Create an adjustment layer or smart object filter without a mask

[Herbert Van der wegen]

No, do not think so. As a matter of fact, you are the first person I have ever encountered who asks for this! Layer masks are kinda essential for most work, so it makes sense that they are added by default.

Why not just use groups, smart objects, and so on, to reduce the clutter?

/*—————————————————-*/
System: Win7 64bit – i7 920@3.6Ghz, p6t Deluxe v1, 48gb (6x8gb RipjawsX), ATI 7970 3gb, EVGA 590 3GB, Revodrive X2 240gb, e-mu 1820. Screens: 2 x Samsung s27a850ds 2560×1440, HP 1920×1200 in portrait mode

[Kevin Camin]

80% of my adjustment layers or smart object filters don’t have a mask attached to them. I might have a folder created where I’m target an element in the photo, say it’s a product shot of a smart phone. I place a vector mask on that folder isolating the phone, and then everything inside that folder is instantly masked. Of course there are times where I’ll feather an adjustment on a mask inside that folder structure.

Another example is that I masked something directly in the photo (mask in on the layer this time) and want to apply some adjustment layers to it. It’s a lot cleaner to use clipping masks to target that object because then the adjustments are automatically limited to their visible pixels. The end result..a bunch of masks that I probably don’t need.

And again, don’t get me wrong. My final files are littered with masks, but it’s a 20/80 ratio due to my workflow. When I watch Lynda.com tutorials I see the instructors clearing them away often slightly annoyed as well.

I was just hoping there was some little known way to change this preference or some type of plug-in to switch this behavior.

Best regards,

Kevin Camin