What's new
By:
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Questions about PSG 3D Tutorial


C

C9Mouse

Power User
Messages
248
Likes
3
Mark,

I am trying to follow along on your 3D tut, but I seem to have run into a couple snags.....

First, after duplicating the main layer with my text on it, I did the Edit>Transform>Scale at 101%. This appears to have no effect. Is each layer suppose to widen out more? It would appear from looking at your example that I should be decreasing the size, instead of increasing it.

Also, in the first screenshot of Bevel & Emboss Layer Styles, what are the settings you used for Contour?

Thanks.
 
Nevermind, I figured it out myself.

Taking each subsequent Text layer and resizing to 101% didn't do anything - instead I changed the numbers in the width and height boxes from percents to pixels and reduced each Text layer by about 5. This got me the desired effect, since each image was now "decreasing" in size.
 
Actually Doug you SHOULD be "increasing" the size. Decreasing will create the wrong effect.

You have to apply this to more than a few layers to "see" any visible difference. After only a couple layers it would appear nothing is happening... but it is. ;)

The reason i use % for scaling is because it will change with the size of your type. Whereas pixels will always be 'fixed'. And at times, 1 pixel increments will be unneccessary.

Let's see your results! [excited]
 
Was working on it when I wrote the post. Here's my image after decreasing the text layers to make the effect (I couldn't get the same effect doing it your way, Mark ... sorry).
 
C9Mouse I just was writing the reply when I sow that Mark
already give you an answer. :)

Mark I had the same problem when I tried your tutorial and increasing height & width for 1%, the letters get some fanky look ( see attachment.)

So how I get 3D effect in previous post: I increased Vertical position (Y) and Horizontal scale (W) for 1%. [saywhat]
 
hmmm... ok thx guys i like the feedback. I'm gonna have to recheck what i said then... could've swore i did it the way i stated... but no harm in double-checking huh. :righton:

Nice effort to Doug.
The reflection though needs to be created differently though. Which we might already have realized from the tute, but didn't feel like pushing forward with that part. No biggy, so long as you're aware of it. ;)
 
Markthe Keeper

I had the same trouble concerning the scaling in Edit/Transform using PS 7. To get the same 3D perspective you show I had to decrease the height & width to 99%. It all fell into place after making that one change.

Are you using an earlier version of PS?
Wondering if PS made a change in how that works.

Thanks for the tut... Mark

Here is what i came up with.

anepu
 
No, i'm using PS7... and that wouldn't make any dif anywho. ;)

But guys i swear to yas... you'd better recheck your methods because i guarantee you you will NOT get the proper results by decreasing the type size.

You have to understand what's happening here...
We're working from the bottom layer upward, and in the image, from the back to the front. That is how we're "building" our effect.

If you decrease the size each time you dupe a new layer, you'll end up with a backward warped mess, such as is seen in the topmost example image below.

If you dupe your layers and increase, then you'll get the correct effect, as is shown in the 2nd example below.

Trust me guys... decreasing will only work if you take all of the duped layers and reverse their order in the layer palette afterward. :B

If you're still convinced you're doing it your way and getting the correct results, then reDo the tute and attach or send me your raw PSD file unFlattened. I wanna see the layers. 3[

BTW... using 1 pixel is a tad overkill here... unless your type/object is REALLY huge. 1% is usually sufficient. Or .5% at the least.
 
Ok, now I get it .... it was this statement that did it:

Mark wrote:You have to understand what's happening here ... We're working from the bottom layer upward, and in the image, from the back to the front. That is how we're "building" our effect.
Click to expand...

So we are duplicating the main text layer upward, and then increasing the size. Thanks, Mark :)

Perhaps you should stick that statement in your tutorial.
 
PSD files

Hi Mark

Here are PSD files, for both examples I was increasing for 1%.
 
That's fine then Lily... you SHOULD be "increasing". ;)

Well technically Doug, that specific statement doesn't "need" to be in the tute. The instructions are explicit enough to allow the user to duplicate the effect, IF they follow the steps as written.

I've found that the more experience (not necessarily skill) a user has with PS, the less they will read the tutorials verbatum. And that's where the trouble begins. :B
 
tutorials can be hard to stick to or follow sometimes, often its just one word that didnt regester that can leave u clueless. I cant count the number of times i have done, and redone tutorials and not getting the result, only to discover there is one small bit of info i either skip over or not click too hehe.

but thats actually a good thing :D Why u ask???

Well, cause each time is more practice lol
 
I was just thinking of people like me, who need some things said in a slightly different way.

Anywho .... thanks.
 
:righton: Great tutorial, Mark!
Athough I confess that I didn't read it "verbatim"... [innocent]

I added a 'gradient overlay' (to match) to the stroke effect, in order to produce the 'shiny' effect on the sides.
 
Wendy Excellent. :righton:

Mark I really do not know why I am getting that fanky letters. [confused]
 
Had a look at your files, Lily!

[shhh] You SHOULD NOT rasterize your base type layer! Each time you duplicate and enlarge it, you are enlarging the "jaggies"!
 
Ok guys as suggested by Doug... for clarity sake i've added that line i wrote in my previous post:

"We're working from the bottom layer upward, and in the image, from the back to the front. That is how we're "building" our effect."

Hopefully that will help folks visualize how the effect is built. Which should make the procedure easier to understand. :B
 
Wendy

[shhh] You SHOULD NOT rasterize your base type layer! Each time you duplicate and enlarge it, you are enlarging the "jaggies"!
Click to expand...

That was it! ;\ I didn`t know that. [oops] Thanks Wendy. :)

Mark Thank you.
 
Anyone found rasterizing their base text layer will have to answer to Wendy from now on. :bustagut: [confused]

Al.
 
Back
Top