Photoshop CC 2019: Transform inconsistencies are confusing

  • 19
  • Problem
  • Updated 1 year ago
  • (Edited)
Merged

This conversation has been merged. Please reference the main conversation: Photoshop CC 2019: Free Transform/Distort tool inconsistency

The new uniform scale by default is nice, but its very hard to get used to when the program is full of inconsistency. Like transform bitmap is uniform, transform shape you need to hold ctrl+shift for it to scale the same way. Same goes for text, which is uniform, but smart objects are not....why?!? So currently it only makes things a lot more confusing than it being a change for the better.
Photo of joachim barrum

joachim barrum

  • 167 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
  • frustraded

Posted 1 year ago

  • 19
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 2429 Posts
  • 1013 Reply Likes
I think the idea behind it is based on logic: what makes the most sense. When you transform text, or a bitmap object, it makes sense that you want to keep the aspect ratio. So that is now the default. When you transform a shape, it is different. When you apply a shape you have no fixed aspect ratio, so it makes sense that when you transform an existing shape that behavior is the same.

So yes, it is logical if you think about it. But whether it is convenient is another matter. I agree that it would be much easier to remember if the behavior was always the same.
Photo of joachim barrum

joachim barrum

  • 167 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
So whats the logic of a bitmap being scaled uniformally but a smart object of that bitmap is not?
Photo of joachim barrum

joachim barrum

  • 167 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Also most of the time, at least for me, a shape is a shape you want to keep the aspect ration just as much as a bitmap. F.example shape of Text ;) -so I don't see the logic, sorry. 
Photo of Ann Shelbourne

Ann Shelbourne

  • 156 Posts
  • 125 Reply Likes
This change is a major problem for those who also use InDesign and Illustrator (both of which retain the traditional Adobe "Shift to Constrain".

All professional editing tools have used Shift Constrain for the past 25 years so I think that it is a bit late for Adobe to try to enforce a change across the industry?!

Anyway, I have installed the Script which solves the annoyance  caused by this unnecessary change to Ps.
Photo of Kukurykus

Kukurykus

  • 664 Posts
  • 183 Reply Likes
May you share that script?
Photo of Erik Hofmann

Erik Hofmann

  • 13 Posts
  • 29 Reply Likes
There is absolutely no logic behind this. You can read this in other boards here with kind of the same topic. Shift was, is and will always be the "constrain button". You use it to make a square selection box with the M tool. When you want to do a straight brush stroke or drag a straight line, you use Shift for that. There are so much more examples. So why should it be different with this one and only thing? It's a stupid and workflow breaking decision. I wasn't able to get used to it so I changed it back. Most of us use this software for over a decade now. But it's very clear now Adobe doesn't want to hear any of their opinions.
Photo of Kukurykus

Kukurykus

  • 664 Posts
  • 183 Reply Likes
Even if they hear you they won't listen for sure, so you are right about last sentence...
Photo of Nolan Conley

Nolan Conley

  • 62 Posts
  • 68 Reply Likes
Deal Adobe... don't you have a kid's version called Photoshop Elements... please have your kids play with that one and leave the Professional Version to PROFESSIONALS!
Photo of Ryan Terry

Ryan Terry

  • 6 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled (photoshop 2019 release) Transform shift isn't consistent and buggy.

I know that the new version of photoshop now doesn't require holding shift to contrain proportions when transforming, but it's inconsistent.  Smart Objects sometimes need shift and sometimes don't.  Same with shapes.  I've also found that when holding alt and shift to transform from center the artwork flashes as I resize; very buggy.
Photo of Bob Ryan

Bob Ryan

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Agreed. The flashing is not only annoying but FEELS buggy. Makes me not trust the software. 
Photo of Colin Cramm

Colin Cramm

  • 2 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Terrible, give us a preference checkbox to disable SHIFT (on by default please) for uniform scaling. And CERTAINLY don't give us a stupid workaround with editing config files. I mean, come on, Adobe!
Photo of Ricardo Pereda

