Will this change PHOTOSHOP FOREVER?

[@bala1000mina]

Awesome as always! Thank you so much Colin for the tutorial on the Parametric filters! Good luck!

[@andreahasse8940]

Thanks for the video! Honestly, Photoshop was never really good with this kind of filter. The very old ones from the filter gallery have not been updated for ages (although some of them are still not bad at all, until today!) Then came these neural filters, which actually only deliver horrible results and which, as far as I know, not have been developed further. Now these new filters, which seem very well thought out and I think it's good that there are so many parameters and setting options. But the results really don't knock my socks off when you consider everything that is possible with AI today. A professional designer will probably not be able to get much use out of these filters, one can only hope that it will be developed further. The potential is definitely there.

[@ianperryman1078]

Some of the neural filter stuff definitely looks half finished. If you take the 'Smart Potrait' face filter for example: it can partially rotate a face and eyes from left to right - but not up and down. It has difficulty coping with faces that aren't directly facing the camera and complains about any minor obstruction to the face, such as a hat or a low hairstyle. The rather strangely titled 'Be Happy' is useful if you're running an American teeth whitening service, but pointless if you want a polite smile etc. Adobe's understanding of the word ' smart' and mine obviously differ considerably. Much the same applies to their 'generative fill'. Far too often what it generates isn't anywhere near what I asked for. I've clicked the 'regenerate' button so often I'm on my third mouse since it came out ! Adobe's AI may well be artificial, but its level of intelligence is similar to Adobe's interpretation of 'smart''.

[@dunnymonster]

If we get a filter setting we like can we create a preset we can apply to other photos later?

[@photoshopcafe]

Absolutely yes.

[@marshawheatley6709]

on the pattern generator--is there a pre-set for tesselation?

[@KatsEyeImaging]

Excellent tutorial...thank you!!

[@r1pperuk]

Alot of these filters have been around for 20 years....just repackaged into parametric now. I use Cloud based selection to cut out everything now its pretty much flawless.

[@larsmichael7162]

Wow this feels like those 8-bit “filter factory” filters lifted to the 21st century. Would love to see the “mapped checkers “ filter reimplemented

[@MWB_logic_reason_respect]

I can see this being more for graphics, rain and oil for me perhaps but otherwise purely for advertising etc. Thank you for sharing!!

[@photoshopcafe]

Graphic designers and compositors will use it mostly.

[@scintilladesign4187]

Great video, love this new feature

[@shutterbug49]

Thank you. Something new to play with. Learn so much from these videos.

[@photoshopcafe]

Thanks

[@fidelrodriguez7964]

This is so awesome tutorial. KUDOS TO YOU!You got me forever now. 😊

[@mikewall827]

🙏 thank you for insight and update

[@Boots1956]

Excellent

[@JaysCashVault]

Awesome!

[@sausirhi]

Awesome video! Tutorial in Substance Designer for creating unique filters please!!! 🙏🏾

[@SpencerPhotography]

Heck yes! Thanks for this!

[@yannmaenden7236]

Thanks for the video - first impressions - seems like an enhanced version of LUTs. Will it change Photoshop forever ? Probably not, we can already do most of this stuff in other ways. I mean, for example, do we need a special filter to put a TV interference pattern behind a subject ? The last thing PS needs is more clutter and bloat. If, as you say, people are going to produce thousands of parametric filters in Adobe Substance 3D Designer ( really ? ) then it needs a separate, companion app.

[@photoshopcafe]

You would just load in what you need. After 30 years doing design, you'd be surprised what clients ask for.

[@adamvonfischerstein1374]

Agreed, too many specific effects.

[@rogerwines6947]

Can I run the beta version, and keep the regular version installed?

[@photoshopcafe]

yes, you can

[@liverpoolpictorial]

Thanks, Colin. Excellent tutorial and info. I never realised they existed until your video LOL!

