In Photoshop, it would be nice when "free transforming" a layer that the "maintain aspect ratio" lock button would maintain the previous setting, or some other way to set the default mode. I'm frustrated that I have to click it each time I'm resizing a bunch of items individually. Thanks.
Posted 8 years ago
Don't listen Adobe.
We don't need productivity or workflow enhancements.
God forbid that we could work more efficiently or effectively.
What we want are more plugins like picture frames, fire and trees.
*sigh*
And you wonder why anyone who can is moving to Sketch?
We don't need productivity or workflow enhancements.
God forbid that we could work more efficiently or effectively.
What we want are more plugins like picture frames, fire and trees.
*sigh*
And you wonder why anyone who can is moving to Sketch?
What we want are more plugins like picture frames, fire and trees.
+1
REQUESTS / IDEAS:
Please finally add an automated "BFF" stickers or filters for sharing selfies! Would love to get these posted on Behance INSTANTLY. Also, maybe a constant "Local Weather" ticker and you could make it so that we can't turn it off, ever. (fingers crossed on this one!!!)
That "maintain Free Transform blah, blah, blah", thing everyone wants, whatevs, who cares. Just focus on releasing new, not really finished, not really tested, not really likely to be used by anyone type features, please.
PRAISE:
Love when you rework standard Tool functions and operations after an update. We typically give everyone a full day off from projects to do some relearning, which we all love! A little "Adobe mandated brian exercise" we like to say!
(Edited)
You're all such Debbie Downers, don't you appreciate that Adobe's been busy bringing you fresh things like the New Document dialogue which is slower than the original one so you can enjoy your Photoshop experience that bit more?
That is tremendously and appropriately and sadly - funny. And the perfect close to this long thread. Oh - did I mention InDesign's many many years' total lack of HSB color editing? The very core of any designer's creation & use of color, in what otherwise is one of the most powerful tools for design out there? Nah, that would be off-topic. (and I love InDesign, and Photoshop - floppy discs since 1.0 and no layers until 2.5)
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Photoshop - maintain aspect ratio as default please.
Page described the issue perfectly - 5 years ago:
Page D Oct 3, 2012 8:11 AMIn Photoshop CS6, if using Free Transform to change the size of a newly-made selection, you have to click 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' option every time to maintain the aspect ratio. How annoying is that! Why isn't this 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' option selected by default? Certainly in my case, there are vastly more occasions when I want to maintain the aspect ratio, and so, in my case at least, it would be much more user-friendly to have 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' selected, by default. Or, alternatively, why isn't there an option in Preferences to either have 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' automatically selected, or unselected, by default, leaving the user to toggle from this starting position, if they want? I know you can hold 'Shift' while resizing, but for the vast majority of the time, I would like to maintain aspect ratio and it would be helpful to have either this option selected by default, or have control in Preferences for the default setting.
Page described the issue perfectly - 5 years ago:
Page D Oct 3, 2012 8:11 AMIn Photoshop CS6, if using Free Transform to change the size of a newly-made selection, you have to click 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' option every time to maintain the aspect ratio. How annoying is that! Why isn't this 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' option selected by default? Certainly in my case, there are vastly more occasions when I want to maintain the aspect ratio, and so, in my case at least, it would be much more user-friendly to have 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' selected, by default. Or, alternatively, why isn't there an option in Preferences to either have 'Maintain Aspect Ratio' automatically selected, or unselected, by default, leaving the user to toggle from this starting position, if they want? I know you can hold 'Shift' while resizing, but for the vast majority of the time, I would like to maintain aspect ratio and it would be helpful to have either this option selected by default, or have control in Preferences for the default setting.
Adobe has the wrong philosophy, not any more customer-oriented... So many old bugs or missing improvements, they could put a programmer to solve all this within 6 months. I get from several forums frustrated feedbacks. I don't see any sense in spending much time on posting new ideas...
(Edited)
You said exactly the same concept I would love Adobe followed, that I mentioned in other words on this and other forum. All bugs in first instance before releasing new Photoshop (even if that had to take 2 - 3 years), and only then new implementations, while if new bug found then taken care of before anything else again!
(Edited)
Hannah Nicollet, Quality Engineer
Hi Everyone,
Thank you for contributing to this discussion. Proportional transform is now the default behavior on Photoshop 20.0 with all but vector graphics. Photoshop 20.0 is available for download today. Please open the Creative Cloud app, download the update and let us know how it goes for you. If you do not see the update immediately, sign in and sign out of the Creative Cloud.
Thank you,
Hannah
Thank you for contributing to this discussion. Proportional transform is now the default behavior on Photoshop 20.0 with all but vector graphics. Photoshop 20.0 is available for download today. Please open the Creative Cloud app, download the update and let us know how it goes for you. If you do not see the update immediately, sign in and sign out of the Creative Cloud.
Thank you,
Hannah
(Edited)
Hallelujah! Thank you for making this change! I'm on my way to China on business--will download the update as soon as it becomes available. Just in time for our new catalog! Thank you Adobe!
Brilliant! Took a while but it'll be a nice fix for an annoying little issue. Thanks Adobe.
Meh, I preferred it the other way. I've been using photoshop for 20 years, I don't think changing default behaviors at version 20 is making your software easier to use.
Some behaviours they were not bugs that were present for so long shouldn't be changed from release to release so drastically ie. without giving choise the method we want to use them - the more we were used to do that other that after end could be more convinient for us.
Personally that one change doesn't matter for me, it's even better, however I have to see it in practise, so maybe not... but there are some other that annoyed me we have nothing to say about:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/digital-imaging-october-max-2018-release-note...
Personally that one change doesn't matter for me, it's even better, however I have to see it in practise, so maybe not... but there are some other that annoyed me we have nothing to say about:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/digital-imaging-october-max-2018-release-note...
I can't stand it, myself. Holding "Shift" while something is selected has always been the universal way to "constrain proportions." It's even how you continue to constrain proportions in other parts of photoshop, like cropping. Now we have to "unlearn" this skill for one item—free transform. Because holding "Shift" there does the OPPOSITE of what it does everywhere else. It "un sets" constrain proportion. Isn't there a way to set this default for Free Transform back to what it was before for those of us who use graphics software as pros and know to hold down "Shift?"
Not only some bugs I waited months were fixed yet, so we have to live with this 'little' change :(
People were waiting YEARS for this fix. Professionals requested it because no pro wants a distorted logo or image by default. Anyway, if you don't like it, you can revert back easily enough:
How do I turn off the new proportional scaling by default behavior while transforming layers?
How do I turn off the new proportional scaling by default behavior while transforming layers?
To revert to the legacy transform behavior, do the following:
- Use Notepad (Windows) or a text editor on Mac OS to create a plain text file (.txt).
- Type the text below in the text file:
TransformProportionalScale 0
- Save the file as "PSUserConfig.txt" to your Photoshop settings folder:
- Windows: [Installation Drive]:\Users\[User Name]\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CC 2019\Adobe Photoshop CC 2019 Settings\
- macOS: //Users/[User Name]/Library/Preferences/Adobe Photoshop CC 2019 Settings/
KY,
Thank you! This is great and just what I needed.
I did see in the thread above—and was somewhat surprised—how people had been asking for this for years, and, I agree, that a logo or image shouldn't be distorted when scaled. But, again, to me, that is why we all know to hold down Shift in this situation.
But there are lots of times where you're scaling a box or a background or something that doesn't have to have the proportions constrained. So, it seemed counter intuitive, to me, to unlearn that Shift trick, especially since it was just for this one Free Transform task.
Either way, it's a moot point, since you have provided me a way to have it the way I like. Now the people who have been waiting for it can do it the new way, and those of us who liked it before can keep it as it was. Win-win for all.
Thanks again!
Thank you! This is great and just what I needed.
I did see in the thread above—and was somewhat surprised—how people had been asking for this for years, and, I agree, that a logo or image shouldn't be distorted when scaled. But, again, to me, that is why we all know to hold down Shift in this situation.
But there are lots of times where you're scaling a box or a background or something that doesn't have to have the proportions constrained. So, it seemed counter intuitive, to me, to unlearn that Shift trick, especially since it was just for this one Free Transform task.
