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

  • 194
  • Problem
  • Updated 1 week ago
  • In Progress
  • (Edited)
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.
Photo of Clayton King

Clayton King

  • 61 Posts
  • 34 Reply Likes
  • kind of angry, but definitely bewildered

Posted 7 months ago

  • 194
Photo of Gregg Peterson

Gregg Peterson

  • 3 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Adobe had no problem raising my subscription price. The benefit of the subscription model is that I always have the latest version of the software. If I revert to an earlier version, I lose that benefit. I could not help but notice that my productivity was suffering due to changing this behavior in Photoshop only. Out of my frustration, I called Adobe and complained. The salesperson would be happy to transfer me to someone who would help instruct me on this new "feature".  I had to reason with him. I asked if he drove a car. No. A bicycle? Yes. So I asked how he would feel if he took his bike in for a tune-up and when he got it back, he was told the new feature of his upgraded bike meant he needed to pedal in reverse to go forward. I asked how he would like that. How would he feel if I offered to have a tech help instruct him on using this new feature. I asked how he would feel after riding for years pedaling one way to now have to unlearn that, and get used to the new way of pedaling. I got him to agree that there would be some time where his bicycling would be inefficient. He wouldn't get to places as fast or efficiently. Then I said I respectfully ask that you refund me four months of my subscription to compensate me for my lack of productivity. Then he said he could give me three. It occurs to me that this might be the only way Adobe listens, so I thought I would share it to the forum. If enough users told Adobe how they screwed up, and asked for compensation, and it is a reasonable request, it might get their attention. Cheers.

Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
That is awesome.

Now go to Twitter and tweet a link to this comment.

Adobe isn't listening to anyone on here.
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
While I too find the change in the use of the modifier key to transform a layer extremely frustrating, I'm very happy that Adobe publishes Photoshop in the first place.

It's good to know that one can get a credit for a few months.
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 48 Posts
  • 66 Reply Likes
@Warren Heaton

We do pay an ever increasing subscription for professional features and some level of corporate trust - right?

I'm actually fine with the change, what I can't stand is the half-baked implementation which has inevitably lead to jaw-dropping inconsistencies, then no real acknowledgement, and after months, no fix.

If it's a fundamental change to the way 'shift to constrain' works, do it properly and do it everywhere. Why would anyone think that changing something so fundamental on 1 tool, in 1 app, would be the way to go? 

The whole thing is mind-numbing corporate nonsense of their own making, we've all been in meetings where people in power make these kinds of silly decisions - right?

Just revert it until you can do it properly, it doesn't have to expose such obvious incompetence. Such a shame.
Photo of Lonny Cloud

Lonny Cloud

  • 42 Posts
  • 47 Reply Likes
Agree! Revert the behavior.
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
It would be amazing if we could see more parity across Adobe applications.  Right now, I think Photoshop CC2019 and Premiere Pro are the only two applications that default to scale being constrained by default (unfortunately, Premiere Pro doesn't respond to using the Shift key at all - you have to go into the Effect Controls and turn it off).  Could you imagine the uproar if the behavior of the Shift key changed in Illustrator and InDesign and After Effects like it did in Photoshop?

Have you used the new Content-Aware Fill yet?  It's amazing.  Or noticed that we can finally do basic math in text fields?  (Talk about catching up with Ai, Id, and Ae.)

The transform issue has been acknowledged and there are a few workarounds (none of them ideal); however, that's been lost in that a new thread pops-up about it with very, very high frequency.
(Edited)
Photo of Alexandra Giamanco

Alexandra Giamanco

  • 120 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
There are two people responsible for this change:

1. Terry White
2. Scott Kelby

They should be petitioned to read this thread, and get through their heads how bothersome this change was, and for how many actual professionals.
Photo of Mariah Parker

Mariah Parker

  • 10 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Any idea how to reach them?
Photo of Alexandra Giamanco

Alexandra Giamanco

  • 120 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Social Media, their websites, ...
I would suggest starting with social media, and go from there. There are other forums who have posts regarding this insanely stupid change. There's one on Reddit...etc.
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 48 Posts
  • 66 Reply Likes
It would be amazing if we could see more parity across Adobe applications
That was one of the stated goals of the original CS suite, we've been waiting a LONG TIME for that! Some things have improved but the differences in the way apps accomplish the same tasks is huge.
Could you imagine the uproar if the behaviour of the Shift key changed in Illustrator and InDesign and After Effects like it did in Photoshop?
If you identify the 100s of places it needs changing, then actually change it in those places, then announce it and explain why and give people time (you know, roll it out properly) then you'd get a lot of grumbling, which passes.

