The paradigm of visible

[roger_ele]

I have just discovered what I am sure many know - I am afraid that I took Photoshop literally - with the clone stamp tool, the check box selection: Use all layers, does not mean use all layers (funny thing, words and there meanings), it means Use VISIBLE layers. I had just taken their word for it and never thought to check...

So my mind wanders to wonder if other areas of Photoshop are treated with the same paradigm of visibility. After turning off the eye on a couple of layers, I created a new layer and selected it, I then went to Apply Image and selected merged, and YES - the image was the result of just the visible layers.

So, now I wonder - are there any areas that Photoshop doesn't follow this paradigm of visibility?

[platscha@cs.com]

I could be wrong but, I think PS doesn't recognize a layer when the "eye" is turned off, so it would use all the other layers, the ones it recognizes with "eyes" on. Maybe the exception would be the difference between merging visible and down, versus flatten, but both do not recognize an "eye" off layer.

[Stephen M]

Depends on the edit.

With apply image - the source layer in the same file can be invisible but it can still be applied to a visible targeted layer within the same file (or separate files I guess).

For most operations involving a 'tool' or define pattern or whatever, the visibility would govern things.

Offhand I would think that invisible items still being included as visible would be more of an exception than a rule.

It will be interesting to see how this thread pans out.

On a tangent - define pattern or snapshot in earlier versions does care about visibility, but does not matter which layer is targeted. So this is why select all/copy only does that layer but select all/define pattern will grab all visible layers (there is also copy merged to deal with multi layers).

Stephen Marsh.