Either way, it's a moot point, since you have provided me a way to have it the way I like. Now the people who have been waiting for it can do it the new way, and those of us who liked it before can keep it as it was. Win-win for all.
Thanks again!
Honestly I saw few times other users suggesting to use PSUserConfig.txt with some content, but that never was something I needed so I forgot about it. It's first time that a can make use of it! Thanks for sharing it. Btw can you tell us how you know what to type in that .txt file?
Ps. still that would be good to have it in preferentions.
Ps. still that would be good to have it in preferentions.
Too bad that is extendable so although I read that earlier I missed the hidden content.
While I do appreciate having this be a default, it feels like a partial fix employed by someone that doesn't fully understand the problem it's fixing.
It should be a preference that you can toggle in settings; not a default behavior whether you like it or not.So you can set it according to your workflow preferences.
Personally, I use Photoshop 90% of the time for my job, and 99% of the time when I scale things I need them to be proportionate.
Holding shift mostly worked, except if I watched the numerical percentage in the top bar I would see that it didn't actually always scale proportionally; unless I toggled the lock before scaling.
With the new version, it's working like I want it to, however if I drag an object from my Adobe Library and I enter a manual number in the field, I still have to toggle the lock to get it to scale both horizontally and vertically. If I drag it from the corner, and ignore the fields, it scales correctly.
It should be a preference that you can toggle in settings; not a default behavior whether you like it or not.So you can set it according to your workflow preferences.
Personally, I use Photoshop 90% of the time for my job, and 99% of the time when I scale things I need them to be proportionate.
Holding shift mostly worked, except if I watched the numerical percentage in the top bar I would see that it didn't actually always scale proportionally; unless I toggled the lock before scaling.
With the new version, it's working like I want it to, however if I drag an object from my Adobe Library and I enter a manual number in the field, I still have to toggle the lock to get it to scale both horizontally and vertically. If I drag it from the corner, and ignore the fields, it scales correctly.
Steve and others that don't like the change ... I don't know what the new behavior is like (I'm still using CS6), but what we were originally looking for is to have proportional scaling by default or locked into memory when using numeric free transform via the toolbar, not when dragging. I'm happy to hear a change has been made. Maybe now I'll upgrade :)
Collin, really?! Then no, it hasn't been fixed. Did someone change the title of this post/idea somewhere along the way? The URL is:
photoshop_numeric_free_transform_maintain_aspect_ratio_button
Which is what we've been asking for.
The title says:
Free Transform - ability to set Maintain Aspect Ratio as default
Hannah/Adobe, please don't mark this topic as implemented and change the title to what it originally was.
photoshop_numeric_free_transform_maintain_aspect_ratio_button
Which is what we've been asking for.
The title says:
Free Transform - ability to set Maintain Aspect Ratio as default
Hannah/Adobe, please don't mark this topic as implemented and change the title to what it originally was.
Hi Hannah!
How can we uncheck this in preferences so that proportional transform would not be a default behavior?
On groups or on texts it proportionally transforms without shift key, but on vector layers, it doesn`t. So this not be an overall behavior in PS, does more harm than good, especially, if we work on PS for years and using shortcut keys became second nature for us.
Can we simply toggle this off in Preferences, please?
How can we uncheck this in preferences so that proportional transform would not be a default behavior?
On groups or on texts it proportionally transforms without shift key, but on vector layers, it doesn`t. So this not be an overall behavior in PS, does more harm than good, especially, if we work on PS for years and using shortcut keys became second nature for us.
Can we simply toggle this off in Preferences, please?
Hello again! :D
I found the FIX on Adobe website:
I found the FIX on Adobe website:
To revert to the legacy transform behavior, do the following:
- Use Notepad (Windows) or a text editor on Mac OS to create a plain text file (.txt).
- Type the text below in the text file:
TransformProportionalScale 0
- Save the file as "PSUserConfig.txt" to your Photoshop settings folder:
- Windows: [Installation Drive]:\Users\[User Name]\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CC 2019\Adobe Photoshop CC 2019 Settings\
- macOS: //Users/[User Name]/Library/Preferences/Adobe Photoshop CC 2019 Settings/
If that default behaviour doesn't behave the same for vector layers so I agree it makes confusion as it's not consitent then. And that one situation you found seems to be bug.
Iulian Art you're my hero! =) Thank you, the fix works!
The solution you found is posted also in the same subtheard, but few posts higher ;)
@Kukurykus the confusion goes even further, because we all are using more than PS from Adobe Suite, so it should be some consistency across all apps, for instance in AI, layers do not transform proportionally.
Moreover, for God`s sake, this menu itself is called "Free Transform" and not "Proportionally Transform" to justify the default lock behavior.
Yet another bug about this: after you engage the "Free Transform" tool on a text, for example, and you unclick the lock aspect ratio icon from toolbar menu, it doesn`t obey the command.
Moreover, for God`s sake, this menu itself is called "Free Transform" and not "Proportionally Transform" to justify the default lock behavior.
Yet another bug about this: after you engage the "Free Transform" tool on a text, for example, and you unclick the lock aspect ratio icon from toolbar menu, it doesn`t obey the command.
(Edited)
You're right, Iulian Art. It's all those things. It messes with the "Shift Constrains Proportions" thing that has been consistent across all graphics software forever. And, like you and others have pointed out, having the constrain proportions be default is not only inconsistent with what we have always known, but it also is inconsistent with the other Adobe apps and within the Photoshop itself in other areas.
Again, the good news is that with that text file, we can get things back to the way they used to be. For those who need this, check out earlier in this thread and you'll see how to set it up how you like it.
As Collin said above, "It should be a preference that you can toggle in settings; not a default behavior whether you like it or not.So you can set it according to your workflow preferences." So, although there is an extra step or two involved beyond just setting it in your preferences through the application itself, at least we can set that preference to our liking.
It's quite amazing how much something small like that can disrupt one's workflow, so it's important to have as must customization to one's work habits as is possible.
Again, the good news is that with that text file, we can get things back to the way they used to be. For those who need this, check out earlier in this thread and you'll see how to set it up how you like it.
As Collin said above, "It should be a preference that you can toggle in settings; not a default behavior whether you like it or not.So you can set it according to your workflow preferences." So, although there is an extra step or two involved beyond just setting it in your preferences through the application itself, at least we can set that preference to our liking.
It's quite amazing how much something small like that can disrupt one's workflow, so it's important to have as must customization to one's work habits as is possible.
You're right, Iulian Art. It's all those things. It messes with the "Shift Constrains Proportions" thing that has been consistent across all graphics software forever. And, like you and others have pointed out, having the constrain proportions be default is not only inconsistent with what we have always known, but it also is inconsistent with the other Adobe apps and within the Photoshop itself in other areas.
Again, the good news is that with that text file, we can get things back to the way they used to be. For those who need this, check out earlier in this thread and you'll see how to set it up how you like it.
As Collin said above, "It should be a preference that you can toggle in settings; not a default behavior whether you like it or not.So you can set it according to your workflow preferences." So, although there is an extra step or two involved beyond just setting it in your preferences through the application itself, at least we can set that preference to our liking.
It's quite amazing how much something small like that can disrupt one's workflow, so it's important to have as must customization to one's work habits as is possible.
Again, the good news is that with that text file, we can get things back to the way they used to be. For those who need this, check out earlier in this thread and you'll see how to set it up how you like it.
As Collin said above, "It should be a preference that you can toggle in settings; not a default behavior whether you like it or not.So you can set it according to your workflow preferences." So, although there is an extra step or two involved beyond just setting it in your preferences through the application itself, at least we can set that preference to our liking.
It's quite amazing how much something small like that can disrupt one's workflow, so it's important to have as must customization to one's work habits as is possible.
Perhaps they are going to do same behaviour throughout all applications in their new releases. But like you and some others I don't like it, the more you found it's inconsistent for vector layers and now also for text layer.
That's not everything I found more to our collection of bugs that shows it works old way in more cases than current one. When you add a path item and make 'Free Transorm Path', it's going to behave like in previous release.