But this is half-baked and creates anger-inducing inconstancies for pros because we spend our lives avoiding the same mistakes in behalf of our clients. At least take pride in knowing you did it right. I can't imagine breaking something so fundamental to a client's website or app, then fumbling the fall out. I'm sure you couldn't either - right?
 The transform issue has been acknowledged...
Let's be frank, it's was acknowledged about as well as it was announced! Hence "...no real acknowledgement". Somewhere on this 'Get Satisfaction' website, an Adobe employee said the change came about because some users were used to resizing windows in the same way - what does that even mean?
 ...and there are a few workarounds (none of them ideal)
First thing I did so I don't have to worry about this change (for now). But I do worry about what this change says about Adobe - what is going on over there? 

(Edited)
Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Totally agree — anywhere but on here. Or more to the point, everywhere and on here.

But if we only post on here they are going to ignore us.
Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
I posted a link to one of the better comments from here on Twitter this morning and a rep responded immediately. It was an insufficient response but a response nonetheless.

The rep was completely out of touch with reality and lacked a general knowledge of  UX principles.

Here is a link to it:
https://twitter.com/AdobeCare/status/1103371716955385856
Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
On Twitter

Terry White
@terrylwhite

Scott Kelby
@ScottKelby
Photo of paul kettlewell

paul kettlewell

  • 14 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
Quick update ... yesterday I opened my adobe account - went through to support and clicked on chat 



Spoiler alert ... get a cup of tea ready ... 

As I literally sat on here for an hour being  passed around to 6 different departments - repeating the same message until I finally got through to someone who actually listened - said about how stupid this situation is - said how much time I lose in productivity - said I wasn't happy about paying what I pay adobe for a suite that's completely inconsistent in the way it works since photoshop was updated when I use multiple apps everyday in a professional capacity - refused to implement any workaround as thats actually against their terms and conditions (to reverse engineer or alter their software in anyway) - and finally said what are adobe going to do ... as I expect some sort of gesture from you for this total screw up

Here was some of the chat ... of the more interesting (yawn) parts ... removed the boring chit chat in the middle ... 

Pronnoy Rajput: Thank you for your patience

Pronnoy Rajput: I really apologize for the inconvenience.

big long explanation of the issue ... 

paul kettlewell: so basically you're going to do nothing ?
Pronnoy Rajput: I apologize for the inconvenience.
paul kettlewell: thats not an answer
paul kettlewell: you're going to do nothing ?
Pronnoy Rajput: If you have any issue in using Photoshop then we have self help link, Video tutorial etc or else I will arrange a call back from technical Team.
paul kettlewell: i have used photoshop for over 20+ years ...
paul kettlewell: I know how it works ... please don't patronize me or insult my intelligence
Pronnoy Rajput: I apologize Paul.

paul kettlewell: so can I get an actual answer you will not do anything?
paul kettlewell: Thats adobe's corporate response to a customer of 20+ years?
Pronnoy Rajput: Paul I really apologize 

Pronnoy Rajput: You can go through the terms and we have not changed  our application
paul kettlewell: here is the link to your own forum on the exact change i am talking about
Pronnoy Rajput: Let me check
Pronnoy Rajput: Thank you for your patience.

Pronnoy Rajput: I apologize Paul, I will arrange a call back and our dedicated team will contact you with in next 24 to 48 hour.
paul kettlewell: i wont hold my breath ...
Pronnoy Rajput: I apologize for the inconvenience.

Pronnoy Rajput: As I am sharing you the link to initiate a new chat and then you will be directly connected to the technical team.

Then passed through to technical team - then passed to customer care - then to accounts - back to customer support - then to technical team - photoshop who then sorted it with billing department  ... 


long story short ...



They closed my old account ... credit of last three months ...  3 x $69.99 refund (was a Creative Cloud for teams account)


They then started a new account ... now paying $29.99 a month for the next year ... 

Doesn't solve the problem ... but at least it's something ... 

anyway update over ... 

I'd say what a sh*t show ... but I think i'd probably get the post deleted ... so instead what a ... poop performance ... !!!


Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
If you're referring to the work around that involves saving a Photoshop user configuration file, that is not against the terms of use of Photoshop.

I have to ask, how much time does it take to press command Z and then click and drag without holding the Shift key?

Don't get me wrong, I strongly prefer the old behavior of holding Shift.
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
Just a reminder:  High vote counts are what matter most in this feedback forum.  

Harassing Adobe employees and Adobe influencers on social media is not a constructive way to bring attention to the issue nor does it increase the vote count on this thread.

Also, if one feels that the feedback to response time is too slow, start a thread about that and then encourage others to vote for it.
Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
I wasn't advocating for harassing Adobe influencers.

