I would like to submit a problem with Local Adjustments in PL3.
To “blur” part of an image, I apply a Control point where it needs to stay sharp, then I invert the selection and I operate the “Blur” cursor . The parts of the image covered by the (inverted) mask actually become blurred, but also the “protected” part.
This behaviour is not normal. All other functions of the Equalizer seem to work normally.
The same thing happens with the brush mask and the automatic mask.
Thanks for any feedback
Works for me with all three mask types. Are you on Windows or MacOS? Which PL version exactly? I’ve got 3.1.3 build 48 on MacOS.
If your mask is not covering 100% you may see this effect, because you then switch from e. g. 70% blur to 30% blur after inversion of the mask. Try a brush with flow and opacity at 100% to make sure this is not the problem.
For control points you rarely have 100% coverage of the mask. This may produce unexpected results with the blur tool if the area is not very homogenous.
Yes. Many users neglect “traditionals” masks.
It’s a shame.
I’m on Windows 10. Pl version 311 b.4314.
You are right. If I put the opacity at 100%, it works for the brush and the auto mask. For control points it is not possible to adjust the opacity.
Actually, you can control Opacity for Control Points, André … It’s applied via the Palette interface (but not via the U-point controls):
- the slider works independently for each adjustment layer.
Yes, you can control opacity for Control Points via the Palette as you’ve shown. But this tool only reduces opacity. In the context of my question (inversion of the mask of a CP to blur the remaining part of the image) this function has no effect.
Thanks for your feedback.
Hello. What do you mean by “traditional” masks ? The Brush and the auto mask ?
… and graduated.
Yes because these masks are covering the full area.
For my case, I should have used the brush - as proposed by Christian above
Because CP can deliver unexpected results if inverted.