So even if people get used for new way of 'Proportional Transform' it's still confusing, as you never can't remember when to use one and when second shift way to get the same result within the same application for the same behaviour, just on different objects!
The name as you pointed makes it even worse to understand. If that is 'Proportional Transform' why to keep the old name 'Free Transform'.
Nothing changed from last relese about one thing - they test on us, unconsisious beta users new stuff. That's really bad. They should test it on their own instead of making the bad name of company known for unprofessional aproach to users.
That's not everything I found more to our collection of bugs that shows it works old way in more cases than current one. When you add a path item and make 'Free Transorm Path', it's going to behave like in previous release.
So even if people get used for new way of 'Proportional Transform' it's still confusing, as you never can't remember when to use one and when second shift way to get the same result within the same application for the same behaviour, just on different objects!
The name as you pointed makes it even worse to understand. If that is 'Proportional Transform' why to keep the old name 'Free Transform'.
Nothing changed from last relese about one thing - they test on us, unconsisious beta users new stuff. That's really bad. They should test it on their own instead of making the bad name of company known for unprofessional aproach to users.
(Edited)
how can i come back to the "legacy" transform?
Not wvrione want "proportional transform as a default behavior"
it should just use the last used... not have a default
Not wvrione want "proportional transform as a default behavior"
it should just use the last used... not have a default
It's unbelievable how this got past QA. Why would you change a default that has been in place 20+ years? This needs a toggle, at the very least a warning.
Disappointing that my money goes towards decisions like this.
Disappointing that my money goes towards decisions like this.
Hi Tim and Anderson,
for us it's very useful, despite it's not perfect executed for everybodies needs (I have read about the missing toggle option and not consistent behaviour for EPS). When the transform just would remember and keeps the state, if "proportionally" is switched on or off, and the shift key temporarily toggles the current state, in my opinion it would be good.
But to ask, "why things were changed after 20+ years" really can't be the right question!
Any kind of improvement means changing things, maybe sometimes with trial & error, and if you wish everything like 20 years ago, I wish you good luck with Photoshop 2.0.
It would be probably smart, when Adobe invites different beta-testers. I wonder myself, how different people can see the realization of a "small improvement" ;-)
And Tim, the answer is already twice given above, with a simple script... please read before posting.
for us it's very useful, despite it's not perfect executed for everybodies needs (I have read about the missing toggle option and not consistent behaviour for EPS). When the transform just would remember and keeps the state, if "proportionally" is switched on or off, and the shift key temporarily toggles the current state, in my opinion it would be good.
But to ask, "why things were changed after 20+ years" really can't be the right question!
Any kind of improvement means changing things, maybe sometimes with trial & error, and if you wish everything like 20 years ago, I wish you good luck with Photoshop 2.0.
It would be probably smart, when Adobe invites different beta-testers. I wonder myself, how different people can see the realization of a "small improvement" ;-)
And Tim, the answer is already twice given above, with a simple script... please read before posting.
(Edited)
You can't come back to legacy transform other way than doing it by PSUserConfig.txt file you can read in earlier posts how to use it. What's bad you have then to relaunch Photoshop.
Hannah - Did you guys not test this? Try this -
1) Import a logo - percentages are not equal - you have to hit the lock button
2) Do something on another layer, then go back to adjust the logo - percentages are not equal - you have to hit the lock button again
...and so on.
Having to hit that button over and over again was the major complaint, and issue that we want resolved.
Reversing the dragging functionality is illogical. You could have made corners the proportional drag and the sides and top non-proportional, which is another standard I’ve used, but reversing it is annoying to most of your users.
So back to the drawing board, I think this is even worse than it was to begin with.
Edit - right after I did the above test the Photoshop tools would not allow me to do anything, so I had to relaunch - now it *seems* to be holding the proportion selection.
1) Import a logo - percentages are not equal - you have to hit the lock button
2) Do something on another layer, then go back to adjust the logo - percentages are not equal - you have to hit the lock button again
...and so on.
Having to hit that button over and over again was the major complaint, and issue that we want resolved.
Reversing the dragging functionality is illogical. You could have made corners the proportional drag and the sides and top non-proportional, which is another standard I’ve used, but reversing it is annoying to most of your users.
So back to the drawing board, I think this is even worse than it was to begin with.
Edit - right after I did the above test the Photoshop tools would not allow me to do anything, so I had to relaunch - now it *seems* to be holding the proportion selection.
(Edited)
IAH1 you're completely missing the point. Of course I can mess around with a config file.
It doesn't change the fact that the majority of users are negatively affected by this change. They should have added a toggle. They should have done a better job at notifying people. It's that simple. Not sure what you're failing to understand here. Please read before posting.
It doesn't change the fact that the majority of users are negatively affected by this change. They should have added a toggle. They should have done a better job at notifying people. It's that simple. Not sure what you're failing to understand here. Please read before posting.
(Edited)
Why should scaling vector graphics be different than raster elements? And why didn't you just implement the toggle as we requested? This is really not what we asked for, but at least a step in the right direction.
I don't really agree with the many who think that shift needs to be held down to maintain aspect ratio just because that's what we've always done. I have used PS since version 1 and I believe I can break that habit and feel good about freeing up the finger that holds down the shift key. But for those that feel strongly about it, the toggle would have been the answer for everyone! Was the toggle just too hard to code? What was the thinking on this?
But why leave vector objects out of the new behavior? I scale a lot of vector objects, so different behaviors for different objects will be a problem. I will thank you though for saving me from clicking on the "maintain aspect ratio" icon way less! I am also thankful that you included smart objects in the new behavior, that will save me a LOT of time!
I do agree with the suggestion of the corner dragging being proportional and the sides/tops being non-proportional. That somehow seems logical to me. People would figure that out in short order without any instruction. That would solve the toggle and make most people happy I believe.
Thanks for finally addressing this issue! It's very, very close to solved, and half solved is much better than not solved at all!
I don't really agree with the many who think that shift needs to be held down to maintain aspect ratio just because that's what we've always done. I have used PS since version 1 and I believe I can break that habit and feel good about freeing up the finger that holds down the shift key. But for those that feel strongly about it, the toggle would have been the answer for everyone! Was the toggle just too hard to code? What was the thinking on this?
But why leave vector objects out of the new behavior? I scale a lot of vector objects, so different behaviors for different objects will be a problem. I will thank you though for saving me from clicking on the "maintain aspect ratio" icon way less! I am also thankful that you included smart objects in the new behavior, that will save me a LOT of time!
I do agree with the suggestion of the corner dragging being proportional and the sides/tops being non-proportional. That somehow seems logical to me. People would figure that out in short order without any instruction. That would solve the toggle and make most people happy I believe.
Thanks for finally addressing this issue! It's very, very close to solved, and half solved is much better than not solved at all!
I personally preferred the traditional way of holding shift to lock proportions across the board, it was consistent and what we've been doing since the very beginning. I'm pretty confident in saying that many of us professionals feel this way. It's also a universal standard across many programs from many different developers, why change this?
However I'm here to point out that this behavior is currently very inconsistent. Smart Objects also still transforms traditionally along with the vector objects you mentioned, requiring the shift to lock proportions. Make it one way or another, this is just messy and confused right now.
It might be trivial to hobbyist but workflow efficiency and consistency is everything for us professionals. This change has amateur written all over it, on both the implementation and the reason behind it.
However I'm here to point out that this behavior is currently very inconsistent. Smart Objects also still transforms traditionally along with the vector objects you mentioned, requiring the shift to lock proportions. Make it one way or another, this is just messy and confused right now.
It might be trivial to hobbyist but workflow efficiency and consistency is everything for us professionals. This change has amateur written all over it, on both the implementation and the reason behind it.
(Edited)
I'm one of the people who requested this, but the implementation is shoddy and hard to fathom. I had assumed that Adobe would implement it either with a toggle to set your preference or with a "last used" manner, similar to masks where, if you set the rectangular marquee as additive it stays that way unless you change it.
And I agree... it needs to be consistent behaviour across all aspects of the program. If don't need to hold shift to lock proportions, then I should NEVER require shift to lock proportions. What Adobe has provided seems like something they just stuck in at the last minute.