[@hakonsoreide]

The ones you'd end up using the most are probably the ones that give you an effect you could easily have made in Photoshop already, or that you've probably already made a preset for in Lightroom. And of course most of the effects you get are either very situation dependent or simply just the kind of stuff that has existed as tacky phone camera image filters for the last decade.🤷

[@delpinsky]

Interesting feature! For sure people would love tinkering with such filters, which are a solid upgrade compared to the old filter gallery.

[@photonsonpixels]

Thanks for the tutorial Colin. Quite exciting to see where Adobe is going with the Lightroom/Photoshop suites! The new filters that you demo here have the potential for replacing the likes of some of the Nik Collection plugins as well as Topaz Studio which seems to have been abandoned by Topaz Labs unfortunately. Thanks again.

[@thewebstylist]

Awesome! Thnks for highlights my PS brother

[@photoshopcafe]

Glad you found it useful

[@danascottcarr]

Nice tutorial, however, this new Beta update keeps crashing when I try to use Parametric filters.

[@sandykreit1752]

I think they are cool. I agree with you about not liking all of them, but there are very interesting.

[@photoman52beta]

Absolutely great that Adobe has quit taking baby steps towards better filters. I was happy to see the neural filters and these newer filters will be great to experiment with.

[@bobkillen8396]

Stacking filter is the most important element. This moves the creator from choosing a look to a creative wow.

[@photoshopcafe]

Yes, it's an important feature

[@jangardner1446]

There are a couple I might play around with, but I’m a bit lukewarm about these. Adobe doesn’t need to put “everything but the kitchen sink” in here. I’d love to see them concentrate on refining what they already have and streamlining the basics.

[@afpwebworks]

I agree. There are so many features I never use that Adobe can't fit everything into even two toolbars. My vision isn't 100% and i'd rather they spend their effort on making the user interface better and easier to use - like give us a means of changing the fonts on the menus and tooltips etc from grey on dark grey and about 4pt type to something more readable with less than 20/20 vision. You often see tutorials on how to get an effect with PS and when you watch the tutorial you find out there are 150,000 steps to achieve it.

[@jangardner1446]

@@afpwebworks Absolutely agree with you on those points!

[@spacekitt.n]

What i really want is firefly 2 in Photoshop... pretty sure the foundation of generative fill still uses firefly 1

[@christopherfarrell-artist3557]

In over 20 years of using Photoshop the only filter I use is the blurs. I guess it depends on what you do, but, I see filters like clipart in that they are mostly used by people who can't achieve the visuals manually.

[@photoshopcafe]

I would disagree with the last statement. Sometimes the user can achieve the results manually, but when you are working professionally, it's about time and budget. But I also agree some people over use filters. You can probably seen lots of skilled filtered work and not even realized a filter is used.

[@christopherfarrell-artist3557]

@@photoshopcafe Uuumm....thinking about it, I may have been a little flippant in my comment. I do use Photoshop professionally, for the fine art market, where the output needs to be 100% original and authentic in terms of the human hand / concept, there isn't really a time pressure to create the digital paintings so my thought process isn't coming from a industry-standard perspective as it can take months to create the artwork. Photoshops strength is that it caters for such a wide range of usages. Note to self: I must learn to be better at seeing outside of my creative workflow bubble :)

[@jadie1234a]

Why does the vintage filter always turn my image blue? I can lower the color intensity to get rid of the blue, but why blue? And why can't I change that blue to another color?

[@stevejarvis186]

Wow there's a lot of things here Colin, I`m not sure how many I`d find useful, but Its great that Adobe are putting things like this into PS. Thanks once again for a great video and walk through of all these new filters.

[@photoshopcafe]

Anytime

[@Isaypreach]

So photoshop basically introduced its own version of Boris Fx or those photo apps on our cell phones that does this..cool

[@photoshopcafe]

I love Boris FX BTW :)

[@TrevorDennis100]

Blimey, you must be filthy rich if you have Boris FX. ;-) I was thinking it was more in line with Filter Forge.

[@charrski2918]

Way cool

[@shaunclapham2936]

I dont understand why they dont just have a beta toggle in photoshop? Anyone know why? Thye have it for nearal filters, makes no sense to leave the app and go to a beta app..

