A modified approach to local adjustments

[freixas]

@Wolfgang

@freixas

Well, I just tried it, and things didn’t work the way I thought. Sub-masks select (or exclude) pixels, the parent mask controls the settings for whatever is selected.

So, in the model I’m proposing, you would only have to select the parent mask from a drop-down. This would select which pixels the UI settings are applied to.

Personally, I would separate the mask creation from the adjustment settings. You create masks using creating one or more sub-masks. You apply settings to the mask. The current UI leads one (or me, anyway) to think that each sub-mask uses its own settings.

… which is why I explicitly mentioned that this is not the case.

Think of the (parent) mask as “one” layer. It and its sub-masks – which define the affected area – are all subject to the same adjustments.
This means you cannot apply an exposure correction of +1 to a specific part of this parent mask (e.g., an area defined by a gradient) while simultaneously applying a correction of +2 to another part of the same parent mask (e.g., using a different tool such as a control point).

Instead, use separate (parent) masks / layers to apply different settings.

Yes, as I said, I checked it out, and I know how it works now. I traced all this back to where user @LVS said something about selecting one or more masks. For the purposes of the changes I’ve proposed, you only ever select one “mask” (where “mask” = parent mask). There’s no point cluttering up a drop-down with sub-masks, since the drop-down would be for selecting which mask one wants to apply settings to, and sub-masks don’t have their own settings.

The current UI, as I mentioned, doesn’t make this obvious. My proposal would.

[Fineus]

@unchdxoly

CO 16.8.5.3 is allowing me to use tone curve adjustments in a layer:

You’re right, sorry I wasn’t clear - PhotoLab doesn’t currently allow local curve adjustments.