I should say that the reason I asked for this change is because 99% of the time I want the proportions locked and losing the need to press the shift key, while minor, would make my process faster and require less thought. Now it requires more thought as I have to remember that for this object I don't need to hold down the shift, but for this other one I do. Even though I asked for this change I will be patching the config file to ensure the program has consistency throughout.
Let's try this one again, Adobe. This update doesn't satisfy anyone.
And I agree... it needs to be consistent behaviour across all aspects of the program. If don't need to hold shift to lock proportions, then I should NEVER require shift to lock proportions. What Adobe has provided seems like something they just stuck in at the last minute.
I should say that the reason I asked for this change is because 99% of the time I want the proportions locked and losing the need to press the shift key, while minor, would make my process faster and require less thought. Now it requires more thought as I have to remember that for this object I don't need to hold down the shift, but for this other one I do. Even though I asked for this change I will be patching the config file to ensure the program has consistency throughout.
Let's try this one again, Adobe. This update doesn't satisfy anyone.
(Edited)
Nobody wanted this. Give us the ability to toggle. Problem solved.
That's what Rocky suggested in the first place when they made the request...
"...it would be nice when "free transforming" a layer that the "maintain aspect ratio" lock button would maintain the previous setting..."
Turn it on, PS it remembers, turn it off, PS remembers. Easy. What's not to like?
But as usual Adobe, waits ages to do anything - 7 years!? - and then implements the worst of the numerous possible ways of delivering a feature that everyone could use as per their personal preferences.
"...it would be nice when "free transforming" a layer that the "maintain aspect ratio" lock button would maintain the previous setting..."
Turn it on, PS it remembers, turn it off, PS remembers. Easy. What's not to like?
But as usual Adobe, waits ages to do anything - 7 years!? - and then implements the worst of the numerous possible ways of delivering a feature that everyone could use as per their personal preferences.
Loll - now we're going to wait next 7 years they restore original behaviour - since that seems to be better than anything one wished to have (by just a little tweak)! Perhaps that was better to ask in this case of too many, to get (un)predictably less :D
(Edited)
Please please give the user the ability to turn this on or off in preferences. The change to default on is totally against what I want. The standard in graphics used to be shift for contain otherwise it is free from constraint. Please follow well established conventions. The way it has been reset is counter intuitive for experienced professionals.
(Edited)
Argggh! It's the same mess with the Skew tool. I use skew and Transform A LOT. Please revert to standard constrain (SHIFT to constrain, Option to 'counter constrain' etc)
Me too!
I was Ok staying with Photoshop and paying the subscription but with changes like this I will be considering my options.
Now in Transform holding option constrains the aspect ratio, Who the heck decided to change this convention?? It's nuts and against everything we've learned. PLEASE REVERT to SHIFT constrains. PLEASE!!!!!!
It's been a few months now that this feature is implemented but I can not get used to this new mode by default. My brain has been conditioned for years to use the shift key, this is so frustrating.
Plus, you still have to use shift to transform vector shapes proportionally and not for the rest, that is so inconsistant... Please offer a setting to revert back to previous behaviour.
Plus, you still have to use shift to transform vector shapes proportionally and not for the rest, that is so inconsistant... Please offer a setting to revert back to previous behaviour.
Nicolas
With the 20.0.5 update, there is now a user facing preference under Preferences > General... and check "Use Legacy Free Transform"
https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/fixed-issues.html
With the 20.0.5 update, there is now a user facing preference under Preferences > General... and check "Use Legacy Free Transform"
https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/fixed-issues.html
Still using 20.0.4
It's time for an upgrade ... :-)
Thanks @Rosa
It's time for an upgrade ... :-)
Thanks @Rosa
You're very welcome :)
Please remove this as the *Default* behavior.
For years, every single user has muscle memory ingrained of using shift for maintaining aspect ratio. If you are going to change that, at least allow for an option to revert it as now it is very frustrating.
Also Please be CONSISTENT:
- If you scale an image, the default behavior is to maintain dimensions (shift to free transform)
- If you scale a shape, the default behavior is free transform (shift to maintain dimensions)
How does that make sense? How is that useable and not confusing?
Every. Single. Other. Adobe program uses the old schema of default being to free transform and using shift to maintain dimensions. Why is Photoshop any different?
Please add a way to turn this off!
For years, every single user has muscle memory ingrained of using shift for maintaining aspect ratio. If you are going to change that, at least allow for an option to revert it as now it is very frustrating.
Also Please be CONSISTENT:
- If you scale an image, the default behavior is to maintain dimensions (shift to free transform)
- If you scale a shape, the default behavior is free transform (shift to maintain dimensions)
How does that make sense? How is that useable and not confusing?
Every. Single. Other. Adobe program uses the old schema of default being to free transform and using shift to maintain dimensions. Why is Photoshop any different?
Please add a way to turn this off!
Let's not complain more, or someone who decided that will lose his job ;)
No employee decided, users voted for the feature and by god it must be implemented, no matter how bad a feature request turns out to be.
Before the creative cloud and user voting, no feature change this ridiculous would have been done.
How much time and energy did adobe put into this, when real features could have added or bugs fixed.
Only after users started complaining en masse did adobe issue a workaround to return the old default behavior and I do thank adobe for doing that.
Before the creative cloud and user voting, no feature change this ridiculous would have been done.
How much time and energy did adobe put into this, when real features could have added or bugs fixed.
Only after users started complaining en masse did adobe issue a workaround to return the old default behavior and I do thank adobe for doing that.
(Edited)
Users voted on an idea that was merged into a completely different thing.
The original (as seen in the URL) was to have the lock on in the toolbar ON by default. For example, if I want to shrink several images consistently by 17.45% I have to click the lock every damn time. The original topic had nothing to do with resizing by dragging.
Look at the URL:
photoshop_numeric_free_transform_maintain_aspect_ratio_button
But the title is:
Free Transform - ability to set Maintain Aspect Ratio as default
:(
The original (as seen in the URL) was to have the lock on in the toolbar ON by default. For example, if I want to shrink several images consistently by 17.45% I have to click the lock every damn time. The original topic had nothing to do with resizing by dragging.
Look at the URL:
photoshop_numeric_free_transform_maintain_aspect_ratio_button
But the title is:
Free Transform - ability to set Maintain Aspect Ratio as default
:(
Hey, Suzanne Hemphill,
With respect to this...
<<< I don't really agree with the many who think that shift needs to be held down to maintain aspect ratio just because that's what we've always done. >>>>
We're certainly cool to "agree to disagree" on this or any topic. But I think the concern goes beyond the idea that it's "what we've always done." True, we have always done it, and it will be a pain to break the habit, but, to me, that's not the crux of it. See below for more...
<<< I have used PS since version 1 and I believe I can break that habit and feel good about freeing up the finger that holds down the shift key. >>>>
For my money—and, again, this is just for the sake of discussion, not to say you're wrong—I thought holding down Shift was SUCH an easy thing that it kind of tried to "fix" a problem that already had a solution to begin with. I mean, when we type, we hit Shift to get a capital letter in. Adding a modifier key to any task doesn't really slow you down. I am actually shocked that so many people were looking for a way to have it default to being "constrained." I have used Photoshop for 20 years and I don't think I ever once went to the toolbar to toggle that checkbox on or off regardless of which way I wanted to do it. I was taught to work with my left hand over by the Shift/Command/Option/Control keys, and my right hand on the mouse or trackpad, and just leaning on shift when I dragged was second nature. Maybe others work in other ways.
But, more importantly, here's the bigger thing... even if we were to relearn the muscle memory, the problem is, we'd have conflicting muscle memory because if you use Indesign, Illustrator, other parts of Photoshop, Quark (if you use that), or basically any program remotely related to graphics, you'd still have to use that same Shift thing... so you couldn't really unlearn it, because it's not consistent across the board. It's not even consistent within Photoshop. (And, I do see that you did address the lack of consistency in your own post, too.)
To me, holding Shift to constrain proportions isn't even a "Photoshop Thing." It's a convention across basically all programs. It's a global thing. But...
