digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

HowTo Create a smoke effect in Photoshop

bluesfear.com — Here is how you can make some very cool smoke with just a simple filter effect. I haven't seen a tutorial like this on the internet yet so I thought I had better post one. But anyway I find it a very useful method, I use it quite a bit.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Crazychipmunk, on 10/12/2007, -17/+49No, those images were enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software.


    That is all.
    • callinthelaw69, on 10/12/2007, -35/+3Correct. They weren't shopped [sic], enhanced using photoshop [sic], enhanced using adobe photoshop, and DEFINITELY weren't photoshopped.
    • stealth45, on 10/12/2007, -7/+64Please don't kill the joke yet.
    • lowerlogic, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5And the digital image manipulation software was clearly running on a computer running Microsoft® Windows® Vista® 32-Bit Ultimate Premium FULL VERSION for System Builders Single Pack UPGRADE Limited Numbered Signature Edition [DVD] OEM
  • statix, on 10/12/2007, -11/+47ok i swear its been like 2 days since this Adobe Photoshop news debut but its already been done to death.

    It was funny the first time. please move along.
    • tobiasly, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3The Photoshop jokes will stop as soon as we go one full week without another "How to make smoke in Photoshop!!" post on Digg.

      In other words, don't hold your breath.
    • mapipolo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3It is still hilariously funny; in fact, I laugh more and more every time I see it on another story.
    • fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9These are the internets, the tubes, jokes don't die.
    • toosas, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4oh, but we are not joking. it'll be like that from now on
    • gcnaddict, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2All your base are belong to us.
    • deaper, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1No, its:
      All your Base­® are belong to ­Google™
  • holyskeleton, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4its been two days and I miss the Adobe® Photoshop® jokes already :)
  • binaryspiral, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42They look Gimped.
    • Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26I thought everything Gimp made resembled a penguin.

      Wait, you mean the USERS do that?
    • allenu, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Yes, clearly manipulated using The GIMP, i.e. GNU Image Manipulation Program.
    • Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Dude, people are gonna laugh at you if you keep calling penguins "gnus."
    • Oldschoolhack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I've just decided "gimping" sounds so much better than "photshopping".

      "Wow, that girls rack is definetly gimped."

      It just flows better....
    • texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"They look Gimped."

      Nah... that would mean they were filled with really ugly gradients and the most horrendous text effects and rendering ever produced.

      /me runs
  • CaptShmo, on 10/12/2007, -21/+10[]D.[]-[].0.T.0.S.[]-[].0.[]D.[]D.E.D!
  • Hayes, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4Hmm, it's been a while since I've seen a Photoshop tutorial on the homepage. I was thinking this one would be good.

    I was mistaken.
  • Mardala, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Photoshop smotoshp... I think "stripslashes()" would be more appropriate.
    • binaryspiral, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Digg'ed for schooling me on wtf all the slashy crap was in the text.

      Thanks!
  • avest, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6stripslashes()
  • DokumentAMarble, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1id just use smoke.....
  • charliecharlos, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I thought Snoop Dogg was on probation...
    • Ocelot13, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6no dude, it says in how to make smoke in photoshop, not "how to make smoke in the back of an impala" or any other place
  • Qwiggalo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Mine came out more like a Picasso painting then smoke. It looks awesome though, but not smokey, the edges didn't blur, am I suppose to assume I do that or did anyone else get it to work right?

    http://www.qwiggalo.com/images/smoke_questionmark.png
  • V3X3D, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Dugg. I was already looking forward to try other methods of creating digital smoke. Also check this highly digged digital smoke effect http://digg.com/design/Real_amazing_digital_smoke.

    btw I swear i'll photoshop this whole page and make ya'll look like fools !
  • Ellevirt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0thanks
  • chrisxkelley, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Note to the php developer:

    stripslashes() is your friend.
  • Lazrius, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3This is an awesome Photoshop tutorial...
    http://i18.tinypic.com/2mwt1xv.jpg
  • smex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Don't you mean "HowTo Create a photoshopped smoke effect" -- let the trademark die.
  • Julz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2omg im just waiting for someone to make a Yakov Smirnoff joke about photoshop
    • kewlito, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13In Soviet Russia, photos shop you

      Ok, hit me as hard as you can.
    • texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Ok, hit me as hard as you can."

