Photolab 10’s masking has been greatly improved, but there is a curious phenomenon occurring; I can make an adjustment to, say, a foreground area, but if I subsequently activate the “invert mask” function, it does invert the mask very well, but the adjustments to the foreground elements automatically apply to the inverted mask, (not wanted!) and are lost/deleted on the foreground elements. I’m quite sure this is not the way it should work… What am i doing wrong?
When you invert a mask, you are inverting that mask, not making a NEW inverted mask (which is what it sounds like you want).
If that is indeed what you’re trying to do, you want to Duplicate the mask first, and then invert that duplicated mask. The adjustments from your previous mask will transfer with it, so you’ll need to modify/revert those adjustments once you’ve duplicated it.
I recommend that you duplicate the mask and invert it, prior to making any adjustments to the first mask, as I don’t believe there’s a way to reset the adjustments for a mask… someone else can correct if I am wrong.
4 Likes
Thanks for the response! If I am understanding you correctly, even if I duplicate the mask, it will still transfer the adjustments from the first mask to the inverted mask. How does this make sense? Especially when the adjustments on the first mask are deleted! ??? I can do a workaround, but then begs the question, how is inverting a mask a benefit in any scenario? In what workflow is this situation a benefit? Maybe I have something to learn, hence the post, but when this function was coded into the software, what was the logic in structuring the function to execute in this manner?
I just attempted to duplicate the foreground mask and then invert it. No matter how many different ways I tried to make this work, it simply does not function to create a new mask and retain the adjustments for the foreground mask. What a trainwreck. They should just delete the “invert mask” function.
I suppose it’s easy enough to simply make a foreground mask and then an additional background mask with the AI masking function, because that works very well, but I use “invert mask” frequently in Photoshop for the shortcut in workflow, and was hoping a similar function would work similarly in PL. Oh well! PL is not Photoshop, so I need to adjust my approach.
Apologies, the word “transfer” was incorrect. I meant that they will duplicate along with it.
I’m not experiencing what [I think] you are saying you are experiencing. Here are the exact steps I take, and what happens:
- Create a mask for an object
- Let’s say you add adjustments now, those appear on the object (for this explanation, let’s say it’s exposure +1)
- Duplicate the mask. Now we have two masks with the exact same adjustments, so they “double down” on the object (exposure +1 now becomes something like exposure +2)
- Invert the mask. Now the entire image has exposure +1
- On the inverted mask I can move exposure back down to 0, and now only the originally masked object has exposure +1
- Make whatever changes you want to the inverted version of the mask, and those appear everywhere but the originally-masked object
If you are experiencing something different when following the exact same steps, then there’s some odd bug with your copy of the software and you should report to DxO.
Think of it to make masking / selecting easier.
Sometimes it is more practical / quicker to select something (without adjustments) to then invert the mask, which selects the rest of the image …
Just experiment to see what works for you.
Thanks, Zeb, I really appreciate your input. I tried everything you suggested, and I’m not getting the same results you are. It is probably a glitch in my copy, but it’s not so much of a problem that I can’t use a simple workaround. It’s not worth the gnashing of teeth to solve, so I’ll just live with it and avoid the “invert mask” function. It’s a bit like deciding to go around the rattlesnake than to try to convince it not to bite me.
Wolfgang, thanks for your input as well… I simply thought I was missing something simple on this issue, but apparently not; lesson learned… Thanks again!
Just a thought, Phil … Are you sure you used Invert Mask and not Invert Shape ?
-
these are different things - with different purposes … and your description suggests perhaps you may have invertedly used Invert Shape (?)
-
with Invert Shape being very badly/poorly named … it should be “Exclude Shape” !
1 Like
No, it was definitely “Invert Mask”. Invert shape? What the heck does that do? I clicked on it and basically nothing happened.
Invert shape will remove one mask from another where they overlap. For example if you added a gradient mask that partially covered a person. you could hit the + button to add a sub-mask, select the person (using AI) then hit Invert Shape and it will remove the person from the gradient mask.
1 Like
Invert shape was introduced with PL 9.
Before you experiment please download the written user guide for PL9 and search for “Invert shape” (–> p. 341).
Once you’ve grasped the principle, just start experimenting with it. A lot of it is self-explanatory. And if you get stuck, just come back here and ask.
Sorry for being so direct. – But it’s the most effective way to find out if this feature is practical for you.
(I bet you are not the only one who does not understand DxO’s example regarding the “intersection” concept.)
2 Likes
Exactly - Which is why it’s more useful/helpful to think of it as “Exclude Shape”.