Ricardo Pereda

  • 2 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
terrible option. now i have to fight years of muscle memory. i went back to previous version and will keep it until this is either fixed or at least that we get an option to reverse it
Photo of Kukurykus

Kukurykus

  • 664 Posts
  • 183 Reply Likes
I see almost everyone keeps saying of not coming back to last release until new behaviour is going to be reverted. Perhaps that helps a little, but after end I do not believe Adobe will do exception to listen to us just this single time.
(Edited)
Photo of Albert Abrantes

Albert Abrantes

  • 1 Post
  • 2 Reply Likes
this is outrageous!!!!!
Photo of Ray Lambert

Ray Lambert

  • 1 Post
  • 6 Reply Likes
I've been using professional grade graphics software since 1988 (Freehand/Illustrator/Photoshop/Pagemaker) and I can't for the life of me figure why anyone would want to change the functionality of the shift key 30 years after every single major application adopted the behavior.

It's just plain nuts to change this long standing convention and even nuttier to not give the user a way to revert to behavior they've spent a lifetime using.

Hows about an update for this silliness?
(Edited)
Photo of Bill Walker

Bill Walker

  • 5 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
it comes across as they have plenty of time and no program issues or bugs to worry about, so they tinker with user settings that have been in place - like you said - for 30+ years. Guess the software is perfect and they don't need to spend time fixing bugs or bad features (such as eating memory/ram when it needs it, but then never releasing it until program is closed out).
Photo of Kukurykus

Kukurykus

  • 664 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
I would agree but however there are plenty of bugs fortunatelly they fix constantly, there are also those that for some reason are 'forgotten'. It's rather the pressure to release another Photoshop so new users are going to purchase it thinking that's something new, so must be better than previous program. You know the reality though.
(Edited)
Photo of Rosa

Rosa

  • 416 Posts
  • 226 Reply Likes
Ray Lambert  I couldn't agree with you more! 

Adobe made the most absurd stupid backward movement ever! I can't for the life of me understand what they were thinking about when they made this change other than making an adaptation in v20 which would be compatible with the iPad when Adobe releases the iPad version soon. 

Who knows? 
Photo of Nolan Conley

Nolan Conley

  • 62 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
I'm with you Rosa... it's like they put the idiots in charge and anyone with common sense got thrown right out the window.  If they want an iPad version... make one.  Leave the basic functionality of the Professional Version alone.
Photo of Bill Walker

Bill Walker

  • 5 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes

I'm not trying to be funny or snide, but it's like a millennial was in charge of these decisions? Let's change things to suit my generation and throw away everything that's come before me.....
Photo of Colin Cramm

Colin Cramm

  • 2 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
@ Bill Walker: that doesn't make sense, as if millennials didn't grow up with this basic function.
Photo of Bill Walker

Bill Walker

  • 5 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
@ Colin, that's my point.  Millennials are going into college using touch screens and when they use Photoshop (or Adobe products) for the first time - I can imagine they have thoughts of better ways for the software to work or function with no regard to WHY it is the way it is and they pay no mind that ppl for 30+ years having been using the functions they are trying to "improve."
Photo of Rosa

Rosa

  • 416 Posts
  • 226 Reply Likes
I agree Bill Walker . . .  it's not cool to be 'old school' -  or is it that - it doesn't pay to be loyal? 

I've been a loyal, 'old school' PS user for many years. . . trained well and truly, my fingers know where to fly on the keyboard. I took it in my stride and embraced updated PS versions and learnt new ways, but, when it comes to stupid absurd changes, which makes no sense whatsoever, I scratch my head wondering if it pays to be loyal to Adobe. 

I never gave ON1 Photo, Affinity Photo, Corel, etc. a second thought, ever, until just recently. . . . . . . 
(Edited)
Photo of Bob Ryan

Bob Ryan

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Well now... you might as well ask why they didn't take Freehand and dump Illustrator. Freehand was far more intuitive. I STILL can't do things with Illustrator that I did easily in Freehand. Adobe... 
Photo of Bill Walker

Bill Walker

  • 5 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Don't forget Page Maker ;)