You are right! You can do that as well, but I am a control freak and wanted to be sure it would understand the direction precisely haha. But I am sure it will work just fine without a prompt!
For birds in the sky, make a smaller selection in the sky of where you want the birds to be. Generative Fill takes into account the size and shape of the selection to fill appropriately, and selecting the entire sky doesn't give it enough info on where or how big the birds should be.
Wow this was fascinating to watch! Super interesting to see the puddle being formed, it did such a good job of making it look realistic. The birds made me laugh so much!! Going to play with this in the next few days :)
I worked on a retouching job yesterday from a GFX 100 and I extended the edges using selections that were no more than a 1000px wide. Ended up using around 20 gen fill layers and the quality was very high. Impressed for sure but always room for improvement.
That's amazing, especially since the results are low-res at the moment, I think they scale quite nicely. And at worst, there's A.I. upscalers and sharpeners to compensate. Thanks for sharing your experiences Ryan!
I'm paying for Photoshop for years and I have never been disappointed by Adobe. I see what they are doing with my money. (Of course opinions vary, but mine is on the positive side)
What you can do to avoid resolution issues is to use marque tools at exact pixel like 512x512 or not tried, could be trained for 768x768 and do multiple fill. Then the small part will be at high res.
@@pratiknaikedu Also for bird type of work, better add on small areas one by one. For me seems working better small areas then to add to a large one multiple objects. Also clean up extra generation for file size. I hope they will add a way to remove automatically in the future.
One of the videos I watched on this indicated that the max resolution is for up to 1080 pixels and then do exactly what you suggested doing but I have not experimented with this yet Another aspect they mentioned is that it, currently, is much more effective horizontally vs vertically but expected to improve over time
@@pbottomley14 it was mentioned in one video, I know, but for the moment from my knowledge (could be wrong) the max training solution is 768x768. So if you use at that resolution then you get the maxiumum quality and not blured, pixeled etc.
i tried to make it leave the image as is, but change only color, and it never did, but generated some new stuff. I think, when they will catch up with generative adjustments - that would be huge
I've been playing with this all day, literally your imagination is the limit. Only downside I can see is that Aaron Nace said Adobe would start charging for its use once it goes into the regular version of PS, and I'm curious as to how much it'll be.
Wayne! Hope you've been well! Oh my gosh I am going to go check out his video now. I really hope they keep it included for subscribers without additional payment.
Just be sure to leave the prompt blank for any removal or objects. Don't type in "remove" or "camera" as may understand differently. But yes, there are many times it doesn't work, but for me most of the time it does. Even if it was 10% for now, it is tremendous sorcery compared to the alternative in some of these complex situations. I look forward to it getting better, I wouldn't be suprised if it's soon!
The birds composition is art
I may be mistaken but I thought to remove objects, you leave the text field blank and just click generate.
You are right! You can do that as well, but I am a control freak and wanted to be sure it would understand the direction precisely haha. But I am sure it will work just fine without a prompt!
For birds in the sky, make a smaller selection in the sky of where you want the birds to be. Generative Fill takes into account the size and shape of the selection to fill appropriately, and selecting the entire sky doesn't give it enough info on where or how big the birds should be.
So many possibilities. The speed that this is all moving at is crazy!
It's really dizzying just trying to keep up with it all! So much being pushed by so many people all at once.
Wow this was fascinating to watch! Super interesting to see the puddle being formed, it did such a good job of making it look realistic. The birds made me laugh so much!! Going to play with this in the next few days :)
I worked on a retouching job yesterday from a GFX 100 and I extended the edges using selections that were no more than a 1000px wide. Ended up using around 20 gen fill layers and the quality was very high. Impressed for sure but always room for improvement.
That's amazing, especially since the results are low-res at the moment, I think they scale quite nicely. And at worst, there's A.I. upscalers and sharpeners to compensate. Thanks for sharing your experiences Ryan!
Amazing.
Have you tried feathering the selections before generating? How does that look?
On first try I didn't notice a big difference but I'll keep playing!
Is there any documentation on prompting available so far?
Not yet but I am sure it will pop up soon!
I'm paying for Photoshop for years and I have never been disappointed by Adobe. I see what they are doing with my money. (Of course opinions vary, but mine is on the positive side)
This is insane!!!!!!
It blew my mind
What you can do to avoid resolution issues is to use marque tools at exact pixel like 512x512 or not tried, could be trained for 768x768 and do multiple fill. Then the small part will be at high res.
That's a great tip! Thank you for that!
@@pratiknaikedu Also for bird type of work, better add on small areas one by one. For me seems working better small areas then to add to a large one multiple objects. Also clean up extra generation for file size. I hope they will add a way to remove automatically in the future.
One of the videos I watched on this indicated that the max resolution is for up to 1080 pixels and then do exactly what you suggested doing but I have not experimented with this yet
Another aspect they mentioned is that it, currently, is much more effective horizontally vs vertically but expected to improve over time
@@pbottomley14 it was mentioned in one video, I know, but for the moment from my knowledge (could be wrong) the max training solution is 768x768. So if you use at that resolution then you get the maxiumum quality and not blured, pixeled etc.
i tried to make it leave the image as is, but change only color, and it never did, but generated some new stuff. I think, when they will catch up with generative adjustments - that would be huge
It won't work in that way yet, it will always want to generate something to fill in the area selected. Hopefully they will bring that in the future.
I've been playing with this all day, literally your imagination is the limit. Only downside I can see is that Aaron Nace said Adobe would start charging for its use once it goes into the regular version of PS, and I'm curious as to how much it'll be.
Wayne! Hope you've been well! Oh my gosh I am going to go check out his video now. I really hope they keep it included for subscribers without additional payment.
got so many examples where generative fill doesn't work at all. remove camera and adobe created another camera etc etc
Just be sure to leave the prompt blank for any removal or objects. Don't type in "remove" or "camera" as may understand differently. But yes, there are many times it doesn't work, but for me most of the time it does. Even if it was 10% for now, it is tremendous sorcery compared to the alternative in some of these complex situations. I look forward to it getting better, I wouldn't be suprised if it's soon!