[@photoshopcafe]

For stability. Not all features can be “toggled”

[@photoshopcafe]

There is a technology preview setting in preferences for some features that don’t affect stability

[@ednsb]

thank you.. at first i was excited but now I am not sure I have a use for these. I do a number of painting-like effects with my photography and the Topaz Studio, Topaz Studio 2 and the new way to use gen fill do more for me than this..But Adobe sure keeps coming up with new ways

[@NicholasStein]

I live a few miles from the hanger that burned down. I was interested to see it as a subject in this tutorial. I thought the whole thing was made of concrete and would not burn. I was wrong. I am still not sure what these parametric filters are useful for. But then I thought same thing about rap music. Creative folks will start using them. This tutorial is useful for me because it will allow me to recognize when those aforementioned creative folks use them.

[@petersolomon5227]

Nothing is really “sacred” or off limits in the ruthless, competitive world of image editing software. Adobe’s introduction of these filters, along with the parameter modification sliders, is clearly a crib of filters first found in Genarts’ Digital Film Tools. DFT products were acquired by Boris FX around 2018, who updated and included them in Continuim (After Effects), along with rebranding them as Optics (for Photoshop).

[@ralphpayne6259]

Distinctly unimpressive sums it up for me. I imagine Adobe are trying to start a different audience. Great as long as it doesn't just become pointless bloat within the main interface. Stay focused on the real objectives Adobe!

[@garyguest1999]

Great video. Great to see Photoshop add new ideas and I feel for the creative minds this is awesome. Thank you.🙏

[@davidf6326]

03:24 Does it do all this without resulting in the usual, God awful halos around the masked subject?

[@ronaldmoravec2692]

Spend $100k on the best photo equipment so I can screw up the pics. I think not.

[@photoshopcafe]

That's a lot of gear!

[@ronaldmoravec2692]

I started when I was 16, now 81. I have been through Pentax, RB67, 4x5, Leica M & R and D200, D700, D3, D7000, D750, D800, & D800E, now Z6 2 and Z7 2. I have many Leica and Nikon manual focus and G lenses. I have sold very little although I should have. Some has been given away. Industry Progress has been impressive.@@photoshopcafe

[@afpwebworks]

The irony is not lost on me. Photographers spend a LOT of money and time trying to get perfect photographs. Then (also at great expense) photoshop is here with filters to give us a host of ways to make the hard-won photos into crappy 'glitch' images.

[@joeldiaz141]

My phone stock photo gallery can do this 🤷‍♂️

[@RyanJohnson]

3:25 Combining Parametric filters bloats the hell out of file size...

[@rgarlinyc]

I'll stick with Boris FX's Optics, thanks all the same Adobe.

[@photoshopcafe]

I love Optics.

[@KevTCC]

Not to be a that guy but few of these are useful at all, and those which are I can accomplish the effect manually with more intentionality and probably just as quickly.

[@snailrancher]

So Photoshop can now do what I did on my phone 15 years ago? Awesome, I guess.

[@karayuschij]

There's nothing more "tasteless" than this kind of filters.

[@mahoutie]

Glitch would have been useful about 5 years ago.

[@tomwojtowicz9567]

I played with this when it was first introduced but was disappointed with the results. At present, this filter set is like a really poor clone of 'Filter Forge'. The one effect that had some possibilities for me was the 'Scratches' filter, but it applies some type of border around the effect and not to the entire image. In fact, this border effect is applied to several filters which is annoying, and is seems there is no way to remove that from the results. The 'Scale' button creates strange results depending on the setting used. Maybe with time, or with users contributing new effects to the library, this will improve. It's a new addition so I expect it to be updated regularly, but this is the first feature offered by Adobe that was disappointing. I even got that impression from the description of some of the filters shown in the video. I really wanted to like this. I'll keep checking this after each new update to the beta of Photoshop.

