Stan Prevost
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
 |
« on: December 04, 2013, 07:09:15 PM » |
|
Should I take layered .psd or .tif files into QImage from Photoshop, or should I always flatten them? I'm wondering if QImage has all the latest Photoshop layer logic and math including layer styles, advanced blending options, clipping masks, etc.
Stan
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2013, 07:31:27 PM » |
|
Hi Stan,
As experiments just to see..... I found that bringing in/ better yet save as PSD which creates an .xmp file. The psd seems to read that in Qimage and looks exactly how it was with layers in Photo Shop.
Try it. It works here.
Of course, save it as a psd in the same folder that Qimage will see it.
Attachment shows the psd file with a layer of Curves which has extra contrast so you can easily see it.
Fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Stan Prevost
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2013, 09:13:21 PM » |
|
Fred, that jives with my experience, in that my qimage screen views and the prints are as close as I can tell to my photoshop screen views. Now, the Epson driver view, that's another story! :-)
But, you may know the old saying, that testing can only prove the presence of problems, not their absence. I was wondering if developers like Mike somehow can license or otherwise gain use of Photoshop's layer math and logic. It is quite deep and complex to reverse engineer in its entirety, and I think is a mixture of pixel edits and parametric edits. Some kind of SDK?
Thanks,
Stan
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2013, 09:53:26 PM » |
|
But, you may know the old saying, that testing can only prove the presence of problems, not their absence. I was wondering if developers like Mike somehow can license or otherwise gain use of Photoshop's layer math and logic. It is quite deep and complex to reverse engineer in its entirety, and I think is a mixture of pixel edits and parametric edits If the real truth be known, Qimage is far ahead of Photo Shop with regard to using filters (saved) instead of layers that bloat the file. You should know that Levels in Qimage is the same or better than Levels in PS. I am not that familiar with PS, but I have a gamma adjust in Levels. and then we have curves, and every feature you have, including the best interpolation on the planet... which goes for printing as well as resampling.. You mention that the screen views are close... between Qimage and Photo shop? If the monitor profile is the same, and the colorspace is the same, the screens should be the same.. not magic Stan. We have and had smart sharpen for years... PS is just figuring that out... Have a look at the videos especially the USM vs DFS sharpening... no halos!! Everything is better... you just have to break the PS spell   http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u/learn.htmOh well, supper time here. Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2013, 10:11:53 PM » |
|
Hi Stan, I'm wondering if QImage has all the latest Photoshop layer logic and math including layer styles, advanced blending options, clipping masks, etc. The answer is no and I wouldn't expect Adobe to divulge their custom program details to another software developer just as Mike Chaney would not divulge his information about the advanced printing algorithms, Deep Focus Sharpening etc. etc. to Adobe You could ask why doesn't PS recognise QU filters and raw refine files!  I don't know if an other software will read all the Adobe stuff but it would take a great deal of reverse engineering to do it. Now, the Epson driver view, that's another story! Driver print previews are not colour managed, hence they often don't look right. Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Stan Prevost
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2013, 01:01:53 AM » |
|
Hello, Terry. Thanks for responding.
I would not expect Adobe to divulge details of their proprietary algorithms. But it does seem within the realm of possibility that they could make available, under appropriate terms, a non-source code module (dll or similar) that could perform back-end processing of Photoshop output files for purposes such as Qimage, to render them into print or other forms. Canon, for example, does not release details of their raw files, but they do make available a canned module to perform extraction of (some) data from and/or processing of, their raw files.
If the two parties were willing, Mike could also disclose his algorithms to Adobe under a suitable licensing agreement. Read: $$$. Likewise for Adobe to Mike.
I believe you may could find such agreements between Pixel Genius and Adobe regarding Lightroom.
But, linking this to what Fred says, this all gets to my reasons for asking the question. Regardless of how superior one may regard QImage in terms of its sharpening or other processing features, that has nothing to do with how accurately QImage can render a Photoshop layered file in which the layers specify operations the details of which DDISoftware does not know.
So it seems that the only reliable way of passing an image from Photoshop to QImage would be in a flattened form so that the details of layer math and logic do not come into play. As I said earlier, my experience so far indicates that QImage renders the layered file (including not all layer features, but only the features I have used to date) accurately (visually), but as I also said, that is not conclusive.
Thanks for the comments on non-color-managed driver print previews. They could be the poster child for color management. Very weird and garish!
Best Regards,
Stan
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2013, 08:25:47 AM » |
|
Stan, So it seems that the only reliable way of passing an image from Photoshop to QImage would be in a flattened form so that the details of layer math and logic do not come into play. That is correct, it's always been like that. Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
|
|
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2013, 10:06:52 AM » |
|
Stan, So it seems that the only reliable way of passing an image from Photoshop to QImage would be in a flattened form so that the details of layer math and logic do not come into play. That is correct, it's always been like that. Terry Make it a flattened 16 bit Tiff and it is also your best edited archive format next to the unedited RAW file. The future will have many surprises. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htmJuly 2013, 500+ inkjet media white spectral plots. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
admin
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2013, 01:21:25 PM » |
|
Qimage Ultimate already supports PSD files to the extent that they are supported in Adobe's own products outside of PhotoShop (like Lightroom). Adobe has not supported the PSD format for third parties since PhotoShop 5.0 a decade ago. That is part of the reason that Adobe's own Lightroom can't read a PSD file unless you check "Maximize reverse compatibility" when saving the PSD from PhotoShop. Qimage Ultimate is the same: you don't have to flatten it... just select the maximize compatibility when saving and then it will support the last (known) SDK that Adobe published for the PSD format. IMO I prefer TIFF because it is an international standard and not a proprietary format that has lost third party support. Save your original and the modified end result (as Ernst said) and those two will probably be smaller than the layered PSD anyway and you know they'll be compatible in the future.
Regards,
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2013, 02:29:32 PM » |
|
Save your original and the modified end result (as Ernst said) and those two will probably be smaller than the layered PSD anyway and you know they'll be compatible in the future.
Regards,
Mike
True. A 16bit Tiff will not compress though, the file is not smaller than the original Tiff. For lossless compression of 16 bit you need PNG which is not supported by Qimage I think. An open source format not supported by more applications, which is a pity. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htmJuly 2013, 500+ inkjet media white spectral plots. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Stan Prevost
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2013, 02:31:17 PM » |
|
Thanks, all. I realized later that it is probably the full-size composite image that is saved when the compatibility option is selected that allows QImage and other software to use PSDs without having to render the image from its layered form. I have used some layered TIFFs, without knowing whether they also contain the composite image. So I will make some minor workflow changes to accommodate all this.
Ernst said "The future will have many surprises." Yep, and Adobe gave us a few of those surprises in the last year.
Just a suggestion, Mike, maybe a mention of this in your documentation could be helpful to some. I couldn't find anything about input files.
Stan
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
