Skybase
![]() |
||||||||||||
Posted: July 3, 2013 10:08 am | ||||||||||||
Skybase
![]() |
Nice. Add a simple offset with xy params and add a simple distance param would make it usable like Photoshop's drop shadow.
A bit of critique in hopes to help you a bit: In the chain going from blur to levels node, there's a bit of an issue: levels still has color. A really subtle amount. Instead of doing that, use get alpha. It'll give you a nice b/w matte instead of using a RGB bitmap operator. I guess the offsets were meant to expand the size of the shadow? Last thing, I'll probably try something as well anyway. And also, update the components to the latest ones. You'll have to do that manually but it'd be better given the fact that you're submitting it as a 3.0 filter. |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 3, 2013 10:36 am | ||||||||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
I have had this snippet since long time ago and I have decided to submit it to the library for anyone that wants to add a drop shadow to any of your filters, you can do it with this one, although for now you can´t change the shadow direction
This shown in this thread below is an example of what can be done with this Fractals by bomber This without drop shadow ![]() With added drop shadow ![]() I think it looks much better and let´s separate the layers and does not look all glued and plain as the one without drop shadow |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 3, 2013 11:09 am | ||||||||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
Thanks for your comments Skybase, if you know ways to improve and optimize this one I am open to suggestion and advice.
Yes, this is a good suggestion and I have already tried it before, but have not had a good result yet, so this is why I submitted first this simple version, and then will make another version with this more controls for shadows orientation as in Photoshop
I have just seen that the Levels components was wrong, and the gamma slider was not at -100 so there has been some color leak, and now when I have out it at -100 there is no more color in the levels component. Would this be enough? I have tried the alpha suggestion, but I am sorry that it does not work right for me and I get a mess as result in the blend.
Yes, you are right. If there is other better way to do it you can tell me.
Good, would like to see an expert in FF like you can do
Yes, Sorry that I did not update the components, as this is an old filter I have done long time ago, and is true that must be updated and to be done manually, specially with the Offset that is not the same one on the FF 3.0 than in FF 2.0 |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 3, 2013 11:42 am | ||||||||||||
Skybase
![]() |
Couple notes: even if you set the levels with gamma set at -100 there's a good chance colors (or luminance values) will leak through with various situations. The point is, that's just how the levels component works.
In the current method, you're using the difference blend mode to combine two images together. Difference mode should be reserved for intentionally inverting parts of the image based on another (or seeing differences between two similar images). In this case, you got two big blobs of shadows being combined, in such cases, multiply blend mode works best. The reason why you're seeing problems when you use the get-alpha component is because you're using the difference blend mode. It's just behaving as it should. ![]() |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 3, 2013 12:04 pm | ||||||||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
NEW UPDATE
I have submitted to the library now a new updated version I have fixed the Levels components reducing the color leak, although maybe would be needed another way to make it to reduce it 100% Have rebuilt the filter with all new components from FF 3.0 to get the same result Have deleted the last Offset component that really was not needed
Well, in the rebuilt version is using the screen blend mode that is better. Will try later to use your suggestion and try again the Get alpha to replace the Levels component after blur, thanks |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 3, 2013 12:06 pm | ||||||||||||
Skybase
![]() |
Ah.... this is one of those filters where the construction itself forces you to use weird methods.
![]() Consider this: the screen blend is a dodge blend mode, meaning it's got brightening properties. Now in this case, you don't see that because you got a black shadow and alpha background. So if there's a situation where somebody wants to change the color of the shadow, then the screen blend at the end of the chain will affect the end result. Which is why I see it as a round-about way of creating the shadow amount parameter. Typically the color image goes on top of the shadow layer, therefore using the Normal blend mode will suffice. However, because you want the "amount" parameter, this doesn't work. A simple, not-so-elegant solution is to simply place something that allows the user to alter colors, change alpha properties of the shadow, but this is like dealing with it "after the fact that shadows have been derived." So some of these factors do have to be "built-in" to the structure. (Below) Here's a version I was constructing. Keeping in mind some of the parameters you set up, I tried to build it around what you were trying to accomplish. ![]() |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 4, 2013 3:25 am | ||||||||||||
Skybase
![]() |
I tried to reduce the number of nodes used for the example I produced so you can understand what's going on. Each node has specific functions that's visually understandable. Consequently the example version I made it so it can behave like outer glow like in Photoshop. Simply input a bright color in the shadow color/amt parameter.
I guess on the positive note regarding the original filter, it's doing really unique things. For example using the difference blend mode to blend shadows together to expand it was kinda brute force, but a alternative method regardless. While the efficiency and clarity of the filter is a bit lacking, the overall thing does work visually but not so much functionally. I attached the filter. Hope it helps you build! ![]() Ultra Simple DropShadow.ffxml |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 4, 2013 3:46 am | ||||||||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
New update already available in the Library
------------------------------------------- Thanks very much for making an alternative and better way to make drop shadows and it looks well, will try it later. Thanks for uploading it here, but I think that you could upload it to the library as a snippet too as it your own filter and whole creation. |
|||||||||||
Posted: July 4, 2013 6:22 am | ||||||||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
WOW!!! I have got an email telling that this filter has got an HU reward!!!
![]() Thanks very much for all the ones that have used and found useful this filter. What I wonder is that this was sent to the library as an snippet to be included in others filter, and if this has an HU, it means that it has been used much as a filter itself, instead of a snippet. HU = High Usage |
|||||||||||
Posted: November 24, 2013 12:27 am |
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
33,711 Registered Users
+18 new in 30 days!
153,533 Posts
+38 new in 30 days!
15,348 Topics
+73 new in year!
13 unregistered users.