<<<< But for those that feel strongly about it, the toggle would have been the answer for everyone! >>>>
Right. That would have been a home run, I think, no matter how you like to work.
I do like that there is a solution with the PSUserConfig.txt thing.
<<< I do agree with the suggestion of the corner dragging being proportional and the sides/tops being non-proportional. That somehow seems logical to me. >>>
The only thing I see here as a problem is that sometimes you need to arbitrarily scale by eye and it would be an extra step to have to first drag up on the top, un-click, and then re-click and drag to the side, and then possibly more steps and back and forth if you realize after seeing the look that you need to revisit the vertical scale again. Having the corners optionally be free transform (without holding Shift) allows you to mess with the vertical and horizontal scaling together in one fell swoop.
I appreciate other perspectives on this, so thanks for sharing!
With respect to this...
<<< I don't really agree with the many who think that shift needs to be held down to maintain aspect ratio just because that's what we've always done. >>>>
We're certainly cool to "agree to disagree" on this or any topic. But I think the concern goes beyond the idea that it's "what we've always done." True, we have always done it, and it will be a pain to break the habit, but, to me, that's not the crux of it. See below for more...
<<< I have used PS since version 1 and I believe I can break that habit and feel good about freeing up the finger that holds down the shift key. >>>>
For my money—and, again, this is just for the sake of discussion, not to say you're wrong—I thought holding down Shift was SUCH an easy thing that it kind of tried to "fix" a problem that already had a solution to begin with. I mean, when we type, we hit Shift to get a capital letter in. Adding a modifier key to any task doesn't really slow you down. I am actually shocked that so many people were looking for a way to have it default to being "constrained." I have used Photoshop for 20 years and I don't think I ever once went to the toolbar to toggle that checkbox on or off regardless of which way I wanted to do it. I was taught to work with my left hand over by the Shift/Command/Option/Control keys, and my right hand on the mouse or trackpad, and just leaning on shift when I dragged was second nature. Maybe others work in other ways.
But, more importantly, here's the bigger thing... even if we were to relearn the muscle memory, the problem is, we'd have conflicting muscle memory because if you use Indesign, Illustrator, other parts of Photoshop, Quark (if you use that), or basically any program remotely related to graphics, you'd still have to use that same Shift thing... so you couldn't really unlearn it, because it's not consistent across the board. It's not even consistent within Photoshop. (And, I do see that you did address the lack of consistency in your own post, too.)
To me, holding Shift to constrain proportions isn't even a "Photoshop Thing." It's a convention across basically all programs. It's a global thing. But...
<<<< But for those that feel strongly about it, the toggle would have been the answer for everyone! >>>>
Right. That would have been a home run, I think, no matter how you like to work.
I do like that there is a solution with the PSUserConfig.txt thing.
<<< I do agree with the suggestion of the corner dragging being proportional and the sides/tops being non-proportional. That somehow seems logical to me. >>>
The only thing I see here as a problem is that sometimes you need to arbitrarily scale by eye and it would be an extra step to have to first drag up on the top, un-click, and then re-click and drag to the side, and then possibly more steps and back and forth if you realize after seeing the look that you need to revisit the vertical scale again. Having the corners optionally be free transform (without holding Shift) allows you to mess with the vertical and horizontal scaling together in one fell swoop.
I appreciate other perspectives on this, so thanks for sharing!
I can certainly agree with you on the shift key, as I too constantly hover over the Shift/Command/Option/Control keys after 20+ years of PS use.
The main reason I wanted the toggle is because I use the numeric entry for 90% of my scaling. And that's mainly because when using Free Transform, most of the time the numbers reflect that the art is slightly off by .1 or .2% ALWAYS, so that's why I am constantly clicking the "maintain aspect ratio" button. The toggle would save a lot of time for everyone. It was the only request, not changing the basic behavior that is 20+ years old.
I always prefer a home run to a single, don't you? ;-)
The main reason I wanted the toggle is because I use the numeric entry for 90% of my scaling. And that's mainly because when using Free Transform, most of the time the numbers reflect that the art is slightly off by .1 or .2% ALWAYS, so that's why I am constantly clicking the "maintain aspect ratio" button. The toggle would save a lot of time for everyone. It was the only request, not changing the basic behavior that is 20+ years old.
I always prefer a home run to a single, don't you? ;-)
Exactly this. They could have just fixed the problem with transform options not saving instead of making such a disruptive change.
(Edited)
I agree with your answer completely, however it was replied in not subtheard it belongs too ;)
Never ever will I update PS! How is this possible, I can't even find the constrain proportion button... how do I transform now? is there a way to roll back?
Hannah Nicollet, Quality Engineer
Hi Dragos,
Sorry for the frustration. Since today people expect that grabbing the corner of a window will transform it to scale, this is now the default. The attempt was to make it more intuitive. So now, constrained transform is simply transform (Cmd or Ctrl T). Now free transform is invoked with the shift key. You can still hold the option key to center.
If you would like to change it back, here are instructions.
Thanks,
Hannah
Sorry for the frustration. Since today people expect that grabbing the corner of a window will transform it to scale, this is now the default. The attempt was to make it more intuitive. So now, constrained transform is simply transform (Cmd or Ctrl T). Now free transform is invoked with the shift key. You can still hold the option key to center.
If you would like to change it back, here are instructions.
Thanks,
Hannah
Hi Hannah,
it is important to understand the difference between implementing an idea with an overall workflow check – or just changing a small detail without check and without options and without consistence. (I personally still weren't able to update, so I can just read the comments).
From any improvement I expect to have more options (checkboxes for example!) and it must be consistent: Must work for numeric values, smart objects and remember the last state...
I think, you really need to ask experienced users as Beta-testers, to develope and improve.
The inconsistency is not the first time a problem:
For example an Alt-click at the layer panel or channel panel at the "new" icon, when creating new layer or new channel means to open the options. But the same Alt-click at the layer compositions means the opposite and when I click without Alt it then opens the options. To me it's confusing every day. Aand so I wonder if no developer knows the "full" software, it just seems that developers only overlook their own small part without daily using all functions.
it is important to understand the difference between implementing an idea with an overall workflow check – or just changing a small detail without check and without options and without consistence. (I personally still weren't able to update, so I can just read the comments).
From any improvement I expect to have more options (checkboxes for example!) and it must be consistent: Must work for numeric values, smart objects and remember the last state...
I think, you really need to ask experienced users as Beta-testers, to develope and improve.
The inconsistency is not the first time a problem:
For example an Alt-click at the layer panel or channel panel at the "new" icon, when creating new layer or new channel means to open the options. But the same Alt-click at the layer compositions means the opposite and when I click without Alt it then opens the options. To me it's confusing every day. Aand so I wonder if no developer knows the "full" software, it just seems that developers only overlook their own small part without daily using all functions.
(Edited)
You may also read posts from last few days to get answer even more than once ;)
It looks like engineers working for Adobe don't test and compare anything, just follow directives without arguing, or maybe each time there are changes Adobe hires new programmers team that can do things as continuation of that someone made originaly. Something is bad-thought as in company I work for such oversights are unacceptable.
(Edited)
At the very least, the workaround text file trick works out well and I
can get my work done without having to deal with this big step
backwards.
For others that come into this thread, here is the text content of that image so you can copy and paste what has worked for me. Hopefully the formatting will not mess up the text.
TransformProportionalScale 0
PSUserConfig.txt
For others that come into this thread, here is the text content of that image so you can copy and paste what has worked for me. Hopefully the formatting will not mess up the text.
TransformProportionalScale 0
PSUserConfig.txt
for SEO purposes - Here is the fix for photoshop scale proportional ratio bug
ABSOLUTELY Patrick.
Please listen ADOBE!
Please listen ADOBE!
Ugh, I hate this new behavior. It doesn't seem to be working correctly for me. Whether that chain icon is clicked or not, it maintains the aspect ratio. It used to work, with the old Photoshop. And even if it did work correctly, what a pain. Make it sticky, please.
