Mary (#74307) missing a shadow is such a common “mistake”. Sometimes, we forget to add it, sometimes, we hid it and forget to unhide it. And often, after looking at a project for too long, we just don’t see anything! (#74425) Sometimes, simply colorizing and adding a texture is enough. We don’t always need to have a busy paper or a pattern. After all, the focus should be on the photo and the story instead of overpowering the page with lots of bells and whistles.
Euka (#74310) I have never been to Australia and all those photos make me feel like I have! I love that font you used for the title. (#74323) That is a beautiful kit you used. Great way to showcase that “panoramic” photo. (#74325) Yes, I also have added that icon on my Layers palette, but not in my 2022, so I would not confuse anyone in the tutorials!
Cristina (#74312) better late than never! It is an interesting take on using the same photo twice, and mirroring them make so much sense with the peek-a-boo.
Fiona (#74316) to answer your question, if you use the clip-to-it (or a mask for that matter) it won’t work. Trust me, I tried! Since the texture is actually the same opacity all over and not variations, you would end up with a solid square mask and lose the texture. That is why I had to show a different way to use it than what we used in previous lessons.
Anita (#74316) those cat faces are so cute!
Linda (#74318) adding a shadow to letters and removing it from the inside would probably look odd. It is a matter of finding the correct settings. From the top of my head, I would suggest you try something like 10-10-70-10 for the big title and maybe 5-5-70-5 for the sub-title. That would be a starting point and you can always adjust the opacity afterward, if the shadow is on its own layer.
Sharla (#74320) I see that you used a flat shadow (like paper) for the flowers. That is very accurate since those flowers are drawn as if on paper, unlike the flowers that I was using! Good thinking. (#74348) You know, when you use scatters like you did, you CAN place some on top of the photos, as long as they are not covering anything important. It is ok under the photos, but you have that option too.
Lois (#74321) that version makes more sense, don’t you think? It is like that what flower with a larger shadow: we can see a gap between the tip of the petal and the shadow, but that makes sense as the petal can very well be off the paper, unlike the title! (#74436) Where are those lighthouses from? It would be fun to have their location indicated on the photos (or around the photos).
Pirkko (#74327) you colorized the placeholders correctly. You can also replace those placeholders by other elements from a kit or your stash. (#74376) You did a fantastic job with the shadow of the flowers!
Rene (#74333) there are so many ways to customize one’s workspace, and with all the possible shortcuts available, everyone should find what suits them.
Julie (#74335) yes that is something on everyone’s mind, wherever they are in the world.
Christiane (#74339) you might have forgotten the shadow on the round photo. Especially since it is on top of the rectangular paper, it should have some. And yes, it can be hard work when you start to learn about a new technique or a new tool (or several).
Randy (#74344) yes, that extra path is a bug. I had addressed it in the scripting course, but I didn’t want to go into such details in the forum since I didn’t know how familiar you were with editing scripts. I had never experienced that bug myself because I always use PSP9 for scripting, but when doing the video tutorials for the scripting course, someone using PSP2022 pointed out that issue.
Hank (#74345) just as a comparative exercise, have you considered using the exact same elements you have on your page, but using the shadow settings I am using (offset, opacity, blur, color)?
Jnet (#74352) those cooking/baking elements are great addition to replace those “boring” rectangular placeholders!
Ann S (#74355) that off-center photo gives such character to the page! I probably would not have thought of it, but I LOVE it!
Cristina M (#74357) awe, I wish those were pictures of your dog!
Marie-Claire (#74359) and Poncho is supervising everything 🙂 (#74374) Where is that church? It is very intriguing (hopefully it is not too windy there). (#74421) Are those your cats too?
Corrie (#74379) it is so fun to have been able to follow your adventure. You now have a whole album about it!
Monique (#74386) the beauty of keeping a layered version of the project is that you can always replace papers or elements later on. Sometimes, looking at our work after a day or two, we suddenly see something we would want to change or tweak. Don’t hesitate!
Bonnie (#74386) I smiled at the “volunteering” of your crocus! I would so love to go see you play. You always seem to have so much fun!
Susan (#74402) I love how you tweaked the template to suit your photos. That is the whole point. (#74437) I am happy that you are getting more and more comfortable with all those tools and techniques.
Theresa (#74404) yes, you are getting a good understanding of the masks: you can create one yourself with the Brush too, although you can also use Selection tool. (#74433) What do you mean when you say that the Select All didn’t work?
Sue (#74405) your layouts always make me smile. I can just imagine you like Snow White, talking to all the animal in the forest surrounding you.
Trish (#74423) those are very interesting paint spatters and they go well with the idea of saw dust all over!
Lynda (#74429) those are beautiful pictures of colorful birds.
Gerry (#74431) yes, the Greyscale command will affect all the layers because it is applied to the IMAGE. If you want to turn only one layer into shades of grey, you should use the Hue/Saturation and set the Saturation to 0.
And to answer Lois’ question, the Dynamic Frames master class is open to all, members, non-members and newcomers too.
