Thanks Ian - and glad they’re helping! 😎👍

Ha! Glad it helped :-) You CAN use pressure and airbrush, but in my experience it's not too accurate, so I tend to turn it off...!

Sometimes - I generally go "a bit heavy" on the layer, knowing we can back it off later :-)

Check out our "Advanced Masking" Pro Tips video - that should help :-)

Yeah - it's a beast... For now! ;-)

Hi Mark, So the trick is to keep the brush edge soft, and keep to low low low rates - ie: 15-20% max - if you want smooth transitions. Pen Pressure is useful if you're familiar with that method when using a tablet, but I tend to find the brush starts running away with itself (unintentionally) as I'm not always consistent with the pressure I place down on the nib!

Thanks and understood. I am getting to grips with Capture One and the videos are helping.

Ha ha! Give it a try - or even push it to 10% Opacity...! But yes, flow is an equally good way of staying in control of the mask, just be careful with that airbrush tick box if you do it that way.

Hi Jose, Unfortunately, there's not an elegant way of doing that, if you're trying to create a mask with less than 100% opacity. As you rightly say, you'd need to release the mouse and then either [space] or hand-tool across to the next area to start brushing again, and any overlap is going to cause a double-mask. ONE option, if it's down to the strength of the mask, is to do the work at 100% flow and opacity, and then reduce the overall layer opacity in the top panel? Otherwise, yes, you're going to get some double-masking however you try. The issue is, I wouldn't want Capture One "guessing" that I want to go off the edge of the viewport as I move to the sides either. Tough call, that one. Of course - the more brutal answer.... "Buy a bigger/higher resolution monitor ;-) "

One way to see what you have already covered is by viewing the coloured mask. But this can be difficult to see if the effect is not very dense. An alternative to seeing what you have already done is temporarily to increase or decrease exposure by the maximum amount, to exaggerate the effect. Then you might see better the areas already affected, so you know where to avoid, or where to erase an overspill. It very much depends on what you are doing, but an extreme temporary exposure adjustment can be a very good quick visualisation tool, and sometimes more effective than looking at the mask in an overlay colour. Of course, this only helps to visualise, and you might still have to use undo if erasing is not the answer. Additionally, once you are happy with one area and are worried that you might then over-paint what you have already done, you could continue on a new layer: the effect would be cumulative but you could discard or change the opacity of one layer if it interfered with another in a way you did not like: think of it as painting on successive overlaid sheets of acetate if that helps, and throw away or replace any you are not happy with. The same principle applies to C1, Photoshop and Lightroom (multiple adjustments rather than layers in its case). Using successive layers can really help to avoid destroying work you were previously happy with. Hope this helps.

Hi Jeffrey, You can go into Preferences > Mask and alter the mask colour to whatever you prefer. The grey scale will always be greyscale by definition, but the red default for drawing a mask can be changed in that panel :-)

So, the mathematical answer is that each click MULTIPLIES on the previous - and it works in the inverse way. (Complicated, I know...) So, it won't go: 20-40-60-80-100 with each click or brush-stroke in an additive way. Instead, it goes 20-36-49-59-67-74-79-83-87-89, and so-on, never *technically* reaching 100% except for rounding. (To do the maths, you need to start at 100. Minus 20% = 80. (Inverse = 20%) Minus 20% = 64. (Inverse = 36%) Minus 20% = 51. (Inverse = 49%) Minus 20% = 41. (Inverse = 59%) Minus 20% = 33. (Inverse = 67%) Minus 20% = 26. (Inverse = 74%) Minus 20% = 21. (Inverse = 79%) Minus 20% = 17. (Inverse = 83%) Minus 20% = 13. (Inverse = 87%) Minus 20% = 11. (Inverse = 89%) ...and so on. This is the same way that it works in Photoshop - and while confusing (I'm not a fan!) it's what we're stuck with :-)