Just contacting them on Social to get their opinion and input.

Definitely need to use all channels when they are at our disposal.

Try to reach out in a decent way and ask questions. Stay positive, etc.
But also be serious in stating the issues.

I have already had some great responses from Terry, Jeffrey, Scott, and other Adobe advocates on Twitter in literally minutes after I tagged them on Twitter. That seems way more effective to me than this forum.
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
Here's a little something from NYU's guide for managing thread discussions that seems like it could use mentioning here in light of the tone of this thread.  This is meant for student discussion groups, but it applies even though this is a forum for consumers rather than students.

Civility in discussion. Students should be reminded that the objective is to be collaborative, not combative. Also, they need to know that even an innocent remark in the online environment can be misconstrued. Therefore, they should proofread their threaded discussion responses carefully before posting them and they should try to ensure that others will not take their posts as a personal attack. It will be useful if the course outline reminds students with a statement such as: “Be positive in your approach to others and careful about your words. Since we cannot see each other, it is hard to tell if you are bashful, bored, sarcastic, or just kidding. Use these discussions to develop your collaborative teamwork and interaction skills.”





Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Warren this is great and I agree entirely with that second paragraph — especially about trying to remain civil and positive and not be combative.

I admit we can all get carried away with emotion on here for sure.

But that should also illustrate how huge a mistake this change is and the level of inconvenience it has caused to a basic workflow. It would be like changing the gas pedal and brake pedal on all cars overnight.

Thanks for the awareness check.
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 47 Posts
  • 66 Reply Likes
@Warren Heaton

Dude, we are way beyond 'being positive in our approach'.

This change proves Adobe doesn't understand design consistency, doesn't understand professional users, and doesn't understand communication.

The longer this half-baked rolled out is not acknowledged, the worse it will get.
Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
I agree we should continue to push on reverting this insane change.
Not saying we should stop or back down. continue reaching on on Twitter, reddit, Social, etc.

I just personally sort of agree with Warren about trying to remain patient and positive — but that is my personal approach to stuff. But even I get heated and angry.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1592 Posts
  • 503 Reply Likes
> The longer this half-baked rolled out is not acknowledged, the worse it will get.>

But it has been acknowledged. They never give timeline references for anything they put to the public. But they have said they're working on it. So we may not like the amount of time working on it is taking, but we won't like a "solution" that's as half-baked and problematic as the feature.

And we ought to at least be fair and say it's been officially acknowledged as a problem they're working to solve in a way that will work for us without destroying what currently is working for some of their other customers, whoever they are.

I don't blame them for staying out of this. We're venting a lot, and all their presence will do is get more rotten eggs and tomatoes thrown at them. The Staff who come here aren't the ones who fix the problems, and they don't have any control over that other than relaying we think there's a problem. We have to assume that Adobe is really trying hard to shoot itself in the foot if we assume they aren't paying any attention to what must be the longest and most vitriolic thread in this forum's feedback.

If any are longer or angrier, I'd love to see what that was all about. <BG>
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 47 Posts
  • 66 Reply Likes
Agreed but it was acknowledged about as well as it was announced - sheepishly slipped through. There's been no real acknowledgement of how fundamental this change is to the way all graphics software works - why not do it right?

Changing it on one tool, in one app? The inconstancies in PS alone are jaw dropping, it raises a lot of questions about how Adobe makes decisions and it brakes trust. Our clients would destroy us for breaking something so fundamental on their websites, and yours too - right?

So why not acknowledge it's huge, reset the change, then work out how to do it properly?

We're in an on-going, subscription-based relationship with Adobe, is it really asking too much to have fundamental changes done right, and communicated properly?
Photo of Alexandra Giamanco

Alexandra Giamanco

  • 120 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
@Ben:
“This change proves Adobe doesn't understand design consistency, doesn't understand professional users, and doesn't understand communication.”

Ben, this change did not come or was requested by a professional working (getting a salary) in a field that uses Photoshop for 12 hours a day.
Adobe seems to want to expand their subscription model to anyone with a wallet by dumbing the software down to appease those without a solid self taught education and without a four year degree in Graphic/Web design. This starts from places like KelbyOne who place zero value on professionalism and a comprehensive education.

The reason this is happening is the constant cheaping out epidemic that has taken over America. Most clients don’t want to pay, most employers don’t pay living wages so to pay $52.99 a month as a freelancer is a lot of money, so Adobe is making a new market for these people instead of siding with the properly educated & professional crowd of artists. This is what’s happening to us photographers thanks to that same crowd of cheap ppl who have no respect for artists: https://www.photosbyag.net/blog/2019/...

