While I'm up wrestling with a bit of insomnia this morning, help me decide on my workflow for the next couple of weeks.
I'm backed up on comprehansive reviews. Topaz Denoise 3, Nik Silver Efex Pro, Nik Viveza, Imagenomic Portraiture, Imagenomic Real Grain, Helicon Focus, George DeWolfe's PercepTool, etc.
An early beta of the TLR Pro USM Panel is available for download. This is for Photoshop CS4 only.
What's exciting about this panel is that it offers a full-size preview for USM sharpening effects. No more reliance on the tiny thumbnail that comes with the USM dialog.
You can dock this panel, if you like. That way, it's available anytime you want it.
I spent some time tonight watching how CS4 panels that ship with Photoshop work. That gives me ideas about how to handle things in future panels.
I'll inquire at Adobe about who's programing the panels. I'd like to have a conversation with them and ask to borrow look-and-feel from the Adobe panels (to keep things consistent for users).
It is possible to create future panels that allow for previews. That will mean using scripts rather than actions.
Updates were posted today to all four of the new panels for Photoshop CS4.
These are minor updates.
Added .PNG files, which you can add to the Panels subfolder with the .SWF and .JSX files. These display when you collapse the panels to icons.
Changed the name of the tone mask panel from Tone Mask to ToneMask. A Mac OSX user reported that the embedded space could cause problems with closing the panel.
You can find the updates here:
A question came up during the brown bag session on Tuesday. Why are the sharpening results for the TLR actions and the TLR scripts different?
We compared the results from the actions and the scripts. We could see that the sharpening settngs were the same. The Blend If settings were the same, too. So ewre the Opacity settings for the layers. So, why do the actions and scripts provide different results?