Skip navigation

Photoshop Macintosh (read only)

(fphz3rDz) Calculating status...

Currently Being Moderated

How to flatten without losing layer effects' "looks"

Mar 30, 2009 2:27 PM

I am working on a client project involving photoshop files, each containing lots of layers and a fair amount of layer effects...things like drop shadow, glow, bevel, etc.

I am not having luck flattening these images (which I need to do) without losing the look of the original.

For example, the shadows might be there, but they aren't as dark, or the glows might not be as bright.

I am using CS4 for Mac OS X, and this vendor used a Windows version of photoshop, but I don't know which version.

thanks for any ideas!

DZ

1633 Views 24 Replies Latest reply: RenéG, Apr 1, 2009 6:19 AM

Replies

Currently Being Moderated

1. Chris Cox,

Mar 30, 2009 2:38 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

The layered image and the flattened version are the same - there's no way to avoid that.

What can happen is that you see a noisy image at less than 100% zoom, and the preview and final can differ a bit (because the preview is downsampled). Or in 16 bit/channel you may get a slightly coarser preview at less than 100% zoom.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

2. (fphz3rDz),

Mar 30, 2009 2:49 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Thank you, Chris...

after I did my flattening, the change was very apparent right before my eyes, especially on elements in the image which were meant to look like glowing glass...it was not a slight difference.

with some effects, you get a warning when you try to layer them using "Create Layers" when you control-click on the fx menu, that "not all effects layer properly."

could the same thing be at work during the flattening process? perhaps, "Not all effects translate properly when file is flattened?"

DZ

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

3. Neil_Keller,

Mar 30, 2009 3:14 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

DZ,

Are you viewing you layered and flattened images at 100% size?

Neil

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

4. (Mark_Reynolds),

Mar 30, 2009 3:29 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

You didn't listen. as Neil says you have to view at 100% before and after flattening.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

5. (fphz3rDz),

Mar 30, 2009 3:37 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Well, thank you VERY much for that, Mark.

I did view at 100% before and after flattening.

But thank you for making sure that I got the correct meaning...

DZ

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

6. Chris Cox,

Mar 30, 2009 3:40 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Yes, the "create layers" option doesn't preserve appearance exactly -- because not all the layer effects are that simple.

But what you see before flattening, *is* the flattened image -- it goes through exactly the same logic.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

7. c.pfaffenbichler,

Mar 31, 2009 4:13 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

DZ, just to make sure: With »flatten« You do mean reduce to the background layer and not just reducing the file-complexity by merging groups or such?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

8. (Mike_Ornellas),

Mar 31, 2009 7:35 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

>after I did my flattening, the change was very apparent right before my eyes, especially on elements in the image which were meant to look like glowing glass...it was not a slight difference.

Some of the blending modes may cancel out eachother when flattened. It happens and have samples, but who cares. At some point it will be fixed. Until then, live with it.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

9. (fphz3rDz),

Mar 31, 2009 7:59 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Mike, I'm not sure what you sat on, but your cheek is not appropriate.

if you don't have anything contsructive to add to the conversation, be crabby in solitude.

DZ

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

10. Ann Shelbourne,

Mar 31, 2009 8:02 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Try making a "merged-up" Stamp Visible layer at the top of the stack before flattening.

Cmd Option Shift E

--------
One more thing:

fphz3rDz:

If I had seen your last message before I originally posted this one, I would not have bothered to try to help you.

If you ask for help here, it's less than gracious to respond rudely to other people who may choose to contribute to the thread.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

11. (Mike_Ornellas),

Mar 31, 2009 8:13 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

I have plenty to say. All of it seems to be less then palatable for commercial use. The features are broken. Unless you can fix it, what's your point?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

12. Buko.,

Mar 31, 2009 8:36 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

fphz3rDz, if you had a clue you would know that Mike is being very helpful.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

13. (fphz3rDz),

Mar 31, 2009 8:37 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

yer kiddin' with that, right?

if features in software are broken, (and many features in many software titles ARE broken) then what to do?

A. get cranky, throw your hands up and be disgusted?

or

B. reach out to professional peers to see what solutions they might have developed.

I'm not in the group who's simply going to roll over and take it. I'm an artist. artists solve problems and challenge the status quo. artists talk to other artists. artists share ideas.

the end process of "B" is that the situation can get better for everyone who participates in the conversation.

Since I've posted, I've gotten a lot of helpful ideas and information from people who've been there.

Before I posted, I had what appeared to be a nasty problem.

I prefer choice "B."

DZ

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

14. Buko.,

Mar 31, 2009 8:40 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

No one is kidding and if you will reread you have been give quite a few answers.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

15. (Mike_Ornellas),

Mar 31, 2009 8:41 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

C = don't flatten your files.

simple math.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

16. (fphz3rDz),

Mar 31, 2009 9:32 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

In other words, as long as I stay in the layered photoshop environment, all's good, but making any modification required by the outside world will result in degradation of what I see only within photoshop.

DZ

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

17. (Mike_Ornellas),

Mar 31, 2009 9:34 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

pretty much.

Ur an artist. Be creative and work around it.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

18. Ann Shelbourne,

Mar 31, 2009 9:38 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

DZ:
Have you tried "Merging-UP" before flattening as I suggested earlier?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

19. Buko.,

Mar 31, 2009 10:00 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Use ID to make a PDF

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

20. Ramón G Castañeda,

Mar 31, 2009 11:15 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Christoph,
>just to make sure: With »flatten« You do mean reduce to the background layer and not just reducing the file-complexity by merging groups or such?

That terminology ("reduce to the background layer") is not used in the English version of Photoshop. Not even "reduce". :)

The menu item labeled "Auf die Hintergrundebene Reduzieren" (oder so was ähnliches) in German is labeled with a single word in English: Flatten.

I know how hard it is to refer to specifics in a version in a different language when you don't have it available. It's not a question of just translating the word. "Layers" in the German version are not layers at all but planes (»Ebenen«, nicht »Schichten«). Took me a few seconds to figure that one out when I started out to learn Photoshop. :)

The concept of "Reducing" is not used in the English version at all. "Sichtbare Ebenen auf eine Ebene reduzieren" is simply Merge Visible.

Usw

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

21. Ramón G Castañeda,

Mar 31, 2009 11:21 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

What I found useful, from a linguistic point of view, was to download each of the User Guides/Help Files PDFs in the languages I'm interested in. They all amounted to just over half a Gigabyte. :D

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

22. Ramón G Castañeda,

Mar 31, 2009 12:32 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Found the bookmark I wanted to give you, Christoph:

http://www.oweiss.com/articles/photoshop-glossary.htm

(Photoshop-Wörterbuch englisch / deutsch)

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

23. c.pfaffenbichler,

Mar 31, 2009 10:20 PM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

Thanks, Ramón.
Actually Im working with the English language version now, but for years had been using the German one, so I guess some residual terminology crept in

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

24. RenéG,

Apr 1, 2009 6:19 AM in reply to (fphz3rDz)

Report

fphz3rDz,
Try flattening the layers a few at a time (instead of the whole image in one shot).

If the look changes, undo that and try flattening a different combination of layers at the same time.

|
Mark as:

Forum guidelines

Photoshop Macintosh (read only)

How to flatten without losing layer effects' "looks"

Mar 30, 2009 2:27 PM

More Like This

Incoming Links

Bookmarked By (0)