chrisjames105
Active Member
- Messages
- 44
- Likes
- 5
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!
newbie photo needs help
- Thread starter chrisjames105
- Start date
ibclare
Queen Bee
- Messages
- 11,033
- Likes
- 4,638
What do you mean by "he's actually there?"
Make him larger? Without the feet, he can't be moved from the edge unless, maybe you sink him into the sand or put something in front of this feet, like a rock or toys (bucket, etc.), or you can find a collection of feet online and go through the transforming to make them look like they work with his body . . . I have done that. Sometimes it's easy, sometimes takes a bit of finagling.
Make him larger? Without the feet, he can't be moved from the edge unless, maybe you sink him into the sand or put something in front of this feet, like a rock or toys (bucket, etc.), or you can find a collection of feet online and go through the transforming to make them look like they work with his body . . . I have done that. Sometimes it's easy, sometimes takes a bit of finagling.
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,222
- Likes
- 4,343
ChrisJames, I was going to ask you the exact same question that Clare asked: "What do you mean by, 'he's actually there?' "
Rather than try to answer this by typing, IMHO, the best way to answer this is to go to Google Images, search for {baby on beach} and send us the URLs of a bunch of images that you think exemplify your phrase, "He's actually there!". We can take it from there.
Cheers,
Tom
Rather than try to answer this by typing, IMHO, the best way to answer this is to go to Google Images, search for {baby on beach} and send us the URLs of a bunch of images that you think exemplify your phrase, "He's actually there!". We can take it from there.
Cheers,
Tom
Paul
Former Member
- Messages
- 12,878
- Likes
- 7,023
To the OP, what you have is 'ok' you need to zoom right in so you can see the edges better then while doing your masking you can brush out pixels more accurately, as for placement, if this is all you have then stick with it, make it bigger maybe.Then you need to address lighting and shadows on the kid more.
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,222
- Likes
- 4,343
Great spotting, Paul. Given the unusual placement of the subject right at the edge of the frame, cut off at the legs , I thought the OP must surely have compositional concerns, so I never even bothered opening the image on anything except my cell phone. However, when one does, the technical problems with the composite that you observed couldn't be clearer.
That being said, and not that there is anything wrong with the current composition (...in fact, I rather like it...), IMHO, there still could be an interesting discussion of conventional vs unusual subject placement.
T
PS - BTW, I've attached a version of the cropped image small enough to avoid a potential side-track into a discussion that the artifacts we now all see might have come from the forum's compression software.
That being said, and not that there is anything wrong with the current composition (...in fact, I rather like it...), IMHO, there still could be an interesting discussion of conventional vs unusual subject placement.
T
PS - BTW, I've attached a version of the cropped image small enough to avoid a potential side-track into a discussion that the artifacts we now all see might have come from the forum's compression software.
