What is Really Going on With Layers??? Question 1

[CEHARRIS3]

I have been a PSE5 user now for 10 months, and although I am ashamed to admit it, I do not have a real grasp of what is going on with "layers". I have even gone through the trouble of taking Matt Kloskowski's layers course a second time!! Specifically I don't understand what is "going on" when you move a file onto another? It appears to me it is making a copy of this file and placing it on the other. As a matter of fact you can move the same file multiple times onto another and the file being moved remains in the file bin as a "free agent" (until you close it). This seems strange to me, and verbally and conceptually I can't say as I understand what is happening. Has anyone else felt the same about this...or is it just me?:(
Mr Kloskowski just glosses over this issue in his very first lesson without so much as a bit of discussion, when this appears to be at the very heart of PSE!!!

I am posting this thread in this forum bacause, because it seems to be a theory issue and not one of technique. I hope someone can make sense of what I am asking:)

[GaryK]

Hi

I think you are trying to make this harder than it is.
I'm not saying layers don't have their stumbling blocks, but this isn't usually one of them.:D

You are correct .. when you drag a photo to another you are in fact copying the photo to the destination and it makes a new layer when you do that.
Personally, I am happy it does that, as I would hate to lose a photo because I dragged onto another.

Maybe I am misunderstanding the issue.:confused:

[hfgerena]

Hi, What exactly do you want to do? Have two photos in the same layer? Please tell me so I can try to give you the correct answer or procedure.

[Matt K]

Hi,
Sorry for the confusion. Think of it this way, no matter how many times you copy/move one image to another image, the original stays exactly the same. You're not changing it. And, the new image that you just copied to doesn't have any reference to the old one. It's just like opening up two Microsoft word documents and writing some text in both. If I copy text from one into the other, on the one I'm copying to changes. The document where I took the text from remains exactly the same and neither of them have ties to each other.

Hope this helps.

[CEHARRIS3]

I thank all for your replies to my question about layers. U hope you don't ll think I am nuttso!! My queries are typically somewhat "far-out" and involve pushing theoretical issues to the extreme. I made a similar posting with respect to "selections" a few months ago which generated over 25 responses. It just the way I learn things I guess, and I do not mean to nit-pick or appear to be trivial.

Related to this issue (at the risk of raising some ire) is the question of "where images go to" when you move them completly off of the the layer on which you place them. Example...I move a picture of a cat onto a picture of a boat. I then close the original picture of the cat, and of course the copy still remains on the boat. I slowly nudge the picture of the cat off of the boat (with the move tool) and it disappears from the edit window. I am left with picture of only the boat in the edit window, and a blank layer (where the cat once was} and the boat layer in the layers pallete. I think if I knew where the cat went, it would answer a lot of questions to me as to what is going on here.:o

[kImages]

If I understand what you've done here you've simply moved your cat off the visible canvas. Your initial layer (background or sometimes layer 0) defines your canvas size. PSE has what can be thought of as "working memory" so that at you move another layer you can go outside of that canvas, then you can move that layer back into a working position.

I think that you can see this if you have your image sized at about 25%. You should be able to see PSE working window all round your image. Now bring in your cat layer. As you move that whole layer around with the move tool you should see your bounding box go beyond the background layer/canvas( let off of the mouse to see the bounding box). You could subsequently return to that layer and reposition it back on the canvas.

[cats4jan]

I'm "into" these kind of "theoretical" questions - but this doesn't seem to be one of them to me.

What you are doing when you are dragging a photo from one project to another is simply copying and pasting it - but the work is taken out of it.

You could
select> all
edit> copy
edit> paste

But instead you are merely doing a shortcut by drag/drop
______________

As for what happens to your "cat" when you move it off your project, KImages said it all. It's there - it's just not withing the parameters of your canvas. It will always be there - invisible because the canvas shows only what's inside the parameters of the canvas - until you crop away any extraneous stuff from outside your canvas.

Do what KImages suggests. Reduce the size of the project and select the layer - note the bounding box - if the bounding box is outside the canvas - there is "stuff" there - and moving it back onto the convas will magically make it appear.

Once you understand layers, you will find there are no mysteries. Everything makes perfect sense.

[CEHARRIS3]

Thank you all very much for your replies...they nailed down some concepts which heretofore simply eluded me. The concept of the canvas space would not have occurred to me without your explanation (got my cat back immediately!)...ditto moving the one image on top of the other as being a shortcut for "copy all" and "paste" commands. It may have been obvious to you, but not to me. I find that this is what makes some of the tutorials difficult, that being an assumption that intervening steps need not be explained because they are assumed (by the instuctor) to be obvious and understood by all. Again you all have made this a very productive day for me!:)

[cats4jan]

CEHARRIS - you're welcome.

You are so lucky to have found this site - and the many other sites recommended here - so early in your learning curve.

