is good to keep around as an emergency backup when you have problems with the primary app or maybe need some esoteric backwards compatibility. 

That's why I kept CC2018 when I was pushed into upgrading to CC2019. New software ALWAYS goes on probation. Damn good thing I did, too. Needed Adobe techs to root around and fix settings so I could open the new stuff in CC2018, but everything seems to be back to normal now that I am rid of CC2019.

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

I agree with you once again but why you for the next time create new post instead of answering in subtheard that answer should belong too? :) Probably that's mistake but if intentional then okey ;)

13 Messages

 • 

392 Points

2 years ago

Yep totally agree. It's change for the sake of change and has messed with every single user's muscle memory. Whoever decided this needs a long hard think about what they have done. 

terrible decision. Why not take all the other settings and make them do the complete opposite of what they've done for many years? Sounds like a great idea right!? Nope.


631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

If there was not subscription payment model they would not play with us so easily ;)

61 Messages

 • 

3.2K Points

I could not agree with you more. The amount of bandwidth being spent on this topic is stunning. Adobe would have tested, retested, confirmed and turned it inside out before making this kind of change without user input...

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Today elapsed exactly 2 weeks you started this theard. It gives over 3 users per day unliking Adobe decision. This two weeks more would be sufficient also to find by testers most shocking truth how badly it affects everyday work in Photoshop since even if someone may be fine with new way of free / proportional transform it exploited about six bugs you find reading just this one theard refered to only one over 20 years working well behaviour before last mistaken release!

60 Messages

 • 

2.2K Points

2 years ago

This change says so much about Adobe it’s not funny.

21 Messages

 • 

660 Points

2 years ago

Agree that this whole situation is ridiculous. Adobe need to add a toggle switch to revert to 'normal' behaviour urgently. Muscle memory cannot be retrained selectively. Shift to constrain is a VERY common convention

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Don't forget to click Me Too button, or your opinion won't be taken into account.
I think they check number of voices in first instance before read our comments :(

204 Messages

 • 

4.1K Points

LMAO... do you really think they even care our comments ?
By now they are numb.

204 Messages

 • 

4.1K Points

They probably laughing their azzes off knowing no change is coming after they invested all that time in a failure they will convince themselves it was the right thing to do and press on with deaf ears..

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

Actually I'd like to believe but seeing there is 12 pages long theard that took 2 years users begged to bring back old crop method it is more likely Santa Claus is going to do that this year for us.

I didn't read that but it seems that crop started with CS6 was left for next CC releases:

https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_6_crop_tool

209 Messages

 • 

4.9K Points

I expect this not to change. I suspect Adobe has the same mindset as apple, people doesn't know what they want more than us. 

I think the whole reasoning Adobe has for doing this, is that they want Photoshop to be more user friendly for that tiny userbase that doesn't use a keyboard (i.e tablet only) - which they expect to grow, and probably scale will work this way on the iPad version of Photoshop. 
 
I could live with this change IF it was consistent throughout the entire program. It's the poor implementation that makes it a horrible change. 

Also, another thing that doesn't make sense to me AT ALL. At Adobe Max 2018 they bragged about this feature and the multiple undos. And the argument for making multiple undo's was to unify all the Adobe programs more, making undo's the same across every program (thank god they at least made an option to turn off this, I like my ctrl-shift-z for multiple undos). But then they do the COMPLETE OPPOSITE with the the uniform scaling and make sure its NOT unified across the whole program suite...So what is it ? Unifying the programs, or UNunifying? 

631 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

The guy who decided that had to be a drunk clown or simply contracted agreement with Apple to make Photoshop working this way. win-win solution for both, but most commited users have now to suffer and can speak openly only to each other as none of prominent persons appears to read about their frustration.

Adobe Max 2018 had to become unhealthy preoccupation of something that in practise was a fail. But that is no matter - people bought it after all. You are right about unifrom scaling that has to be same for all produtcs but some odd way it's inconsistent with scope of just one :/ Regarding undos, what about ExtendScript ToolKit? I don't like the new way of how that works but they don't plan to make new version of ESTK so we have to still use that by both ways?

252 Messages

 • 

4K Points

2 years ago

more Adobe Garbage Keep on abusing your Customers.