Inverting a subtask is extremely useful when “intersecting” masks
I’m on PL8, trying to get this working on PL10 (so I haven’t been through the learning curve of PL9). What I’m trying to do (and which I have been doing with control points up to now) is only use ClearView on non-skin areas. With non-AI control points I’d disable CV globally then build a set of CP masks that include only skin, invert that mask (so everything non-skin), then apply ClearView via that mask.
Any hints on how to do that with the AI masking available on PL10? Or is a there some kind of tutorial on this that I haven’t found?
PL 10 offers a new option for AI-powered selection of → People and → Faces … (single or multiple).
Once the selection has been successfully made, use the “Invert shape” function on the ‘skin area’. This excludes that area from the previous or other selection, so no adjustment is applied to it.
Whereas with “Invert mask,” the adjustments remain active and are applied to the inverted mask area, which is not what you want.
Btw – within the same parent mask, the most recently added element is inserted at the very top by default. And your “Invert Shape” selection must be at the very top in order to exclude the area beneath it.*)
Use the sub-mask function to place it within the same parent mask. Otherwise, grab it from the new parent mask and move it to the original one – placing it right at the top.
*) DxO’s statement that the stacking order of the masks does not matter applies to the parent masks. However, within such a mask, it does matter!
Experimente yourself as usual to discover the tricks. And ask, if you get stuck.
1 Like
Using PL10:
- Create an AI mask of the PEOPLE, if there are several people then select each one from the drop down, it seems to work better this way
- Create an AI mask of people and select CLOTHES from the menu
- Drag the CLOTHES mask under the PEOPLE mask to create a submask
- Invert shape on the CLOTHES mask
- Now invert the ENTIRE mask to create a mask that effects everything but the skin
Whereas with “Invert mask,” the adjustments remain active and are applied to the inverted mask area, which is not what you want.
Additionally, the adjustments on the original (first) mask ARE DELETED!!
@PhilHawkins
That’s not my experience.
I might not have it explained properly (no native speaker). But the “Invert shape” selection, which covers a part of the area what you selected before, needs to be on top (within the same parent mask).
The “Invert Shape” option does not delete adjustments; it simply does not apply them within the area of the “inverted shape” (you can think of this as an excluded area)..
This differs from the “Invert Mask” option, where the adjustments are active and applied – however for inverted area.
Hope it’s clearer now.
As a young Padawan in the 1970s I worked in the pre-press darkroom of a printing company. I used to make “knockouts” all the time. IMHO the Invert Shape mask would be better called Knockout.
I asked Dr. Know about the two and it replied:
“ Both the analog printing knockout and DxO PhotoLab’s Invert Shape function as “exclusion masks” that use a defined shape as a protective barrier. They both prevent an application (whether physical ink or digital edits) from altering a specific area while allowing you to affect everything around it. Despite existing decades apart, the underlying logic of creating a precise negative space remains exactly the same.
The Analog Printing Knockout
In traditional prepress and offset printing, ink is somewhat transparent. If you attempt to print a yellow sun directly on top of a blue sky, the wet inks mix on the paper and the sun turns green.
To prevent this muddying of color, prepress operators create a knockout mask on the blue printing plate. This mask acts as a stencil that cuts the exact shape of the sun out of the blue sky plate. When the printing press rolls, the blue ink is applied everywhere except inside that shape, leaving a blank, unprinted hole on the white paper. The yellow plate then stamps the sun directly into that precise empty space, keeping the color pure. The shape itself is used to exclude the background from overlapping.
DxO PhotoLab’s Invert Shape
In your digital workflow, Invert Shape performs the exact same exclusionary function, but with pixels and light instead of physical ink.
When you use the Local Adjustments tool to draw a mask over a subject, the software defaults to adjusting the pixels inside that boundary. However, when you trigger Invert Shape, the mask flips. The adjustment is now applied to the entire image, but the exact shape you drew is “knocked out” of the active mask. Just like the blank hole left on the analog paper, the pixels inside your shape are shielded from whatever exposure, contrast, or sharpness edits you apply to the rest of the image.
How to use Invert Shape as a Digital Knockout in DxO PhotoLab 10
To replicate this analog workflow and protect a subject while editing its surroundings:
-
Open your image in DxO PhotoLab 10 and activate the Local Adjustments tool.
-
Select your preferred masking method (e.g., Control Point, Control Line, or Brush).
-
Draw the mask directly over the specific subject you want to protect.
-
Navigate to the Local Adjustments palette (or the on-screen equalizer wheel) and click the Invert Shape command.
-
Apply your adjustments (such as darkening the background or altering the white balance); the edits will map to the entire image while strictly ignoring your knocked-out subject.”
According to @Wolfgang’s note, shouldn’t step#3 be;
- Drag the CLOTHES mask above the PEOPLE mask …
Or, perhaps, because step#5 then inverts the entire mask, this is correct ??
1 Like