That is the worst intellectual property abuse and extortion I have ever seen! This is what’s starting to happen, with Adobe’s help, to the graphic design industry too...ever heard of Fiverr? So, Adobe wants to be in everyone’s bank statements and to do so they need to dumb down the software since those who spent four years to get a solid education at SCAD are in minority. I don’t think there are that many subscribers in reality, or not as many as Adobe hoped, so they probably think that if they make the software less complicated more wannabes will subscribe and fill out Adobe’s wallets.

Also, “Adobe” gets all their marketing colleteral from others, so while they teach how to use the software, they don’t have knowledge of how their software is used on daily basis in say “any” advertising agency. Is there anyone here from an advertising agency that was directly consulted by Adobe before this change happened? Did anyone from Adobe showed up to explain why they even considered such a preposterous change? I don’t think so. I also don’t think they care how their software is used either. Plus, those who make these changes don’t work on making advertising materials; they make software, which is not the same thing, so those folks won’t know or care how the software is used either. So regardless of calling them out on social media or here, they don’t really care because this change doesn’t affect them directly. It sucks, but companies that get this big don’t usually care and the only way to make them pay attention is to not pay for their services. It shouldn’t be this way, but people allowed it to be, so now it is.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1592 Posts
  • 503 Reply Likes
> is it really asking too much to have fundamental changes done right, and communicated properly?>

I honestly don't know. I think they may have gotten lost a bit when they tried to find out what customer expectation is. I know they went along with the way it works in Affinity, but not why. Also I heard someone say this was the way it works in Microsoft. As if most of us who use Adobe software regularly care about anything except how it works in Adobe software. But if chasing new users is the paramount mission. . . or even just listening to regular users spout off about what is more "logical" . . .

But I also know that they've made plenty of changes before that were reviled, then accepted and never mentioned again. It's always been best to use Preferences, at the least at first, so people adapt and choose, but I've also heard people complain there are too many Preferences, as well as complain that they have to use them at all. They just want the defaults. <sigh>  Me, they have made changes I'm still not happy about, but then again, they've made changes that I am still thrilled they did make.

I believe when using other software that it's on me to figure out, and remember, how basic functions work. I reckon it's the same for newcomers to Adobe. But I'm not opposed to choice, and I expect that's what they're going to go for. Sure beats having the other half as angry as the first. Plenty of people think no key to constrain a transform should have been the default anyway, even people who disagree with how this was handled.

They did respond nearly immediately with a temporary "preference" fix that from all I hear, everyone is satisfied with who want to revert. I think that's taking far more accountability for the mess they created than leaving it up to volunteers to create hacks for us while we wait for them to do something elegant (hopefully). I chose not to use it for the above-mentioned reason_there are no standards, so I want to be able to choose whether or not I get along with another app or not. And stay on my toes living in a world of modifiers built on shifting sands. And I do half remember, then swear. <G>
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 47 Posts
  • 66 Reply Likes
For the record, I have no problem changing 'shift to constrain' to 'shift to unconstrain' here's what's amazing...

1.
Changing it on one tool, in one app creates staggering inconsistencies. All other resizing within PS (and across CC) still uses 'shift to constrain'!!! This kind of fundamental inconsistency breaks the most basic rule in all of design - consistency.

2
This change goes against 35+ years of design software convention, so it requires a little bit of thought and care. Nothing crazy, again, very basic considerations in the design world.


Either Adobe knew and didn't care, or had no clue. Both are jaw-dropping. Again, even an intern designer knows this stuff, it gets drilled into us from the very beginning.

These basic errors beg the question, what is going on? While we all get frustrated with changes from time-to-time, we've never seen anything like this. It's so embarrassing.
(Edited)
Photo of Mark Payne

Mark Payne

  • 94 Posts
  • 87 Reply Likes
After a thread with 1000s of posts, I'm pretty sure they ought to know what is going on by now.

If they won't fix something because of the frustrated temperature of their official form, that's another issue, and quite petty at best.

If the forum wants to moderate discussion,fine. Until then, people are human and they will vent in their own ways. It would be ridiculous for them to misconstrue the intent here.
Photo of Mariah Parker

Mariah Parker

  • 10 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
100% agree... 
Photo of agitpromo

agitpromo

  • 22 Posts
  • 19 Reply Likes
Mark pretty much summed it up.
Photo of Marcus Spaull

Marcus Spaull

  • 9 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled How do I revert the constrain proportions and the ctlr+z changes? It is driving m....
Photo of David

David, Official Rep

  • 3102 Posts
  • 482 Reply Likes
Adobe is paying attention.

