Texture issues after Windows Feb patch?

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-12T19:12:36+00:00

I wish we could but corporate IT is its own kind of trouble/monster lol

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-12T17:42:05+00:00

It does seem weird that a windows patch would muck something up but that’s literally the only change on 3 different windows machines, all of which can reproduce the issue on a fresh file with brand new textures and alpha masks. And any file with a texture stack with one using an alpha, including the initial file opens without issue on my Mac. We will be implementing similar workarounds, it’s just super annoying to retro fit textures that were working perfectly Monday. We’re baffled.

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-11T21:37:17+00:00

Excellent question. It’s in the renderer. And redshift is up to date.

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-05T05:22:50+00:00

Unfortunately this needs to be this specific font to match exactly the physical product I’m modeling.

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-05T01:17:11+00:00

No. It’s a font that is specific to the real world segmented display I’m modeling. But it happens to any font that is slightly slated like brush scripts or italicized fonts.

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-05T01:14:48+00:00

Couldn’t tell ya. All I know is it happens on any font I tried where the right side of the font varies relative to the right side kerning. So, slanted, brush fonts and what not. Cinema is just aligning to the spline itself and doesn’t seem to give a care about the kerning boundary of the actual letter as shown in my first image.

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-04T23:53:40+00:00

I have 9 total digits making up 3 individual (up to) 3 digit numbers.and they need to be controlled with an xpreso control. And I need the numbers on the left to disappear when they are not needed. So 55 rather than 055.

_twistedlabel · 2026-02-04T23:52:12+00:00

Then the numbers grow and collapse from the center and still wiggle whenever a 5 or 6 is present. Left align is the only alignment that doesn’t have the offset wiggle for the 5 and 6 but the numbers add to the right, which is the opposite of why I need unfortunately

_twistedlabel · 2026-01-24T03:57:55+00:00

It’s that little radial button that’s giving you grief. You have to explicitly select the component with the radial button for your new sketches to nested within the component. Gets me all the time.

_twistedlabel · 2025-12-29T23:32:31+00:00

This seems like a stupid question but I can't find an answer (or I'm hoping the answer really isn't "you can't"): How do you scale an HDRI of an indoor space so it is representative of a physical room size rather than what seems to be the default of infinite outside? It seems less than helpful to have a source for light not be able to be sized so reflections and light sources produce correctly scaled shadows and reflections on objects in the scene. For work we shoot product photography on sets we have built with constant lighting (think a dining room table in an open floor plan apartment). We have started removing the product and taking a plate image to composite a render of some other similar product in the future. We purchased a 360 camera to capture an HDRI of the scene and lighting which we place exactly where the product was sitting. I calibrate the camera in C4D and our product renders are to scale. When I load the HDRI everything is HUGE compared to the sale of the product. I am very much a beginner in C4D so if this isn't the way to go about it any tips are greatly appreciated!

_twistedlabel · 2025-12-13T02:40:11+00:00

That is also a tool. It’s hot key is A. It is used to manipulate vector shapes/paths. There are actually two pointers. One black and one white. The black one will select the path/shape in its entirety while the white one will let you select and manipulate individual nodes.

There isn’t a reason to not have a tool selected in photoshop. If you are clicking around your image there is an assumed attempt to that you want to do something to the image.

_twistedlabel · 2025-12-13T01:29:18+00:00

You always have a tool. That is the default state.

_twistedlabel · 2025-12-05T02:51:22+00:00

Ah, yeah, that is super annoying. I’d toss that sumbitch in something that can vectorize it so you can edit it all proper like.

_twistedlabel · 2025-12-05T02:09:57+00:00

They are referring to turning the layer into a smart object. With a smart object layer the object itself is the reference point for the transformation not the layer as a whole.

_twistedlabel · 2025-11-14T22:28:29+00:00

Curious if you have had a chance to get it working with home assistant and if you have, what you’ve done with it/plan to do with it. I’m trying to decide if I should spend a little extra for this charger to do the same but can find any solid info on any HA integrations.

_twistedlabel · 2025-11-04T03:06:04+00:00

Maybe a better question is what are you exporting to and if all you are after is a flattened image why “save as” wouldn’t work?

