Jump to content

Do the layers have the ability to "mask" lower layers?


Recommended Posts

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers?

I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do?

For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this?

(Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers?

I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do?

For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this?

(Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers?

I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do?

For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this?

(Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers?

I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do?

For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this?

(Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers?

I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do?

For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this?

(Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture B).

The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B.

(Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture B).

The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B.

(Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture B).

The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B.

(Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture B).

The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B.

(Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture B).

The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B.

(Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...