We are aware that the changes we made to Transform/Resize in Photoshop have not been well-received by the user-community at large.  Sorry, that wasn't our intention.  We are looking into a solution that addresses the comments made here as well as the original problems we were trying to address.  We hope to have this fix released soon and we welcome those interested to join our prerelease program -- if you'd like to have some influence on how the application develops, we'd sincerely love to hear from you.

In the meanwhile, here is a workaround that will revert to the earlier behavior until we can get a new release ready for you.  This is the same set of instructions that Jeff posted earlier:

(Edited)
Photo of Marcus Spaull

Marcus Spaull

  • 9 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I feel like you should just revert this change to the older version in the official software until you come up with a better solution rather than: leave it up to people to configure there own files with a notepad 'fix'.
Photo of Wootie Cartoons

Wootie Cartoons

  • 11 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Thanks David.  I appreciate the official response here.  Sanity is starting to return ;)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1615 Posts
  • 520 Reply Likes
I respectfully disagree. I didn't want this, but as I've said many times, I know a lot of people who welcomed the change. Even professional users who wanted the option, not one way or another forced, but they liked the change. Simply reverting doesn't help everyone, and it's everyone we should be concerned about—if we want Adobe to also be concerned about them. Let's not start pitting one group against another—Adobe already succeeded in doing that.  '-}
Photo of joachim barrum

joachim barrum

  • 143 Posts
  • 47 Reply Likes
I think if you had implemented it properly at the get go, it would have been better received. It's mainly the inconsistency that made it impossible to work with, at least for me. Particularly in Photoshop. As for someone like myself, I use shapes, text and bitmap layers and all kind of layers all the time, often on one same PSD file and all the layers are used in different ways. I don't really regard shapes in a different way than a bitmap layers. And having to learn my muscle memory to get used to them all behaving different is impossible!. F.example: first scale a bitmap layer in uniform scale, then add a vector mask and scale, and boom it behaves differently and you make mistakes. It feels like a complete mess when working. 
If such a major behavior change for a tool that is used all the time should be changed, it should be a common behavior across the entire program (bitmaps, content aware scale, vector, text, etc etc....) and not least across all Adobe programs coming out at the same time - so you are forced to relearn it. Additionally, users should be able to revert to legacy behavior the same way you did with multiple undo's, inside the program preferences. 

Without such an implementation, this feature will never be well received. 
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 50 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Thanks David, 

But the real problem isn't changing shift-to-constrain. The problem is changing it on one tool, in one app. 

That's like switching 1st gear with reverse but only for one road.

This huge UI/UX inconsistency, and the sheepish roll-out, raises a lot of questions because we're in an ongoing relationship with you.

We're getting a lot of 'you can't teach old dogs new tricks' attitude but that isn't the issue. 

It's about design consistency, and basic communication. Both were of shockingly low-quality in this instance, and these aspects are yet to be acknowledged by Adobe.

I hope that makes sense and thank you again for taking the time to post here.

Ben


 
Photo of David

David, Official Rep

  • 3102 Posts
  • 482 Reply Likes
Again, I'm happy to try to share your voices and input with the team, but it would be far more effective if you want your perspectives really heard to join the Photoshop prerelease program.  There are limits to what an employee of a publicly-traded company can discuss on a public forum with regard to a feature under development...

That said, it wasn't just one tool.  Many behaviors were changed.  That's why a fix isn't immediate.  We TRULY want to get this right for users, including all the many and sundry fringe cases.  And believe me, there are multiple (conflicting) consistency arguments involved...8-(

Thanks,
David
Photo of Peter Figen

Peter Figen

  • 24 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
Sorry David, if you "truly" wanted to get this right, you would have consulted with actual users before baking in the changes and maybe even run a decent sized beta program and listen to the feedback. And if you "truly" wanted to get this right, you wouldn't have been basically silent for months. And, in addition, you could have given public explanations as to what YOU think the benefits were of completely screwing up the workflows of hundreds of thousands of professional users. But, sadly, you did nothing of the sort. It's what we've come to expect from Adobe. Joe Ely had a great song years ago called "My Hopes Up High" Well, they ain't very high at the moment. I mean, it's really not hard to get this right and any excuses you make for it, are just that - excuses. Why don't YOU, David, tell us exactly who was responsible for this and more importantly, why. And as far as joining some sort of "prerelease" program, sorry, got way better things to do with my time that ferret out your problems. I was invited once years ago to participate and the whole thing was like slave labor. Hell, even Schewe told me on the phone that there was no point in being part of the beta program as all the real decisions had already been made at Alpha and Adobe was just using the Beta to find bugs - for free. Just sayin'.
Photo of Andi@redfishblack.com