      In the ear?
  • Barnolde, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7This would've been dugg a lot more had it been posted on 4/20.
  • ThankTheCheese, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5stripslahes($article) for crying out loud.
  • BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Mine came out looking like radioactive dog poop, anyone know why? Did I not apply the filter enough times?

    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b397/blackcow99/poop.jpg
    • Qwiggalo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Doesn't look like you did. Use the shortcuts though to make it go faster. Ctrl+F to do the filter and Shift+Ctrl+F to do the whatever it was called thing.
  • EvilFerret, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Pretty easy to follow tutorial for newbies, but the smoke is pretty lousy... I suppose it *kind of* looks like smoke :|
  • isplashwater, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Do they not know how to unescape " or ' ...?
  • madmaxptz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, this "rocks".
  • jamesjarvis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Whats with the copyrighted photoshop? lol
  • m00dy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1sexy
  • svenjick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The tutorial "looks" good, but when you try it out, the result is no where near as "good". Watch out!
  • svenjick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Take the tutorial picture (2nd one), apply the "wave" and "fade" a few times, and it becomes obvious that it's not the same picture that served as a basis for the tutorial (or there is more to it than said)...
    • cheesenuggets, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I concur. This tutorial is obviously leaving something out.
    • loneraven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Of course it doesn't work, The smoke should be on a different layer, not mixed with the black background.

      The tutorial isn't all that great, but seriously, read it first.
  • Errik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5STOP DIGGING EFFECTS ARTICLES, THIS DOES NOT MAKE YOU A BETTER PHOTOSHOP USER

    Learning about levels and bit-depth will make you a better photoshop user, why doesnt anyone post about THAT
    • macbookpromat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Cause it's boring.

      I understand where you're coming from, but people just want the quick and easy so no tutorial about bit-depth for you.
    • deaper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's the beauty of Digg bud. You want to see a tutorial about bit-depth and levels on the front page? Write up a halfway decent tutorial about it that actually makes sense to a novice Photoshop user, and submit it to digg. I'll be happy to digg it up.
  • Artzealot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Filters are for n00bs... Hand paint realistic smoke in photoshop and i'll be impressed.
    • BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well what are you waiting for? Hand make some smoke for us.
  • mdvashro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1for step three I cant click on "wave". tell me why.
  • ShaneShane, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The tutorial gets way too vague at this part:

    'To make this effect look even better you may have to "distort", resize, and change the blending modes when fading a bit."

    What the hell is he talking about? Is he saying you have to "distort" using a variety of filters?
    If so, why not just write a tutorial that says: "Step one to make smoke - use wave and some other filters and, poof: you have some crummy smoke"
    Disappointing.
  • relayerdesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It works with a little finesse. I illustrate here: http://www.relayerdesign.com/rd_blog/
  • Sampson80, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it's funny, people want to get credit for showing a technique, but then they leave out critical steps. The settings this tutorial shows for the "wave filter" are the DEFAULT settings. So I'm assuming the guy didn't give out "his settings". Alot of it is dependent upon resolution too. I first tried this with a 300 dpi document and it barely did anything to the image... Whereas if you try it to a 72 dpi document, the results are more drastic... However, 72 dpi isn't going to print well, so you need to play with the settings if you want the smoke to look right. I turned up the # of generators and got better results...
    • morguth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It also makes me wonder if people tried this out before digging it, or just dugg it for the pretty smoke.
  • Hiros, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thanx so much for this :)
  • jdonner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Man, that's looks aweful!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.