Given how quickly Adobe pulled the feature and how Adobe abandoned  Pixel Bender IMO it not likely to happen. Its something a painter program should implement.  Adobe is focus on the web not on art....

Can't read this can you send the link? Thanks

I always praise Adobe for their innovative genius but this time they created a major catastrophe.

I am in the middle of illustrations for a book and an accompanying app. The oil paint filter was a major part of the styling. I had to uninstall PS 2014 since I can't really use it . There is too much work to have to redesign a years worth of illustrations. Not to mention problematic, to tell the publisher Adobe has deleted one of my tools, blah,blah,blah.

I wld suggest that efforts be employed to develop an add-on or plugin to aid the artists and photographers who rely on the OilPaint filter in their work. Can't imaging you geniuses won't put some energy into that idea. Hello?

And JJMack -- I assume u are being sarcastic. Adobe is ART!

Aa_lique, you didn't have to uninstall Photoshop CC 2014 in order to use Photoshop CC 14.x.

-Noel

Just display the images in a new tab or browser window its the jive html on this site that scaling them making the unreadable. They are very readable.

Who wouldn't think to try clicking on the picture?

-Noel

Noel Carboni wrote:

 

Who wouldn't think to try clicking on the picture?

 

-Noel

You have to right click on the image then open it in a new browser tab or window.  Double clicking the image just get the image scaled poorly in a pop up window that can only be dismissed. Where in a new window or tab you can have the browser display the actual image pixels.

I see the full image, but I guess that's because I have a lot of desktop space. 

-Noel

You always see the full image but I only see the actual full image size when I open the link in a new tab or browser window.  This jive site scale the image down in size in its non size-able pop-up window.  If the image is large the pop-up window is unreadable. And the embedded image in the append is blurry and can not be read the way the scale it.

Please, give us back the Oil Paint filter! Even if you never put any more work into improving it. I really need it, and I don't want to keep two or more versions of Photoshop installed, just for a filter that I need. I did not yet even use it for special effects that some people described here. I mostly use it to make old 3MP photos usable for posters. A totally pixelated image can be turned into a beautiful large poster with the Oil Paint filter. But also just to create a special artistic look to images for decoration. What are you going to do about it, Adobe?

I am another user that is furious Oil Paint is gone in the latest version. Many of your user, Adobe, do use that filter and may even regard it as one of their most important tools depend upon the work required. Bring it back.

Install photoshop CS6 and you can use the oil paint filter

Claudia, install Photoshop CC 14.0 and you can use the Oil Paint filter too.  It's only been removed in Photoshop CC (2014).

-Noel

Claudia, Noel, are you making fun of us, or just restating the problem? Yes, I now have two versions of the same software installed, which is already ridiculous. What about CC 2015? Do we need to have three versions installed then to have all the features we need? What next? No updates anymore, but only additional versions? Someone already compiling a table of which version we need to run for each feature we'd like to use?

How is that different from Photoshop 1,2, ...7...CS,CS2...CS6? Each of these added and removed features.

I agree that removing features is a bad thing to do, and doesn't show sufficient commitment. But having to run multiple versions is nothing new.

Ok, I don't know how it went in the past. I've been using Photoshop since version 2. I never missed a feature in a new version, the Oil Paint Filter is the first time that a feature that is essential to me has been removed, and there is no replacement. Not even third party.

I have actually installed GREYCstoration in CC2014, which is very nice to reduce noise (that's what's advertised), but no replacement for Oilpaint. If it only affects the ~5 people who complain here, ignore us. But I don't think so.

Since the code already exist, why not publish the OPF as an unsupported plugin? Or sell separately? Whatever. Just don't simply take it away.

Incredible ---

It was a very nice effect.

They keep removing the great stuff and adding stuff no one needs.... Cant wait for Affinity Image.... I have been using PS since V1.

The past 5 years, this wonderful software keeps getting slower and fuller of no-use features.

First one had to install Pixel Bender to get Oilpaint.... THEN - they removed that. And made it a part of PS. Then they kill it..

So out of touch with what is great and what is NOT !

Not making fun of...coping for now...and feeling grateful for what we got.

Good vibes...;) Remember that these creators of Photoshop are humans too.

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:52 AM, wdburgdorf <forums_noreply@adobe.com>

You are right, Claudia. We are all humans.

But that does not mean we don't make giant mistakes... Humans admit mistakes. That is if they FEEL human. Humans with a God Complex forget that they are human

and believe mistakes do apply to them.

Photoshop is Titanic... The Programmers are Mr. Andrews. The guys deciding over the fate of Photoshop are Mr. Ismay.

Mr. Ismay in his own stupidity bursts out : ' But this ship Can't Sinck '

Mr. Andrews, which is a human without a God Complex, responds: 'It is made of iron, sir - I assure you that it can... and it will'

Your analogy may be a bit flawed, AtonMusic.  Photoshop is more like 1,000 little boats.  One may hit an iceberg, but 999 of them are still going.

The removal of the Oil Paint filter does not break the entire product.  What's left still provides a great deal of value to many people. 