As for the tutorials not providing enough "fill in" info. With Elements there just is too much "fill in" info. Knowing all the "fill in" info isn't all that necessary to accomplish specific tutorials.

Calm your "wanting to know why" urges a little. Go with the flow. Why things work the way they do will eventually fall into place while you learn other things.

PSE is so multi-dimensional that even people with an excellent grasp of it continue to learn new things.

That's because there are so very many ways to do things. There is no right or wrong ways - just different ways. You will learn Elements one way and you will hone your skills as you go along - discarding your old methods for new methods you pick up as you go along.

Getting mired in the minutiae will only make learning more frustrating.

[raindog]

I'm glad you asked your question CEHARRIS, even though you had some anxiety about doing it. It's not uncommon for people to find themselves in similar dilemmas about the workings of various software, but can't quite bring themselves to try get an answer from people that seem to more than they do, simply because the person with the question has an overwhelming sense that it somehow won't be received well.

One of the things that must sometimes be hard for educators, is to be aware of whether the method they're using to introduce something new to people, is simply but effectively covering fundamental concepts that underly the new subject. Darrell T

[vawitt]

And...how cool is it that MATT jumped in to help clarify?? Where else do you get that kind of attention? :):)

This forum rocks!!

~Val in waiting-for-another-snowstorm IL

[CEHARRIS3]

In summing up my feelings about this thread, I think Cats4jan sees where my head is at and I think her advice to "go with the flow" and eventually things will make sense is a good one. It is true that there are many ways to achieve the same result in PSE. I guess when I pose questions like the present one, I have dealt with what I consider to be an unanswered question for long enough, that I feel the need to seek the help of others. What is amazing to me is that on this forum and with this group of folks, I always get that help. The amount of time and qualitative effort people give others here has always amazed me since I joined this group about a year ago. I can think of no other source to match it...on any subject!!

The frustrating thing texted messaging (like this and email) is that there is a lot of room for misunderstanding. I certainly did NOT want to give the impression, for instance, that Matt Kloskowski's was in any way remiss or inadequate, I took it once and paid for it...and am doing so again (and have again paid for it)! The course is just that good! Thanks for your help, by the way, Matt! It is just that it didn't answer a small theoretical detail for me, that in the sum-total if things is probably not important to most people other than myself. I have that peculiar bent of mind.:confused: PSE in many ways is "magic-land" and understanding the sub-stratum of what is going on is half the fun of it. Other-wise it would be cheaper, more economical and less time-demanding to send my images out to a print service with instructions as to what I wanted the final-product to look like! I bet most of you feel the same way:)

Please stay tuned to this thread as I continue with the "Layers" course as I am sure I will have several more questions to ask. You may find you have the same questions also.

Again a big thanks to all of you Clarke Harris

[Edmund]

Clarke, don't feel alone. I am a retired Electrical Engr. and when it came to learning PSE/CS and grasping some of its concepts, I had to first understand each step and plog along very slowly at first (because of my technical background). Now three years later I do a lot more but on many so called advanced steps I still need a book to guide me thru the step by step process (so I can understand them). I was watching a Photoshop tutorial on the Radiant Vista here: http://www.radiantvista.com/workbench
and I am absolutely amazed at the complexity of some editing techniques used in the TUT with the lighthouse. These steps do not just come to me intuitively and I don't know if they ever will. If you watch the TUT it really does not appear to be that difficult but to just do it on my own without ever having seen the TUT I don't think will ever happen. IMHO
Eddie:)

[cats4jan]

Clarke - I'm with you on wanting to know the minutiae - but I'm just concerned it's "getting in the way" of your learning process.

What will happen as you learn is that you'll one day notice something and go "Oh, that's why that happens."

I love PSE4 - more for the learning process than for what I can do with it. The program is so amazing - and so much fun.

It's been more than a year now, and I still want to "talk Photoshop" with everyone I meet - but then I get that "eyes glazed over" look and I know I've lost them. ;)

That's what I like about this forum - everyone loves to "talk Shop" :D

[jjvera00]

I found this tutorial about Layers (http://www.photoshopessentials.com/basics/layers/) on PhotoshopEssentials.com

I hope this helps. There are a few items that only apply only to Photoshop CS2, but the majority applies to Elements all the same. It is a bit long, but informative for people with questions about layers.

[Jon.P]

Clarke Hi
Just a quick line you are not alone with ques and thoughts like these.I am just the same trying to get my head around layers !!! been uaing pse5 for about a year now and only just starting to get to grips wiyh the layers only basic stuff but more confident now.Just remember you cant break pse. good luck jon

[Lesa]

WOW See? This is why I started reading forums--to find out what folks need/want to know.

Case in point, it would never have occurred to me to explain what canvas space is. I've covered layers plenty of times, layers masks, etc. It really is difficult to get into the mind of your student but forums like this one really help :)