[@photoshopcafe]

I think the conduit is what’s exciting, not necessarily all the filters created by engineers that currently populate it, a couple have promise. I’ve played with substance and I think some remarkable things are possible. Let’s see

[@tomwojtowicz9567]

@@photoshopcafe I agree. Filter Forge has over 13,000 user-generated filters, and this seems to have a similar model for filter creation. It's just a matter of time before a decent library of effects is created.

[@mmstrux]

Cool, but I would rather have the ability to upload my own photos to firefly and use all their effects.

[@feelfreefpv]

I wouldn't use any of them. Feels just like the old filter gallery.

[@SBloem57]

The introduction of this video was "Will this change PHOTOSHOP FOREVER?" Well I don't think so. I followed your video and tried the filters. I wasn't really impressed by it. Most effects can already be achieved with the previously available options. As frequent users of the black and white options, this filter is unusable in any case. It also adds little to the options for color grading and color gradients.

[@photoshopcafe]

I don't really like that black and white one either.

[@jensgaethje8555]

There seem to be other programs that do these kinds of filters much better ... Photoshop is such a prefessional program, I dont understand why they are messing around with this when the results are so immature. In my opinion it takes away from Photodhops professiobalism by dumming itself down in trying to become a "one click wonder".

[@davidf6326]

So this is a tool that enables one to reintroduce all the horrible noise, distortion, blur, colour aberrations and artefacts that the last thirty years of development has been ironing out of digital photography?! Hhhmm, useful😁

[@photoshopcafe]

A lot of younger people like these "flaws" since the gear they use it too flawless.

[@davidf6326]

Same reason they buy vinyl, while those of us who suffered all the associated crackles, warping, scratches and broken styli first time around, appreciate the virtues of streaming, MP3 and CDs 😊 It's a strange world 🙄@@photoshopcafe

[@budsurtees4224]

Serious photography and editing are fast being hijacked by gimmickry and effects for the sake of effects alone.

[@photoshopcafe]

Photographers are only one type of photoshop user and not the majority either ;)

[@eisenschweinchen5354]

These filters don't make a bad photo any better!

[@photoshopcafe]

And nothing does. That's not the point of Photoshop or a $10,000 camera.

[@spookysandwich1355]

as a photographer these are not for me but i do wish PS would fix the focus stacking blend , its god awful and as anyone that does nature macros will know how bad it is

[@jadie1234a]

To be honest, I am not too crazy about these filters at all.

[@lovecraftiana268]

Thanks for the video. As of filters - an absolute cringe fest. Can see some of them used in a limited capacity, maybe for some graphics, but nowhere major.

[@greatunz67]

Most of these parametric filters look like photo effects from the early 2000's, why do i feel like these have always been there? nothing really useful in most of them.

[@kennethrohen5963]

There is no reason to worry: neither humans, any species, the planet, or even Photoshop will be around forever. Have you given any thought whatsoever as to how long "forever" is?

[@photoshopcafe]

I think you are a little too hung up on my title, which will probably change 5 times ;)

[@kennethrohen5963]

@@photoshopcafe Obviously, my reply to your inane, overused "forever" has caused you intense anxiety that has burrowed deeply into your neural (nothing to do with Photoshop's "neural filters"), such that you are having a cortisol storm, causing heart palpitations, trembling, and bladder discomfort. Get up from your computer, breath deeply, and go to a room that has soft lighting and meditate to soft jazz. Don't be so tense. Use this moment as a lesson to embrace change and deeper meaning. "Forever" is beyond human comprehension, but this very moment isn't. Live now. Seek inner-peace. 🦈

[@xraydelta1]

Such a shame about the hangar.

[@photoshopcafe]

Yes I agree! Fortunately we still have the one in best condition still remaining

[@greeceinfocus]

Who needs all these tools? Photographers are buying their equipment for thousands of euros and then they edit their photos with such filters. Find the mistake

[@sagetheowlfatfeathery2083]

Graphic artists. Photoshop isn’t just a photography tool; the first Photoshop course I went on, I was the only person (out of 8) in the class who was going to use it for photo manipulation.