I use that chain only when I manually enter a value, then scroll with mouse to increase it. So I'd like it was remembered or chosen as option, but not always pressed that each time you transfrom it is already on. It was sufficient to just do what Rocky Bomgaars asked 7 years ago! Really weird they let us wait so long, and when finally it's incorporated it does not work the way 'we' requested it :(
(Edited)
Yes! Make it sticky at least or put an option to select preferred default behavior in the preferences. The way it works now is really stupid and unhelpful. It doesn't make any sense to change a basic feature like this that's been the same for 15 years because brand new users think it should work the way they want it to.
Bug. Maintain aspect ratio constrain link on the toolbar does not work in cc 2019.
* Need to look at this bug also with the constrain link -
When you un-check the Maintain aspect ratio constrain link on the toolbar and then use transform it still maintains aspect ratio. . . un-checking the link should disable maintain aspect ratio shouldn't it? Well it doesn't.
Also shift key + transform disables Maintain aspect ratio but doesn't correspond with the constrain link on the tool bar.
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/constrained-resize-ps-cc-20?topic-reply-list%...
* Need to look at this bug also with the constrain link -
When you un-check the Maintain aspect ratio constrain link on the toolbar and then use transform it still maintains aspect ratio. . . un-checking the link should disable maintain aspect ratio shouldn't it? Well it doesn't.
Also shift key + transform disables Maintain aspect ratio but doesn't correspond with the constrain link on the tool bar.
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/constrained-resize-ps-cc-20?topic-reply-list%...
Meanwhile it must be oviously, that it is buggy and inconsistent. And I can not imagine, that Adobe isn't already trying to fix this. Or am I wrong??
It would be just great – if not better to say – "intelligent", if they would ask betatesters from this forum for opinion and check. It seems there is no developer with vast overview, maybe they always have a special field in comparison to experienced users... at least it's my explanation to this. And I am still working with CC 2018...
It would be just great – if not better to say – "intelligent", if they would ask betatesters from this forum for opinion and check. It seems there is no developer with vast overview, maybe they always have a special field in comparison to experienced users... at least it's my explanation to this. And I am still working with CC 2018...
the new behavior is not consistent!!!! you still need to hold shift for creating shapes, - also holding alt to expand outwards equally is now broken. is there a way to turn off this new behavior?
yea. uninstall and reinstall the previous version. that's what I did. This has probably been the most amateur update I can remember.
There's solution in previous posts of this theard that should work for you if you want to keep v20.
(Edited)
That already started with CC 2018, now it's just worse continuation of lame releases.
How do you uninstall CC2019 and revert to CC 2018?
Use Adobe Creative Cloud application. There you can (un)instal certain version.
(Edited)
It's really not very obvious. On the right across from your version of CC2019 in the Creative Cloud app's Apps section, click on the disclosure triangle next to Open (or Update), and choose manage. You don't need to uninstall 2019 to install 2018 (though you can if you like). But that's where you can both choose to uninstall AND choose Other Versions, where you can reinstall 2018.
W the actual F, Adobe? I updated my CC like a good little boy and now I have this cracked-out scaling nonsense?
You mentioned the Undo changes on startup but not this? I don't even have words, I'm so pissed off about this right now, especially since I'm in the middle of a crazy last-minute deadline (communications designer, news fell into our lap this morning).
You mentioned the Undo changes on startup but not this? I don't even have words, I'm so pissed off about this right now, especially since I'm in the middle of a crazy last-minute deadline (communications designer, news fell into our lap this morning).
Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging
eartho, Champion
Jeff, just a heads-up that transform/distort now requires the shift key to properly distort. I imagine that for 99% of the users, contrstrain distort is not what's wanted when invoking distort.
holy cow -- its even worse than I thought. Sometimes I like to stretch part of an image using the rectangular marquee tool when the image is just a TAD soo small - so Ill stretch it to the left, or up, or something like that. one direction. IT TRIES TO MAINTAIN ASPECT RATIO EVEN WHEN IM TRYING TO JUST STRETCH IN ONE DIRECTION!!!!!!!!
im reverting. this is crazy.
im reverting. this is crazy.
(Edited)
eartho, Champion
Oh, just wait until you try and transform/distort!
it just doesn't make any sense - the only place this should have been a default behavior - is when you grab a CORNER. If i grab a side transform point... why would I want the other sides to scale too!
eartho, Champion
yeah, it's kind of a big, giant trainwreck.
I agree! Wait until you try transform/distort. . . that's my worst nightmare!
Ok, is it not done just holding the shift key?
I'd like to answer to you, but I just uninstalled Ps 19. I heard though there's some new logic in that.
(Edited)
Marking this as "Implemented" is an insult. What was implemented was nothing like the above request, but a slipshod afterthought that nobody asked for. A muscle-memory challenging, workflow-interrupting, inconsistent and clumsy UX disaster.
And give us more room to rotate without accidentally committing!
And give us more room to rotate without accidentally committing!
(Edited)
This is seriously screwed up. I think there's a memory issue. After using Photoshop for awhile, free transform no longer works, even if you unclick the chain icon. It works for awhile if I restart Photoshop, but eventually stops working. I have 64 Gb of RAM and never had a problem with the older version of Photoshop.
This version is pretty much unusable for me, unless I want to keep restarting Photoshop, which is a pain if I have several images open at once.
This version is pretty much unusable for me, unless I want to keep restarting Photoshop, which is a pain if I have several images open at once.
this new update is driving me absolutely insane. 10min to figure out how to figure out how to revert to the old undo system, draw for 2 min, 15min to google why my brush is lagging, turn off ruler and draw for 5 min, 30min trying to figure out what the hell happened to the transform function. How many more more surprises are gonna trip me up? I've never had to actually look at the updated features to preform basic functions in PS. I do NOT want to have to relearn the program every time you decide to roll out an update. :/ I'm trying to get things done and it's set me back at least an hour by this point. I am so close to reverting back to the 2018 version, I don't want to learn new habits only for you to change the settings again.
I agree with you, but it's their program and they don't have to listen to us about anything. You may stop paying for this product and find other one, because while you purchasing it you're accepting the terms of subscription, so any changes they don't ask us whether we like or directly inform of before another release.
They know what they want us to use, so our suggestions with their model of business are pointless.
They know what they want us to use, so our suggestions with their model of business are pointless.
(Edited)
Most of the time they try to balance the old with the new through legacy settings. This time, for whatever reason, they didn't. And I'm this close to re-learning, except for the change being so inconsistent with everything else.
I can remember a time ages ago when they switched places between kbsc for moving from one brush to another in the brushes panel, and making the brush larger or smaller. I remember because every designer and retoucher I knew was screaming murder about it. How many people actually are still thrown off by what's going to happen when they hit the bracket keys with an active brush tool? In fact, how many even know that you can still use the <> keys to step through a set of brushes without clicking on them in the Brushes panel because they only changed this the one time? That change goes back to PS 6, maybe 7?
That's the kind of history they go by. That people do relearn, do forget some changes they've made in the long history of PS. But back then, there was no way to make the change and let people choose a legacy option or to rewire their kbsc. Now there is, so other than just not wanting to support the legacy options, I have no clue why something this fundamental didn't come with any option, apart from asking—is every change going to have to come with a legacy option?
The click to commit text and transform didn't come with an option, either. I think I can relearn how to transform proportionally or not—once (if?) they make it consistent through PS AND the other Adobe apps, but I'm not sure I am ever going to like having to pay close attention to the invisible boundaries for click almost anywhere to commit or wait for a render, then undo, then redo something with several transform steps in it. I try to use SOs to help, but that does balloon file size and can slow people down a lot with other issues. However. . . not my call.
But since they've decided to change the use of Shift with transform, I suspect it will remain changed. I keep reminding myself that humans are nothing if not adaptable. Yes, I'm trying to cheer me on while I struggle. Reminding myself we've been here before and survived. LOL
And I'm pretty familiar with my options outside of Adobe. For the near-term, anyway, I'm spending most of my time here so I don't get just as upset by finding I can't do this, can't adjust to that, in the other apps. I'll use an earlier version of PS when something flat out is broken, or was never updated to work in the latest version. But I'm probably not doing myself any favors to not start relearning Shift with Transform now, not if I mean to keep using newer versions of PS, and for now, I'm staying with the app that does mostly do the things I want to do.