Andi@redfishblack.com

  • 68 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
Hi David, first of all thanks so much for addressing this problem. I am looking forward to the changes. Can you give us a timeframe ?
I never doubted you would not listen to the users and at the same time I wished you guys would have kept us in the loop a bit more frequently.
I also appreciate that you mentioned we can become part of the pre release program.
I appreciate that a lot but don't think that due to deadlines and tight retouch work schedules I ( and I am sure many of us) don't have the time to work with something that might have bugs and is still a work in progress.
I would wish that on the other hand you would network way more frequently with those users like me who make a living with photoshop, in my case as a photo retoucher, in other cases as a graphic designer, those whose tax return declares that
I think we should be the ones that should be asked first, on questions like what tools are missing, or what tools can be improved. 
If you say photoshop is a professional program, you have to connect with us professional users way better. In Forums, by invitation, by questionnaire , by invitation, etc.
I am sure there are many ways to connect better to us that these forums here.
Thanks again,
Andi

Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 50 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Thanks David,
 Again, I'm happy to try to share your voices and input with the team, but it would be far more effective if you want your perspectives really heard to join the Photoshop prerelease program
I'm afraid that I too have had bad beta experiences (I also had to let an Adobe beta tester go). I was left in no doubt that fundamental decisions were long gone by the time stuff was tested, and that the beta programme doesn't always attract great people (who are always way too busy).
 That said, it wasn't just one tool.  Many behaviors were changed.  That's why a fix isn't immediate.  
I kind of liked this better when I thought it was an oversight sorry.
 We TRULY want to get this right for users, including all the many and sundry fringe cases. 
OK but you guys recognise that shift-to-constrain is not a fringe case and that it's a decades-long design software convention (not just Adobe) which is used 100s if not 1000s of times per day by every designer/retoucher/3D artist - right? Keeping it consistent benefits all uses-cases and users of all levels, it's that fundamental.
 And believe me, there are multiple (conflicting) consistency arguments involved...8-(
But shift-to-constrain is shift-to-constrain, it's learn't right after pointing, clicking and dragging - no joke.

Changing it to shift-to-unconstrain requires changing it everywhere, including fully across CC. If that's not in the works, then this is way worse then any of us could imagine.

Re the internal consistency arguments: this isn't like a feature request, you're messing with something so fundamental (again, think clicking and dragging) that it's troubling to hear there's an argument about this.

e.g. 1st gear is 1st gear, it's a very bad idea to switch 1st gear to be reverse when driving on a different road.

Surely you and your team know all this?
(Edited)
Photo of paul kettlewell

paul kettlewell

  • 14 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
I feel like this removing the shift key - is a solution answering to a problem where people don't have direct access to a shift key when working on files ... ie... tablets - ipads etc ... (your not gonna have that onscreen keyboard pop up over half your screen to use it) ... that to me seems to be the only logical explanation as its not been changed in other software in the adobe suite ... ie software that you wouldn't really use on an ipad ... - illustrator - indesign all the other apps ... hence the inconsistency across the different packages

I don't use a tablet so have no idea if an identical version of photoshop exists for tablets/ipad in any useable form other than that weird one they made ages ago that i had on my iphone - like a super light version ... (red eye reduction and contrast - essentially edit basic stuff) ... maybe that software is about to drop or still in development via a port from desktop photoshop as we know it ... 

total speculation ... but thats all I can think that makes any sense as a reason for fixing something that (based on the feedback and backlash here) wasn't essentially broken ... 

who knows ... 
Photo of Marcus Spaull

Marcus Spaull

  • 9 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled How do I revert the constrain proportions and the ctlr+z changes? It is driving m....
Photo of laden m

laden m

  • 184 Posts
  • 34 Reply Likes
Did anyone try 20.0.4 yet?
(Edited)
Photo of Andi@redfishblack.com

Andi@redfishblack.com

  • 67 Posts
  • 19 Reply Likes
I opened it, still no fix !
Back to work on the previous version.
Photo of paul kettlewell

paul kettlewell

  • 14 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
I'm literally losing the will to live ... So I opened photoshop this morning - now I don't even see handles with the move tool selected !!!

What the hell are you guys doing over there at Adobe ... 

Spent 45 minutes googling to see if any one else has had this - and I find the following:

"Switch to rgb and then back to cmyk and they appear"

Which insanely makes it work - but honestly that's the solution - like somehow making the software refresh itself - it's a joke ... 

Honestly your strapline of:

Creative Cloud for business - Everything your organization needs to do exceptional creative work.

should have the sentence ... in the most inefficient and unprofessional way we could think of ... 

added to it ...

