lasa, I heard you just fine. If I had an answer to your question I would have provided one. Per liking Fluid Mask. I wanted to like it too but don't. The companies tuts are very misleading making the plug-in look easier and better than it really is. What makes it worse is that when you have a problem the company is not very helpful. Bottom line - nobody likes it........except Evil.
Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Extract tool is bad ?
- Thread starter NemesisWorks
- Start date
NemesisWorks
Banned
- Messages
- 822
- Likes
- 208
Actually it only requires hand control, just ! + 3 set of each tool gives it the wind, I don't know what's wrong with you two. As lee was saying knockout was the best plugin in world now he says it isn't \:/
Good to see you Evil..can you give me a typical run thru on how you've use it? something that I may not be getting from the reading... a before and after you've used it on... how you attached the problem... I don't doubt it works, a $300+ plugin has to do something.. I just seem to be Fluid-less.
Thanks,
Lasa
Thanks,
Lasa
http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1981/ol2rl.jpg
Back in the day (P.C.) the issue of 'outlining' a photo was accomplished by hand. Either the artist would create masks using 'amberlith' or a liquid mask. Or a "stripper' would create a film mask from 'rubylith' and/or film ( positive image of the subject ) and some handwork. The hand tools usually consisted of an x-acto knife and a rapidograph pen. Then, once the mask was complete, they would make a series of film 'shrinks and spreads' to accomadate trapping the image outlined into a background image, color or tint.
I've gone ahead and recreated this technique in PS. It still sort of works.
Ex.A is the mask. created by copying the image, convert to greyscale, invert and manipulate with 'curves'
Ex.B is (return mask to rgb) copy orig photo over the mask layer. use cmd-g (ctrl- g) to ko the background. Select the subject (Tolerence depending on the subject) Inverse the selection then using the eraser tool set at 10 % pressure, soften the egdes of the subject.
Ex.C create a background. This is where some art direction comes in, Everything you do is subject to how it is to be used. This, of course, is all part of the design process. If you design it so that the outlined photo is to be used with a background ambience that is complimentary to the subject, as in Ex.C or Ex.D then life will be easy If the ambient color is bright red, Then you may want to make some curve adjustments at the Ex.B stage.
Ex.D is simply to show how the 'outlined' subject compares to the original.
If you can, find some printed matter that pre-dates the computer and Photoshop. You'll find some amazing things that were done by hand, by Pros that had great skills working with film and manipulating light.
Back in the day (P.C.) the issue of 'outlining' a photo was accomplished by hand. Either the artist would create masks using 'amberlith' or a liquid mask. Or a "stripper' would create a film mask from 'rubylith' and/or film ( positive image of the subject ) and some handwork. The hand tools usually consisted of an x-acto knife and a rapidograph pen. Then, once the mask was complete, they would make a series of film 'shrinks and spreads' to accomadate trapping the image outlined into a background image, color or tint.
I've gone ahead and recreated this technique in PS. It still sort of works.
Ex.A is the mask. created by copying the image, convert to greyscale, invert and manipulate with 'curves'
Ex.B is (return mask to rgb) copy orig photo over the mask layer. use cmd-g (ctrl- g) to ko the background. Select the subject (Tolerence depending on the subject) Inverse the selection then using the eraser tool set at 10 % pressure, soften the egdes of the subject.
Ex.C create a background. This is where some art direction comes in, Everything you do is subject to how it is to be used. This, of course, is all part of the design process. If you design it so that the outlined photo is to be used with a background ambience that is complimentary to the subject, as in Ex.C or Ex.D then life will be easy If the ambient color is bright red, Then you may want to make some curve adjustments at the Ex.B stage.
Ex.D is simply to show how the 'outlined' subject compares to the original.
If you can, find some printed matter that pre-dates the computer and Photoshop. You'll find some amazing things that were done by hand, by Pros that had great skills working with film and manipulating light.
About my earlier problem. I had contact with Vertustech and they gave me the following solution:
"We were discussing your issue yesterday and our chief researcher reminded me of an automated work-around we used in the past. That is to open the IIL, reduce the resolution to medium (thereby suppressing the compression noise at the edge) and with 2 strokes (one on the white background and one in the shadow) you can mask the delete part then press create cut-out with a thick or medium autocomplex setting and you get a near perfect cut out."
And it worked, close to a perfect extraction with a few clicks, I was pretty amazed.
I have to say that their support is excellent (from CEO to Technical Department), especially when you know that I?m still a trial user.
From what I've understood is that some of the problems are related to jpeg images, no matter how low the compression rate is. They seem to have a solution, but it?s not fully tested yet.
There are still a few issues with the product and manual that I?ve pointed out to them, but I feel good about this company, I think most problems will be solved in the very near future.
In general I sincerely get the feeling that these people believe in their product and after some more fiddling with it, I slowly start to understand why.
My advice; if it doesn?t do what you expected, contact them like I did, because they really appreciate the user input, even when it?s not always positive (at least I had that experience).
"We were discussing your issue yesterday and our chief researcher reminded me of an automated work-around we used in the past. That is to open the IIL, reduce the resolution to medium (thereby suppressing the compression noise at the edge) and with 2 strokes (one on the white background and one in the shadow) you can mask the delete part then press create cut-out with a thick or medium autocomplex setting and you get a near perfect cut out."