I can remember a time ages ago when they switched places between kbsc for moving from one brush to another in the brushes panel, and making the brush larger or smaller. I remember because every designer and retoucher I knew was screaming murder about it. How many people actually are still thrown off by what's going to happen when they hit the bracket keys with an active brush tool? In fact, how many even know that you can still use the <> keys to step through a set of brushes without clicking on them in the Brushes panel because they only changed this the one time? That change goes back to PS 6, maybe 7?
That's the kind of history they go by. That people do relearn, do forget some changes they've made in the long history of PS. But back then, there was no way to make the change and let people choose a legacy option or to rewire their kbsc. Now there is, so other than just not wanting to support the legacy options, I have no clue why something this fundamental didn't come with any option, apart from asking—is every change going to have to come with a legacy option?
The click to commit text and transform didn't come with an option, either. I think I can relearn how to transform proportionally or not—once (if?) they make it consistent through PS AND the other Adobe apps, but I'm not sure I am ever going to like having to pay close attention to the invisible boundaries for click almost anywhere to commit or wait for a render, then undo, then redo something with several transform steps in it. I try to use SOs to help, but that does balloon file size and can slow people down a lot with other issues. However. . . not my call.
But since they've decided to change the use of Shift with transform, I suspect it will remain changed. I keep reminding myself that humans are nothing if not adaptable. Yes, I'm trying to cheer me on while I struggle. Reminding myself we've been here before and survived. LOL
And I'm pretty familiar with my options outside of Adobe. For the near-term, anyway, I'm spending most of my time here so I don't get just as upset by finding I can't do this, can't adjust to that, in the other apps. I'll use an earlier version of PS when something flat out is broken, or was never updated to work in the latest version. But I'm probably not doing myself any favors to not start relearning Shift with Transform now, not if I mean to keep using newer versions of PS, and for now, I'm staying with the app that does mostly do the things I want to do.
(Edited)
TransformProportionalScale 0 is working great for me. It's returned Photosthop to the old behavior, and more importantly, eliminated the memory problem (or whatever it was that caused transform to work improperly if Photoshop had been open too long).
It would be nice if it was a setting in preferences, rather than having make a config file, but I can live with this.
It would be nice if it was a setting in preferences, rather than having make a config file, but I can live with this.
So what <> keys were doing originally in early Ps releases, maybe in/decreasing size of Brushes that users got mad at decision of Adobe to change it to current behaviour?
"invisible boundries" - that is the problem. Normally I like working on something without thinking how I use avialable tools for, as all I do is coded deeply in my mind, but with current changes I have to be aware not only on project's concept but also to not spoil something by using that improperly.
"invisible boundries" - that is the problem. Normally I like working on something without thinking how I use avialable tools for, as all I do is coded deeply in my mind, but with current changes I have to be aware not only on project's concept but also to not spoil something by using that improperly.
(Edited)
The <> (period, comma) keys made the brush larger/smaller, and the [] keys moved ahead and back in the group of brushes, according to the designers who were hopping mad. I didn't start using PS until PS5—so very much a Jill come lately. Back then, I only used brushes for masking and cloning, was still too new to have a need to memorize that many kbsc, so I didn't find the change a problem. <g> Boy did I get an earful about Adobe getting too big for its britches, though.
Will Adobe (Photoshop) go the way of (the old) Quark Express?
Say something more what you mean...
I was one of the people requesting and championing this change many years ago.
I can't believe how such a simple request could be implemented so poorly and so unintuitively - and in my view wrongly. Seriously - did nobody test it? They couldn't have made it more confusing had they tried. It's no wonder nobody likes it.
Thank god I don't need to use Photoshop as my daily design tool anymore.
I can't believe how such a simple request could be implemented so poorly and so unintuitively - and in my view wrongly. Seriously - did nobody test it? They couldn't have made it more confusing had they tried. It's no wonder nobody likes it.
Thank god I don't need to use Photoshop as my daily design tool anymore.
Conclusion: during last 7 years users expected simple improvement, while Adobe made it own not requested way, that now it is not useful for those who did not wished that, but also all others who can't deal with and are bent to revert old behaviour. Bravo!?
(Edited)
Dear Adobe,
Please fire EVERYONE involved in the Transform tool screw up & revert it to it's familiar behaviour. P.S. I also use Affinity Photo & I'm close to ditching Photoshop because of idiotic changes such as this.
Please fire EVERYONE involved in the Transform tool screw up & revert it to it's familiar behaviour. P.S. I also use Affinity Photo & I'm close to ditching Photoshop because of idiotic changes such as this.
A simple "Maintain aspect ratio as default"-button would've done it. You know, to keep that little link button on by default. So easy, yet you managed to make it all way too complicated somehow.
Right, I think the keyword is "BUTTON". No deep programming, just the ability to lock the "maintain aspect ratio" button which works then for everything and can temporary reversed with Shift (in whichever state it was locked).
OMG thank you so much to that person above who said to hold down the shift key for transform. This has been driving me insane since the new version was launched and I've almost put my fist through the screen a few times!!! Please Adobe, revert back to users choosing when to lock and unlock the transform cause I was hitting that lock symbol and it wasn't working at all! Thanks again above folks, my sanity has been saved because of your comment. <3
Stil not solved !!
It's now more than a half year ago, I installed it fresh and still not consistent!!
Smart-Objects have OTHER transformation keys than normal layers.
How stupid, lazy and ignorant is that???????
No more intuitive working!!!!
It's now more than a half year ago, I installed it fresh and still not consistent!!
Smart-Objects have OTHER transformation keys than normal layers.
How stupid, lazy and ignorant is that???????
No more intuitive working!!!!
(Edited)
christoph pfaffenbichler, Champion
Smart-Objects have OTHER transformation keys than normal layers.I apparently cannot reproduce that, please elaborate.
How stupid, lazy and ignorant is that???????How impolite is your choice of words?
Ok! step-by-step to reproduce:
1. Create an object and transform it (CTRL+T on windows). It's by default with maintained aspect ratio
2. Create a smart object and transform it. It's by default without maintained aspect ratio.
It means it's inconsistent and impossible to come in a "blind" intuitive workflow.
Why I'm really excited about this:
I have read this here in this thread right in the beginning as a new inconsistency bug and was desperately waiting a half year, because this is not ok for my workflow, where I switch quickly under timepressure between smart objects and pixel layers.
Ok, this can happen. But now nothing is repaired.
And that seems ignorant or lazy to me, sorry.
So much effort was put from users, me too, into collecting ideas, to make a product better and then it stays even worse. And there is really not "intelligent logic" behind this inconsistent tool.
(And I did not try, but I read from users also other objects... just to mention that there could be other transformation things needed to be checked, which are not in my personal workflow)
1. Create an object and transform it (CTRL+T on windows). It's by default with maintained aspect ratio
2. Create a smart object and transform it. It's by default without maintained aspect ratio.
It means it's inconsistent and impossible to come in a "blind" intuitive workflow.
Why I'm really excited about this:
I have read this here in this thread right in the beginning as a new inconsistency bug and was desperately waiting a half year, because this is not ok for my workflow, where I switch quickly under timepressure between smart objects and pixel layers.
Ok, this can happen. But now nothing is repaired.
And that seems ignorant or lazy to me, sorry.
So much effort was put from users, me too, into collecting ideas, to make a product better and then it stays even worse. And there is really not "intelligent logic" behind this inconsistent tool.
(And I did not try, but I read from users also other objects... just to mention that there could be other transformation things needed to be checked, which are not in my personal workflow)
christoph pfaffenbichler, Champion
1. Create an object and transform it (CTRL+T on windows). It's by default with maintained aspect ratioThat is not the case on my computer (Adobe Photoshop Version: 20.0.4, Mac OS 10.12.6), both transformations behave the same namely proportionally by default.
2. Create a smart object and transform it. It's by default without maintained aspect ratio.
Shape Layers behave differently because they are Path-based, though.
What have you done for trouble-shooting so far?
