ken_fleisher's profile

2 Messages

 • 

90 Points

Tue, Jun 21, 2011 1:03 PM

Closed

Acknowledged

Photoshop: Stamp Layers behaves different if the only paint layer is the background layer

There is a bug with the Stamp Layers command. If you use cmd-opt-E (on Mac) with multiple layers selected, they will correctly create a new, merged layer at the top using the selected layers. However, if the only paint layer is the background layer, then the background layer will be replaced with the merged layers, and re-adjusted by the adjustment layers above it. There is no new layer created at the top. I believe this is not the intended behavior.

Official Solution

Adobe Administrator

 • 

16K Messages

 • 

296.7K Points

10 y ago

Ken,

Cool find. Note that the history step that is recorded is "Stamp Layers" not "Stamp Visible."

Try using Cmd + Opt + Shift + E as your workaround. You'll not in this case, "Stamp Visible" is performed correctly.

We'll take a look at this. One of the problems with changing something like this that it may break existing actions that expect the current behavior (Even if the present behavior is somewhat expected) - so that may affect our decision making on performing a change here.

62 Messages

 • 

892 Points

10 y ago

May not be intended behavior, but an easy workaround is to option+double click on the Background to turn it into a layer. Now Stamp Merge should work as expected.

2 Messages

 • 

90 Points

10 y ago

Thanks for the reply. Sure, a workaround is easy, but I was sort of curious if others have noticed this bug and if it is in fact a bug. How do I go about filing a bug report with Adobe? I'm not a developer...

Employee

 • 

123 Messages

 • 

2.7K Points

I've gone ahead and logged this in our bug database. Thanks for the report!

62 Messages

 • 

892 Points

10 y ago

From what I gather, all Adobe Photoshops bugs are now filed here at Photoshop.com. I guess just by posting like you already have in this Photoshop Family "Problems" category.

2 Messages

 • 

90 Points

10 y ago

Thanks for the replies! Glad to see that this is now reported as a bug.