Adding to masks

[shenstone]

Sorry this may be basic, but I can’t find it and thought I would ask the experts

I’m trialing the new depth masks in PL10 and it seems to work very well with things with hard edges, but struggles with gaps in tree branches etc.

How do you paint in an additional section to a mask to get rid of those bits that would still have the original image and not the adjustments. I want it to be one consistent mask in the end, not 10 or 15 I have to adjust seperately

Regards Andy

[Wolfgang ([ Win11, PL10, FP7, VP5, Nik8 + 3.3 ])]

Try using the “Control Brush” as an additional sub-mask
(= within the same parent mask, to avoid having to make separate adjustments).

and to exclude …

(in my example also with a different Mask selectivity )

[aaeriam]

Is there a way to collapse all Control Brush sub-masks into one sub-mask layer?

I realize we can select the top level mask and change settings globally for everything within the parent layer but it would be more organized if brush strokes just added to the existing sub-mask instead of creating a new one every time I added/removed a brush stroke. Or if we could collapse them down into a single sub-mask layer after we’re done creating the mask that would feel cleaner as well.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA, Win10, RTX 4060, PL9, FP8, VP5, Nikon Zf)]

@aaeriam

Is there a way to collapse all Control Brush sub-masks into one sub-mask layer?

Not automatically, but you can manually drag and drop masks from one sub-mask to another sub-mask. However, If you do that, the mask you moved will now take on the attributes of the sub-mask where you have moved it, which may not be what you intended.

Mark

[Wolfgang ([ Win11, PL10, FP7, VP5, Nik8 + 3.3 ])]

@aaeriam

Is there a way to collapse all Control Brush sub-masks into one sub-mask layer?
…

This is (currently) not possible.

I think it would make things simpler, and (most likely) also contribute to reducing the computational load to some extent. – However, this stands in complete contradiction to the concept of being able to work in a non-destructive manner.
One compromise would be to design the parent mask in such a way that opening / folding it down is prevented (optionally, of course!).

.
A look back …

• In PL9, it was (and still is) for instance possible to adjust a Control line using the Manual brush, by holding down the ALT key (on Windows). While this might not seem particularly spectacular, it allows for seamless adjustments:
  you can add areas to the mask and – by holding down the ALT key – remove them again. There is no need to juggle submasks or even keep an eye on the LA window.
  .
  The same applies to the Auto brush: here, too, you can use the Manual Brush to add areas to the mask and – by holding down the ALT key – remove them again …
  
  
  

Now …

• In PL 10, each instance leads to a new sub-mask, which – unless one explicitly clicks “Add sub-mask” – also appears by default within any newly created parent mask …
  
  
  
  
  .
  What appears more straightforward in terms of workflow (and what DxO has opted for) actually complicates matters unnecessarily.
  .
  To avoid any misunderstanding: I do not wish to do away with the current “organized view”; rather, I’d like the previous level of user-friendliness back – and since the Alt key is already assigned to a different function – another key /combination, such as Ctrl+Alt, Shift+Alt …

.
@DxO_Support-Team – please take note