[@greeceinfocus]

@@sagetheowlfatfeathery2083 I work with Photoshop since it was released. It was always part of my job bur I never used those stupid filters

[@davehenson5390]

Photoshop is, and always has been, primarily a graphic design package that photographers find very useful. Advertisers will often get a stock photo and create an advertising to the point the original photo is barely recognisable. If as a photographer you don't want to use the tools, dont.

[@TrevorDennis100]

I honestly think Photoshop is wasted on photographers.

[@davehenson5390]

@@TrevorDennis100 Do you mean the (relatively) small range of tools a photographer will use? As someone who updates Topaz every year, PS monthly payment is not much more.

[@polystormstudio]

From my testing, it's an absolutely useless feature. I'm on a high end PC and it's painfully slow. The default settings are pretty bad and I'm not about to tweak them given how slow it is.

[@Mjtphoto]

Answer to your title question: no.

[@nholmes86]

filters in photohsop right.nah dont think it will change much.

[@krectus]

Some decent stuff here but not that impressive. Where was this 10 years ago when people could have got good use out of this. Seems the competition is really pushing them to actually do new stuff here, wish they would have pushed themselves years ago instead of years of nothing updates in Photoshop.

[@ianperryman1078]

Interesting concept, but I'm not convinced it's a 'game changer'. I guess I don't have your youthful enthusiasm.

[@Dewabarasunderan]

What a clickbaity title… Obviously it won’t change anything.

[@billnoll]

Let's face it, these are bland at best or terribly outdated (glitch in 2023?) at worst. With Adobe's massive budget, they can certainly be more current and on trend.

[@BURTBROWN]

NOT a big favorite of mine.............

[@benzakonium]

Warning - something nobody mentions when they talk about the Beta apps - You will be bugged constantly to update them. Every few days there's an update. If you're ok with that and use them cool. But if you download to just try things out, it becomes a real pain.

[@rgarlinyc]

If you "download to just try things out" then you can either uninstall it or better, leave it as it in case you come back and then change Finder to open regular PS instead.

[@yannmaenden7236]

There are all sorts of problems with beta versions that don't get mentioned. For example - the last time I used a beta it failed to recognise that my Adobe subscription existed and I couldn't update the main version of PS until I uninstalled the beta. Then there's the hassle of finding that things you carefully set up in the original - like actions and scripts etc - don't get incorporated into the beta. I would suggest, if you want to play with the new features, that you install the beta for a couple of days then uninstall it.

[@photoshopcafe]

It is a beta for a reason. :) it’s like complaining you can’t spread butter on your unbaked cookie dough lol

[@rgarlinyc]

@@photoshopcafe Exactly.

[@carlkristensen8398]

Not much of that am I going to use.....Not the greatest thing I've ever seen in Photoshop!

[@Ian_Walsh]

filters have been around in photoshop for a long time. They have always been a bit naf. Looks like they still are. Its not what being creative is about. Thanks for showing us anyway.

[@prakkari]

To me, this is tacky and unnecessary. Will it change PS? Well if they are trying to make it into Snapchat or Instagram, they could be successful.e.

[@SardonicDog]

Most of the ones I’ve tried are crap. Useless for me.

[@IridiumZero]

Like all Adobe presets, they look like complete garbage

[@agarwalsimages]

Most of the filters are useless

[@adelalvin]

L title

[@peter-jac4143]

Terrible🤬

[@REDINKmysteries]

LOL, even in 2023 PS filters are useless

[@darrenleigh201]

Meh...

[@derphotoshoperdotcom]

You can make own filters, great. Other than that, what a TERRIBLE filter! It´s slow, even on really fast machines, it limits the resolution to 4096x4096px (if you have a higher res of the original image, it get´s upsampled! ). The UI is TERRIBLE! Looks different to all other PS UI´s ( with the exception of "Materials, of course). UI doesn´t react to "scrubby sliding", mouse wheel or arrow keys! And most of the filters look like crap, anyway. Why would anyone use the "color" filter, for example? You can do that with many other PS tools, without ruining the image resolution...Terrible job, Adobe!

[@nholmes86]

filters in photohsop right.nah dont think it will change much.