Are you using Photoshop regularly for paint?

I was watching a photoshop tutorial today, and I saw some pretty awesome results from content aware fill for object removal (on still frames), and it got me wondering why I’m not jumping into photoshop to paint clean frames more often. I tend to just stick in flame and recursive clone it out, but I’m feeling like I wanna start building my photoshop chops up to use in conjunction with my flame work. Got me curious though, how many folks are bobbing in and out of photoshop to do paint work for still frames? I can recognize that in terms of handing off a setup, you’d need to make sure that painted still is easily accessible on whatever server and labeled as what it is, but dang, there’s cool stuff in there that makes me want to stop painting stills in flame.

When there is a DMP involved it breaks the Flame workflow anyway, so what’s the difference.

Yeah I haven’t kept up with all of the Adobe updates recently. It has some pretty cool features. Sucks when you are on linux but on a Mac jumping around is super simple.

1 Like

I’m on a mac and the jumping about part is what I love. “Hello Syntheyes, nice to see you again! Have you met flame? Of course! See you again soon friend!”


BrittCiampa –

I don’t use Adobe’s tools because it doesn’t make sense for me to pay for a Creative Cloud subscription.

I use Affinity Photo or Affinity Designer for most of what I’d normally do in Photoshop or Illustrator. US$55 or so per application.

Affinity Photo has an inpainting brush that is very good. I first used it last week to remove a designer chair’s undercarriage (five spoke leg system) and replicate the carpet texture that the chair was sitting on.

This would have been a cloning nightmare in Flame’s Paint but I got to the 90% point in Affinity Photo in under ten minutes. Would PS’ content-aware fill have done better? Probably yes, but it’s nice to work with software that you only have to pay for a single time.


I don’t use it for painting because it does not fit into my workflow. I might consider it if there were python hooks, but from what I have been led to believe in conversations with Autodesk peeps, that’s not going to happen. I might reconsider if a major portion of my job was creating hi rez matte paintings, but it’s way overkill for tv commercials. What I have done in the past is used it to clean up a lens flare that was moving across a face. I stabilized the flare, cropped the shot to just a few hundred pixels around the flare, exported as a tiff or exr sequence, (it was last year, I don’t exactly remember) created a photoshop action of selecting and removing using content aware on just one frame then automated the process across the whole sequence. It was a last resort and it worked way better than I thought it would. I then reloaded the sequence and dropped it back into the shot. I appreciate the efforts AD has put into incorporating photoshop into the timeline and batch workflow for tiles and graphics, but it would be nice if there could be a deeper connection. I believe the ball is in Adobe’s court right now, so good luck with that.


Some of us have no choice. We get scads of elements from clients that are done in Illustrator and photoshop. We need to be able to make changes (and more often than not, fixes) and don’t have the time to wait for them to do it again, particularly when I can’t even make them understand that cmyk is not a viable format for television. A creative cloud license is indispensable for us.


you can open and save psd files in affinity photo, it actually has more options than photoshop.



Up there next to “can you send us a high-res still at 300 DPI”?

I 100% jump into photoshop regularly for all the content aware tools. Been using them since day 1. Saves a ton of time and gives a way better result.

1 Like