?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Photoshop Friday - transform zoom

I was lucky enough to win a ticket to Photoshop world a couple of years ago, and when Scott Kelby showed this tip, the room gasped. It's utilitarian, and if you already use your keyboard to navigate your document, you may already know it. But if you don't...it's a MASSIVE timesaver.



You know how when you pull a very high-resolution photo into a lower resolution composition and you're scrolling and zooming all over so you can find the bigger image's corners to re-size it? You can find your corners with a few keystrokes.

zoom1

I'll start with this image of Paul that I bought for the Turbulence series and now I can't use because he's too blurry and grainy...not that I'm bitter or anything. I'll make it much lower resolution than it is, only 300 pixels wide, to illustrate my point.

Now I'll pretend I want to bring in a Bermuda background. Here's one.
zoom2

Only it's HUGE. I've dragged it onto Paul's document, but all I can see is a palm tree trunk. I've hit command-T for transform, but I can only access one handle in the upper right hand corner. I could zoom and scroll and whatnot, but here's the trick that left the room agog. While I'm STILL in transform and I haven't yet accepted the transformation, hit command-0 and the canvas automatically zooms to make all the handles visible. Then you can grab and position it easily.

zoom3

And here's Paul standing in a crappily composed montage with no attention to blending or lighting.
zoom4

Similar key commands:
command-1 brings you to 100% view
command-0 (not in transform mode) zooms your view in or out to fill the screen

Comments

( 13 comments — Leave a comment )
orehime
Dec. 8th, 2012 06:58 am (UTC)
\o/ HOURS saved \o/
jordan_c_price
Dec. 8th, 2012 01:15 pm (UTC)
Yaaay! Not only that, but it's annoying fiddling that's being dispensed with. (You know how some things are fun and some are annoying? Finding those corners is really annoying.)
indigoraven
Dec. 9th, 2012 07:04 pm (UTC)
OMFG. I love you. Sooooooooooo much.
jordan_c_price
Dec. 9th, 2012 08:52 pm (UTC)
Best. Comment. Ever.
lou_harper
Dec. 10th, 2012 05:45 pm (UTC)
That's pretty cool. I use mouse-wheel to scale my images up and down, since I'm a compulsive scaler.

What stock photo site do you use? I once bought a landscape from Shutterstock that turned out to have artifacts all over it, but when I sent complaint they refunded the price.
jordan_c_price
Dec. 10th, 2012 06:52 pm (UTC)
I find the stock sites are mostly all the same, with the same photographers submitting the same image collections to the majority of them. I'm using bigstock lately just because I bought 100 credits there.

I don't have a mouse-wheel but I just did an experiment and if I op-drag on the mouse's surface it will mimic a wheel. That will come in handy, I'm sure. Thanks!
lou_harper
Dec. 10th, 2012 07:20 pm (UTC)
I partially agree. There's a big overlap, but the selections not identical. I also sell images to stock photo sites--mostly background textures, occasionally photographs. The same image will be rejected by some sites and accepted by the others.

The biggest difference I found is the pricing structure. Sites that charge different amount of credits depending on the size of the image are best when buying a small file. Shutterstock charges the same, not matter what size you download, and that works for me since I always buy them big. They also have the best search system I found so far. However, I haven't looked into Bigstock much. Their prices seem reasonable.
jordan_c_price
Dec. 10th, 2012 07:32 pm (UTC)
That explains why the collections of photographers are slightly different on the different sites, which is important when you have a "character" that spans several book covers, as I do. (Vic lives on lots of sites, though his photographer has pulled out of a few, which is alarming.)

I find I almost never need a small file. It's too often I buy the small one and regret that I don't have more resolution. I should probably look into Shutterstock next since I use big files more. (You're BURSTING with useful tips here! Thank you!)

I never made the leap of submitting work to a stock site though I've thought about it off and on a lot over the years.
lou_harper
Dec. 10th, 2012 07:50 pm (UTC)
What sells on the various sites varies a lot too. Shutterstock is the only one reliably selling my more illustration style stuff, so I stopped submitting to all the others. To buy, you can pick from various plans. I use the 25 image for $229--it comes out to $9.16 a picture. For someone who uses lots of stock photos, the yearly subscription would be worth. I wish I could justify it.

I'm always on the lookout for reasonably priced stock photos. Some sites, like iStock are ridiculously expensive.

You have great illustration skills, and I bet you could sell stuff. Unfortunately, the pay is peanuts. On the plus side, once you upload something, you can keep selling it even years later.
jordan_c_price
Dec. 10th, 2012 08:42 pm (UTC)
I had an idea I could sell vector illustrations, since vector skills are a little less common and therefore could theoretically give me an advantage. But those skills have seriously degraded from lack of use. Back when the majority of my time was spent making signs in Illustrator, I was pretty proficient. But not anymore. I open Illustrator and I feel left-handed on both sides.

Though I suspect you may have planted a seed anyway ;-)

I think Bigstock is a bit cheaper, you can get a high-res jpg for closer to $6, I think. The tiffs are pricier.

I would LOVE an annual subscription to something. I'd be pulling down images left and right just to play with. Could you imagine what that would do for your creativity, just knowing you could try out whichever image you want? (ultra-low-res-comps don't really cut it.)
lou_harper
Dec. 10th, 2012 08:51 pm (UTC)
Oh yeah, I'd love to make comps with high res photos. One of these days...

You're right Bigstock is cheaper. I will look into it more in the future. I have the suspicion Shutterstock has bigger selection. At least, they do of one of my favorite contributor. Still, money is money.
jordan_c_price
Dec. 10th, 2012 08:56 pm (UTC)
*sigh* Shutterstock's annual subscription is on par with the cost of my rent. However I think their 5-image pack is definitely reasonable. Bigger selection and contributors whose work you like are super important.
lou_harper
Dec. 10th, 2012 09:06 pm (UTC)
I wish a handful of designers could get together and share an account. Unfortunately, Shutterstock doesn't allow it.
( 13 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

April 2017
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com