Like you, I'm one of those who hopes Adobe will listen and return the feature to the product - I liked it and found it useful too.

But I'm also capable of realizing that the money that would have to be spent to re-float that one little boat and staff it with a crew may be overwhelming compared to the additional passenger carrying capacity it would restore...

It's a very difficult thing to choose to deprecate existing features from a product - certainly as users we all expect continuity of all the features we use and love - but occasionally as a business decision it makes sense.

And let's not forget that there are new features we all get from time to time.  We don't complain that the price of the subscription has not gone up when we get them.

-Noel

"One may hit an iceberg" - too bad when you happen to sit in that particular boat ... who's going to praise the value of the other 999 boats while his is sinking?

You'd rather scream, hope that someone hears you and throws a life-saver. So I hope Adobe will listen and invest in putting the filter back - not like they had to reinvent the code.

But so far none of them has responded at all. Are they ever even looking at this forum?

Adobe is most certainly aware that they've stirred up ill feelings by removing the plug-in (I raked them over the coals myself several times as well), and yes, they do read this forum.

And while it's not an ideal solution, Adobe DID provide you with a lifeboat (the ability to run the older version of Photoshop).

-Noel

Are you stating the boat is sinking and Adobe is abandoning ship with lifeboats

Go purchase Topaz Impressionist.  It does a great job and has many paint looks.  It does cost but it's worth it and not expensive.

JJMack wrote:

 

Are you stating the boat is sinking and Adobe is abandoning ship with lifeboats

As I illustrated above, the operative concept is boat, not armada, as in a tiny part of Photoshop got worse.  There is no question the Oil Paint boat hit something and sank.  That's not to say it wasn't an important part to some people.

The Adobe fleet that is the entirety of Photoshop continues to grow stronger.

-Noel

Here is a tip for all developers: never, ever, ever remove a feature that you have once introduced.  It is complete lunacy.  Microsoft found that whenever they remove a feature, or think about removing a feature, they never do, because there is always a significant group who use a particular feature.  It is the same here.  Why the hell would you do it?  So, it takes a lot of effort!  What of it?  I pay good money every month, as do a lot of other people, and we have certain expectations of what is in the product.  I know I'm not going to discontinue my subscription, but come on guys, get your act together.  We want more features, not fewer!

Just for reference, Microsoft HAS deleted all kinds of features in Win 8.  And we see how successful it's been.

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/156585-features-and-options-removed-in-windows-8/

In principle I very much agree with you.  The roll-out of a new feature in Photoshop implies - if for no other reason because of past history - that there will be ongoing support.

-Noel

I am concerned that no one from Adobe is addressing this issue of the disappearing oilPaint filter?

Dear ADOBE

Can you provide a plugin? Are you working on it? Can you share that with us? Please?

It not an issue of a mysterious disappearing oil paint filter.  Adobe removed the feature it was done during their spring clean up. No more messy oil paint. The removal was not accidental it was a deliberate removal.

(Posted last week, somehow didn't go right through ...)

I like the boat analogy. And yes, the Paint filter in the old PS is indeed a lifeboat for me, currently. A lifeboat that's losing air quickly. How many version can I keep installed at a time? It's alread 3 now.

@LauraMacky Thanks for mentioning Topaz Impression - looks very cool indeed, and at $99 it's not super expensive either. The examples on their site look way better than what I have done with the Oil Pint Filter so far. Since I use the Filter for a long term series it would probably take quite a bit of effort to get the same look with something else. If PS really doesn't get the OPF back, this might be the way to go.

@JJMack - Messy? What exactly is messy about the Oil Paint Filter? I had great results with it. Perhaps messy for someone who never seriously tried to use it and figure out what it can do. For me it is still mysterious why Adobe deliberately chose to take it away from us.

what scares me the most is that adobe failed to realize how great oil paint is. What wonders one can achieve with it. I am using Oilpaint on just about everything.

Subtly yes and sometimes with a 5% opacity but it gives that incredible look to the image.

So what frightens me is that adobe never realized how powerful the plug-in was. If they had, I doubt they would have removed it.

I never use content-aware fill as I find that it never yields 100% and I always have to correct this and that when using it, so I do manually as I always have.

And I doubt that they would remove CA Fill ;-)

Adobe, in case you ever read this, I believe that you have and that to the extreme, severely underestimated the power of Oilpaint and the size of its user base...

You need to ask Adobe why they thought it was a mess I did not make the call.

I had the chill water splash just today....

One of my main areas of work is paintography, so the Oil Paint filter was a main tool for my line of work, upgraded to 2014, now i have a lot of nails but no hammer.... this is plain outtrageous!

Keep posting these comments.  Adobe DOES read these forums.

-Noel

Really Adobe? Really?  You just removed the oil paint filter in PS?     It was the single most useful filter (to me) and you just removed it without adding a viable alternate ?  Hel-lo?     I used that for all kinds of things, it smoothed out grain, and added a final polish to a finished work.   C'mon Adobe!   Why you gotta be like dat?