Adobe you have honestly blown my mind with how poorly you firstly executed this and then managed the fall out from it - with still seemingly no solution in sight ... 
Photo of Gregg Peterson

Gregg Peterson

  • 3 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Does that always preserve the exact color of the original? I would not trust that if color is critical.
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
Did you mean to start a post about the transform controls disappearing unexpectedly, reapearing of the color mode is changed?

The issue will likely get proper attention of you start a new thread. Also be sure to include your OS, PS version and GPu infro.

While I ‘ve had plenty of unexpected things happen in PS over the decades, the Free Tranform controls have always been visible when expected. It’s defintaggrivating to have them not be there when you need them to be.

-Warren
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
Changing to CMYK and then back to RGB is likely to result in reduced colors if using Image > Mode. An undo, of course, should return the document to the full RGB color gamut.
Photo of paul kettlewell

paul kettlewell

  • 14 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
As mentioned in my post - (although not explicitly)  i'm going from being already in CMYK - then "switch to rgb and then back to cmyk" -  so i'm not losing any color honestly ... as the gamut expands in rgb then goes back to what it was before ... the other way around of course - would be an even bigger nightmare than it already is ... 

warren ... I put it here as it's all part of the same mess as far as I can see ... that whole control has been half-assed changed and it seems they don't really know what they are doing ... 
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1609 Posts
  • 514 Reply Likes
It sounds to me, like it does to Warren, that this is likely a separate issue—the transform was a decision, while this is an issue of disappearing interface elements (maybe a refresh/video card issue?). It's not been reported extensively, while hatred for the decision has been. I know I've never had a problem with controls not showing up.

The main reason for you to post this separately,  I should think, would be to get attention for a new "symptom," if not an entirely unrelated bug. Along with your System Info, it should get their attention. Maybe what you're doing is forcing a redraw and there's an even simpler workaround they can find for you while waiting for a proper fix.
Photo of paul kettlewell

paul kettlewell

  • 14 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
i'm pretty sure its not redraw - every other control works ... and if I fish around the artboard  off screen I finally get the cyan lines  for the extremities of the layer I pasted in which flick on and off  as i roll over them ... i'm on a new macbook - plenty of memory space and hard drive for cache ... and never had it before this debacle started either ... plus the file size was like 4mb max ... as it's a tiny lable artwork background ... 

I'll start a new thread - but its definitely related to this whole thing ... 
Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
In case there’s any confusion from the thread....
CMYK to RGB to CMYK should not result in any color shifts (narrower color gamut to wider color gamut to narrower)
RGB to CMYK to RGB is likely to see color shifts (wider color gamut to narrower to wider)

A reply mentioned possible color shift, so I was just chiming in one when it’s likely to happen.

Or course, this shouldn’t be necessary for showing PS user interface controls.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1609 Posts
  • 514 Reply Likes
> i'm on a new macbook - plenty of memory space and hard drive for cache ... and never had it before this debacle started either ... plus the file size was like 4mb max ... as it's a tiny lable artwork background ... >

Most odd. I can't find anything other than Cmd-H that will hide Transform controls in a CMYK file. I'm on an older MBP running High Sierra. Mojave seems to be involved in a lot of oddities, but I also hear people saying that Adobe runs perfectly in Mojave on their machine. I hope they can find the problem quickly.

Photo of Erling Storvik

Erling Storvik

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled How can I make a selected area just wider or higher?.

The middle handle isn't working as before — how can I make a rectangular selection wider or higher?

Pulling the middle handle will now enlarge the selection, not change proportions.

Pressing command key will allow me to drag in one direction, but will not constrain the enlargement to a 0 degree direction.

Do you get it? I use this all the time in Photoshop, so what happened?


Photo of Warren Heaton

Warren Heaton

  • 214 Posts
  • 88 Reply Likes
Was this one rhetorical? It makes the point about the now former behavior of holding the Shift key for constrain pretty well, actually.
Photo of Erling Storvik

Erling Storvik

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Yes, I just wanted to make it clear that to me, this is the real problem in my workflow, not being able to use the middle handle as before. I'm actually not able to extend a selection to make it wider or higher. 
Photo of Erling Storvik

Erling Storvik

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Well, I thought I tried the shift key but obviously didn't.... sorry for the waste of time guys, this works for me now :) 
Photo of Glinda Chen

Glinda Chen

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Can we PLEASE reverse the Proportional scaling to be Shift + Drag again..