Ah ok, then it is maybe a Windows10-Photoshop bug?
Maybe any other Windows Photoshop user here, who could tell, if that works with smart objects in the same way like with pixel layers or not?
I wouldn't know, what I can do for troubleshooting. From the reports I'm quite sure, it has to do with Photoshop.
(I'm working on Mac and PC and at the moment only had installed it on the Windows workstation. I will test it soon on Mac, too. )
Maybe any other Windows Photoshop user here, who could tell, if that works with smart objects in the same way like with pixel layers or not?
I wouldn't know, what I can do for troubleshooting. From the reports I'm quite sure, it has to do with Photoshop.
(I'm working on Mac and PC and at the moment only had installed it on the Windows workstation. I will test it soon on Mac, too. )
christoph pfaffenbichler, Champion
When faced with inexplicable Photoshop-behaviour Restoring Preferences after making sure all customized presets like Actions, Patterns, Brushes etc. have been saved is pretty much the basic starting point:
https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/basic-trouble-shooting-steps.html
The solution to the problem could be quite straight forward, I think:
First use the behaviour like it was until PS CC 2018.
Then just leave the chain-button sticky. Means, if clicked once it will also be active if one is using the transform tool (command or ctrl + T) later again.
So people who prefer the old way of pressing (shift-key) to scale objects proportional in both dimensions will have this button 'unclicked'.
All others who prefer always having scaled objects without distortions always have this chain-button 'clicked' and so don’t need to press any qualifier key (unless they want to distort deliberately).
And the icing of the cake would be a preferences setting to tell if you want to reset the 'chain-button' every time you make a transformation, or have it sticky all the time (leaving the 'chain-button' in its last user selected state.
This should make all people happy (hope I haven’t overlooked anything).
Summary:
– Make the 'chain-button' sticky (keep user selected state) (if never clicked state would be turned off like it was in Photoshop all the years, so to scale proportionally 'shift-key' must be pressed.
– Make a Preferences Setting for having the 'chain-button' always sticky or reset after every use (behaviour as it was before and is right now).
First use the behaviour like it was until PS CC 2018.
Then just leave the chain-button sticky. Means, if clicked once it will also be active if one is using the transform tool (command or ctrl + T) later again.
So people who prefer the old way of pressing (shift-key) to scale objects proportional in both dimensions will have this button 'unclicked'.
All others who prefer always having scaled objects without distortions always have this chain-button 'clicked' and so don’t need to press any qualifier key (unless they want to distort deliberately).
And the icing of the cake would be a preferences setting to tell if you want to reset the 'chain-button' every time you make a transformation, or have it sticky all the time (leaving the 'chain-button' in its last user selected state.
This should make all people happy (hope I haven’t overlooked anything).
Summary:
– Make the 'chain-button' sticky (keep user selected state) (if never clicked state would be turned off like it was in Photoshop all the years, so to scale proportionally 'shift-key' must be pressed.
– Make a Preferences Setting for having the 'chain-button' always sticky or reset after every use (behaviour as it was before and is right now).
(Edited)
This is all we ever asked for!
I have no idea why Adobe felt the need to completely overcomplicate the whole thing.
What's been done instead was clearly not thought through properly or user-tested effectively. Little wonder people have moved on to using other tools.
Rob
I have no idea why Adobe felt the need to completely overcomplicate the whole thing.
What's been done instead was clearly not thought through properly or user-tested effectively. Little wonder people have moved on to using other tools.
Rob
Yep, that’s what was suggested months ago by many people. This is so stupid it’s embarrassing.
Slightly better idea, I think:
Have the 'chain'-button fully decoupled from the mouse-driven interactive transformation and just add a Preferences Setting:
=======================================================
[X] Transform Selections/Objects/Forms/Paths proportionally
by holding 'Shift' as qualifier key (constrain proportions)
=======================================================
If the checkbox is 'unchecked' all things scale proportionally without holding the 'Shift'-key.
The key is consistency here!
That would make it so, that when you start the transform-action by mouse (visually) then you won’t even have to look at the top menubar if the 'chain'-button is clicked or unclicked – just use your muscle memory as you ever have.
And whenever you use numerical transformation the 'chain'-button stays in its last selected state, independent of the mouse-driven transformation preferences setting.
The 'chain'-button state then would have no influence on the mouse-driven transform operation and vice versa.
Have the 'chain'-button fully decoupled from the mouse-driven interactive transformation and just add a Preferences Setting:
=======================================================
[X] Transform Selections/Objects/Forms/Paths proportionally
by holding 'Shift' as qualifier key (constrain proportions)
=======================================================
If the checkbox is 'unchecked' all things scale proportionally without holding the 'Shift'-key.
The key is consistency here!
That would make it so, that when you start the transform-action by mouse (visually) then you won’t even have to look at the top menubar if the 'chain'-button is clicked or unclicked – just use your muscle memory as you ever have.
And whenever you use numerical transformation the 'chain'-button stays in its last selected state, independent of the mouse-driven transformation preferences setting.
The 'chain'-button state then would have no influence on the mouse-driven transform operation and vice versa.
(Edited)
Maybe somebody opens a new thread? If this is marked as "implemented", nobody will care.
I have the problem especially with smart objects and can't understand why it wasn't possible to just only make a button "sticky". (and shift toggles that temporary). Important would be the consistency. The simplest solutions need no learning and are often the best.
I have the problem especially with smart objects and can't understand why it wasn't possible to just only make a button "sticky". (and shift toggles that temporary). Important would be the consistency. The simplest solutions need no learning and are often the best.
(Edited)
christoph pfaffenbichler, Champion
nobody will care.At least the Adobe employee/s who have posted here like Hannah Nicollet should be kept abreast of the newly posted messages.
And I am fairly sure that, even if they should not be able to post an official response, they understand that there are dissatisfied customers yet.
But whether they will be able to do anything about it does not depend on whether they see the merit in the requests/complaints alone ...
Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging
You are right, discard my previous idea of decoupling the button from the interactive behaviour of the scaling/rotation tool (after closer examination :-).
Just make that 'chain'-button sticky is all that’s needed for tackling this problem.
And to momentarily override that state just press Shift (to alternate the currently active state).
Maybe it could implemented that the 'chain'-button is somehow highlighted when holding down the shift key, so it’s clearly visible what holding that key does in the currently selected transformation-tool.
- -
The second annoyance which should be tackled is the 'auto-commit' of the tool when once clicks outside a hidden circle of the scaled/rotated object.
Before that you had to press 'Return' to finalize the operation.
As the 'auto-commit' can surely speed-up the workflow it still needs some kind of visible drawn circle or circular area, to tell the user at which point the tool changes it’s operation from chaning scaling/rotation to commiting the operation.
Or at least make it clearly visible by changing the cursor/pointer icon graphic.
Just make that 'chain'-button sticky is all that’s needed for tackling this problem.
And to momentarily override that state just press Shift (to alternate the currently active state).
Maybe it could implemented that the 'chain'-button is somehow highlighted when holding down the shift key, so it’s clearly visible what holding that key does in the currently selected transformation-tool.
- -
The second annoyance which should be tackled is the 'auto-commit' of the tool when once clicks outside a hidden circle of the scaled/rotated object.
Before that you had to press 'Return' to finalize the operation.
As the 'auto-commit' can surely speed-up the workflow it still needs some kind of visible drawn circle or circular area, to tell the user at which point the tool changes it’s operation from chaning scaling/rotation to commiting the operation.
Or at least make it clearly visible by changing the cursor/pointer icon graphic.
(Edited)
This change is so fundamental that if it needs changing, it needs changing everywhere. That means company-wide buy-in.
Until that internal debate is complete, changing it in a fraction of the places it needs changing is half-baked, unprofessional and unacceptable.
Why Adobe doesn't understand this and rectify the situation is beyond many of us who are design professionals - consistency is literally design 101.
Until that internal debate is complete, changing it in a fraction of the places it needs changing is half-baked, unprofessional and unacceptable.
Why Adobe doesn't understand this and rectify the situation is beyond many of us who are design professionals - consistency is literally design 101.