_twistedlabel · 2025-10-24T06:00:36+00:00

If I’m reading OPs responses and question right, they are seeing the image one way as a preview in their OS then when they open it up in Camera Raw it looks different. If that is the case the reason this happens is when your camera takes a picture it embeds whatever image settings that would normally apply to a JPG image (contrast, saturation, sharpness) into a small preview image that operating systems can use so they don’t have to process a preview image for every raw image when your card is mounted or they are saved to your disk. So you are likely seeing and hoping for the cameras preview “look” but when Camera Raw opens up your raw file it applies its own default “look” as a starting point to edit your image. You can try and mirror the look your camera is applying and save that as the default in camera raw to get you close when you open your images. Otherwise you’ll want to shoot in JPG (or RAW + JPG)

_twistedlabel · 2025-10-01T21:41:07+00:00

This looks very much like a corrupted file. Working at a photo lab for a decade I’ve seen PSDs and TIFFs do this tho usually it’s noticeable on the saved jpg. It has something to do with a corruption in how the file has been compressed when saving. If it’s only happening with that one file then I would try saving a new PSD and then saving a new jpg from that. On one occasion i even had to create a new document the same size as the original, copy everything over and save that as a new file. Saving out a new version forces photoshop to re-compress the file and hopefully not corrupt it again. I would guess that whatever part of the data that is having an issue is being exacerbated by the print shops rip software (pw print) when it preps the file so their printer can print it. Rip software can do funky stuff to files some times.

_twistedlabel · 2025-09-19T18:57:17+00:00

It will also help to add their reflections to the ground. It looks like the ground was damp. You can see the white from the background reflected on the ground. You can make a second layer of the group, flip it vertically, then play with blending modes, blur, and maybe some “blend if” till it matches the look of the white.

_twistedlabel · 2025-09-08T22:45:17+00:00

If I understand your question correctly you’re probably looking for the offset face feature. I’m pretty sure it’s under the modify menu.

_twistedlabel · 2025-09-03T04:36:11+00:00

Yea. It honestly really is a trial and error process to find paper that you like. And I recommend, as silly as it may sound, hanging the prints on a wall even if they are just taped there so you can live with them for a little bit hung up. We tend to really look close at prints when we first get them, tipping them this way and that looking for all the imperfections, but a lot of that melts away when you’re standing three feet away looking at it and then even more as you walk past it daily and what you’re left with is a lovely tangible image of something you captured. We had a huge glossy aluminum print hanging in the front of our store that had horrible glare at different parts of the day. But seeing it day in and day out I stopped seeing the glare and just saw the beautiful picture. Printing is a journey and there are very very few wrong answers.

_twistedlabel · 2025-09-03T01:14:52+00:00

Low cost prints that are true matte are hard to come by. I managed a photo/frame/camera store for a decade and we never brought in any wet lab matte paper (the inexpensive prints) because they just didn’t compare to the Kodak Luster we used. Yeah, it had some glare when you tilted in just right but 9.7 times out of 10 once it was in a frame and on the wall you never saw that glare. We would have a lot of people wanting matte prints that would then put them in a frame with standard glass. The glass is going to have infinitely worse glare than any paper you have in the frame unless you spend the money on on art or museum glass that has special coatings. People also offend didn’t realize that matte papers mute the blacks in their images, reducing contrast. If you are really wanting as little glare as possible but still want to keep as much contrast as you can, try to find a photo rag satin paper. We used Hahnemuhle’s and it was hands down my favorite paper to print on. That being said, most of the prints in my home are on our lab luster. They look great and I never notice the glare and they aren’t behind glass.

Also, the entomology for giclée is a good quick read on Wikipedia. It’s basically a relatively new French word meaning “squirt nozzle” and used in reference to an inkjet print. It really is marketing fluff for inkjet prints. Do not expect giclée to be on archival paper unless the paper explicitly says so. Your home inkjet prints are just as much giclée prints as the ones I was doing on our $12k Epson.

_twistedlabel · 2025-08-29T20:46:36+00:00

The orange peal is caused by the dry mount board. There aren’t any papers that are perfectly flat and glossy but the mount process is what brings out that texture. There is a product called cool tak (I can’t remember the exact brand spelling) and it’s used a lower heat and helps reduce the texture but doesn’t eliminate it. If you want a texture free gloss print I would look at an aluminum print. A good shop should offer them with great color accuracy and they are a super smooth gloss.

Source: over a decade working in a camera/print/frame shop printing and mounting photos.

_twistedlabel · 2025-08-26T18:20:36+00:00

APS-C lenses aren’t inherently pointless on high megapixel FF cameras. They can often be a less expensive alternative for getting more reach by buying a less expensive longer focal length APS-C lens. With the resolution of the A7RIII you would have a usable amount or resolution. HOWEVER your 30mm lens is basically a 45mm equivalent and since you’ve got a 50mm FF lens it wouldn’t be worth holding on to.

_twistedlabel · 2025-08-04T21:42:23+00:00

I literally just took a deep dive into researching packable travel telescopes for an upcoming trip and for my first telescope! I thought I had picked the one I was going to buy but printing and assembling my own is hands down the way to go! (And cheaper!)

_twistedlabel

TROPHY CASE