Literally every post I've seen about this change talks about how much they hate it. Even when I get used to this change, Marquee tool and every other adobe program still has hold shift for proportional scaling. It disrupts everyone's workflow when they have to consciously switch back and forth when using different tools and programs. PLEASE just pick one set and stick with it for all programs and tools.   
Photo of Pete Pritchard

Pete Pritchard

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Is this going to be fixed or not?  I am going to roll back to a previous version I guess.  I have been using photoshop professionally for over 20 years... and I can not believe this was changed.  Keyboard shortcuts and fundamental things like how to resize objects are second nature. I have been fighting to relearn this stupid way of resizing objects since this version came out.  Here's a goofy thing too, when copying and pasting from illustrator, the first transformation still uses legacy shift constraining as you place the image.  wtf adobe?  you dont have to change something just to ensure i will continue paying for it. if it works LEAVE IT ALONE
Photo of Adam Petrasek

Adam Petrasek

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Please Adobe, Listen to your users!!!

By adding an option IN PREFERENCES (not a hack job of adding configuration files) to revert back to the legacy behavior, you are still able to proceed with whatever crazy ideas you have for transform, while giving us users the behavior we expect and the consistency we need!

This request isn't a crazy unheard of feature! You already have options for legacy behaviors for things like cropping.

This alone is holding me back from upgrading to version 20, and getting any of the useful upgrades that i'm paying for. 
Photo of Kevin Burke

Kevin Burke

  • 3 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Can anyone else confirm that the Legacy Transform Preference wasn't added to 20.0.4?

What was that one developer talking about 3 versions ago regarding a fix for this?
Photo of Tim Mackey

Tim Mackey

  • 7 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Adobe team, I understand why you may have wanted to change this. You got it wrong 20 years ago—defaults should have been that aspect ratios are constrained unless the user specifies otherwise by holding down a hotkey.

But it's TOO LATE now. Millions of people have been trained by countless hours in Photoshop that holding down the Shift key constrains proportions. And most others in the industry adopted this convention long ago, including other Adobe apps.

My co-workers and I have spent MONTHS trying to unlearn this muscle-memory in Photoshop, and still every other day I hear audible frustration as people get it wrong yet again. The decision to not apply it to all layer types just makes it even more rage-inducing.

Photoshop Team: No matter how much you are convinced that a UI decision was wrong and that it needs to be fixed, you CANNOT CHANGE ESTABLISHED RULES long after they've been established. And if you still feel the need to do so, it MUST be done in a way that can be changed in the user preferences. It's downright hostile and insulting to your users to make changes the way you did in this situation.
(Edited)
Photo of Andi@redfishblack.com

Andi@redfishblack.com

  • 68 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
So another months has gone by and still no reply or solution to this desaster ?
What is going on ? 
Jeffrey, this is what you wrote 3 !! Months ago:

 Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15320 Posts
  •  
  •  2221 Reply Likes

Official Response

"Sorry. The improvements I mentioned in the official answer did not make it into the 20.0.2 update. I’m hoping they make it into the next update. I’ll update the thread when the change is available."

I am a full time retoucher, often on set so I see how everybody working profesionally  struggles with this and nobody updates or uses the older version.

What's the plan ?

Andi




Photo of Olaf Giermann

Olaf Giermann

  • 44 Posts
  • 27 Reply Likes
CC 2019 in whole and especially this issue really is a very sad story ... :-/
Photo of brian

brian

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled New proportional scaling OPTIONAL.

PLEASE make a way to revert the scaling back to the way it has always been.  Those of us using Adobe products for years are accustomed to using shift for proportional scaling and not using shift for non-proportional scaling.  To force the change of working artists is cruel and unusual punishment.  If you believe this is a good change as a default that's fine...but we should have a simple box select option in preferences to change it back to the way we've always worked.  ESPECIALLY when other adobe products are still operating the old way.  This seems like a VERY obvious fix to an extremely disruptive change...does not have to be this difficult.
Photo of Jason Williamson

Jason Williamson

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
This is a total troll update. So the design devs screwed up with their new transform/scaling system, which only applies to rasterized layers. Trying to transform vectors uses legacy transformation behavior which made sense. So you guys only half a job at implementing this screw up.

Another thing is rotating objects, when you cursor off the transform object you are then able to rotate. In 2019 now if you move the cursor too far out of the object it switches to transformation interrupting rotation. Is freaking backwards this whole 2019 version. Seriously what happened with the team does anyone on it use photoshop professionally or at least talk to any half decent pro users?

Using cc2014 till you fix  you guys fix this mess up.




Photo of Michael Stephenson

Michael Stephenson

  • 12 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
When the hell is this getting fixed ? Why are we still waiting ?
(Edited)
Photo of Ben

Ben

  • 50 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
The inconsistency of changing this in one context, of one tool, in one app, is still truly baffling to me sorry. It can only create confusion; the enemy of UI/UX for users of all levels/backgrounds.
 
Removing confusion and clarifying stuff is fundamentally what design is all about. If it needs changing, then it needs changing in every context, of every tool, in every app.