And it worked, close to a perfect extraction with a few clicks, I was pretty amazed.
I have to say that their support is excellent (from CEO to Technical Department), especially when you know that I?m still a trial user.
From what I've understood is that some of the problems are related to jpeg images, no matter how low the compression rate is. They seem to have a solution, but it?s not fully tested yet.
There are still a few issues with the product and manual that I?ve pointed out to them, but I feel good about this company, I think most problems will be solved in the very near future.
In general I sincerely get the feeling that these people believe in their product and after some more fiddling with it, I slowly start to understand why.
My advice; if it doesn?t do what you expected, contact them like I did, because they really appreciate the user input, even when it?s not always positive (at least I had that experience).
Aaron Sorkin
Member
- Messages
- 19
- Likes
- 0
BlueFlare said:
I noticed in the past several of their tutorials used jpgs to demo the product and they've since added the following to the faqs on their site:
What is the best image file format to work with?
A RAW file is best. If this needs to be compressed and you?are asking what is the best file format to use, the first thing to mention is PLEASE avoid JPEGs as they are too lossy and leach out the very information we need to do a good job finding edges. JPEG2000's are better but PNGs are better still.
Still there must be demand for it if they've released a Windows version aswell.
AaronS.
Ok..I'm looking for a favor...I need somebody that has this Fluid Mask to extract Mr. Ford from the background using it. I have the demo and can't for the life of me, extract anything...It isn't a very hard extraction...I just can't even get a passable extraction from this program.
Lasa
Lasa
Aaron Sorkin
Member
- Messages
- 19
- Likes
- 0
BlueFlare said:
I know it doesn't help Lee much now, but I see Vertus have recently added a user support forum to their website. At least it's a step in the right direction.
AaronS.
Based on most of the comments from other forums they probably HAD to do something. They've already dropped their price from $399 to $249 and are still having problems with sales. A few people like the software but most don't. And, keep in mind, Vertus can salt their forums with "happy users" posing as customers. It's done all the time and is a great way to help sales.
Unfortunately, bottom line for Vertus is that KnockOut 2 is an excellent program and it is considerably cheaper at $99. And, even IF the two software prgms. were equal in results, KO 2 is STILL cheaper. Why would anyone want to pay two and a half times more for the same results?????
There's an old saying, "Let the buyer beware." Nothing could be more appropriate in the case of Fluid Mask.
Unfortunately, bottom line for Vertus is that KnockOut 2 is an excellent program and it is considerably cheaper at $99. And, even IF the two software prgms. were equal in results, KO 2 is STILL cheaper. Why would anyone want to pay two and a half times more for the same results?????
There's an old saying, "Let the buyer beware." Nothing could be more appropriate in the case of Fluid Mask.
Lee, I don't think they are peppering the forum...they should probably consider doing it..lol.
Did you log on, it has a blood bath. The poor moderator..couldn't stop the bleeding from what I read.
Keeping a open mind, but my moneys in my pocket. I find Knockout and extract to work pretty much the same...
Lasa
Did you log on, it has a blood bath. The poor moderator..couldn't stop the bleeding from what I read.
Keeping a open mind, but my moneys in my pocket. I find Knockout and extract to work pretty much the same...
Lasa
Aaron Sorkin
Member
- Messages
- 19
- Likes
- 0
lasa said:
How's this for you Lasa? (Been a bit of a slow day at work today.)
AaronS.
NemesisWorks
Banned
- Messages
- 822
- Likes
- 208
Fluid Mask 2.0 is out and it has awesome new features I tried it , it works with charm really better than the first version. And it's free for those who buyed the first version.
Evil Nemesis said:
Most definitely an improved version, but awesome... well no.
I like the new edge detection (most definitely an improvement), simple extractions are pretty accurate (the problems I had with version 1.x of this plugin, to extract a simple book as shown in one of my previous posts, are totally solved), the program is easier to use but it's slow with large images and it stiil doesn't impress me with hair.
A nice addition to Photoshop nevertheless, but not more than that.
Just my 2 cents
NemesisWorks
Banned
- Messages
- 822
- Likes
- 208
lasa said:
You were always testing us 8}
Not testing you guys at all...still testing this program...or any other extraction program for that matter.
Lately I've been testing the channel method with good results.
But it comes down to the same thing, almost any type of extraction procedure works on hi-res clean clear photos, since lines and tones are clearly defined... so to need a hi-res to "try" an extract seems a little weak considering most people aren't working for National Geographics using $25,000.00 cameras.
What I would like to see is something that works on normal or low res photos.
The sample was just something tangible I would see a before and after...like we did a long time ago with a noise photo of you...we learned something by people posting their results using dif. methods. You actual used Noise ninja if I remember right...Oh well this time I learned people can only extract from hi-res or not at all.
Lasa
Lately I've been testing the channel method with good results.
But it comes down to the same thing, almost any type of extraction procedure works on hi-res clean clear photos, since lines and tones are clearly defined... so to need a hi-res to "try" an extract seems a little weak considering most people aren't working for National Geographics using $25,000.00 cameras.
What I would like to see is something that works on normal or low res photos.
The sample was just something tangible I would see a before and after...like we did a long time ago with a noise photo of you...we learned something by people posting their results using dif. methods. You actual used Noise ninja if I remember right...Oh well this time I learned people can only extract from hi-res or not at all.
Lasa