What's new
By:
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!

Realistic background replacement


So i had a go at it finally, we had a power outage here today which sucked!! I was PC-LESS!! Anyways, i could have went a lot further but, what the heck, the job is still up for grabs!! I could have worked out the windshield more and a few other tricks but...

exampledu1.jpg
 


Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

It's hard to get a believable angle out of that shot.. I've got a couple idea's on how to do it better next time. It would greatly help if the photo's weren't Lo-Res and complete dookie.
 
Last edited:
hawkeye said:
The lighting is just all wrong. The background scene shows an overcast almost shadowless day (soft light), as the building is very evenly lit. The car photos are just the opposite, they were obviously taken with very hard light, and so they are not evenly lit. As is, the two just don't mix and will never be convincing. The angle and type of lighting should be the same for all objects. The buildings aren't casting a shadow, so why would the car cast a shadow?

To make it reasonably convincing, would require replacing the white sky with a sunny sky and adding the required shadowing to the buildings as well as the car. Or the reverse of that, which would be removing the sunny glare from the cars. Neither of which will alter the fact that the car is photographed from a very different angle.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't say you are wrong but you are overanalyzing this way too much. If a client asks for something, do it to the best of your ability and that's that. Sometimes the clients demands aren't actually acheivable but do the best with what you are given and just see what the client has to say. If it's unacceptable they will let you know, hopefully they work with you as well as you work with them..
 
Gaussian said:
It would be a very soft shadow if there was one visible at all.

To get the idea, go outside on a clear sunny day... look at the ground and you see harsh shadows everywhere. Then go out on an overcast day where there is no direct sunlight and you see almost no shadows. If you do see shadows they are soft and diffused.

From the looks of the pic, that's an overcast day and the shadows should be minimal.

Just my .02
Click to expand...

You have to take a lot of things into account when dealing with lighting. Different surfaces reflect light differently, some more shiny which reflects more or dull which is more absorbent than others. Just because it is overcast does not mean no shadow or even lighter shadow. The amount of sunlight and angle does however have an immediate effect on how soft or hard the shadow being cast is. Now I will go back to my corner..

Google Image Result for http://priuschat.com/forums/attachments/freds-house-pancakes/20602d1261331780-december-snow-share-your-pictures-noname-1.jpg
Google Image Result for http://static.flickr.com/2165/2433714406_2457573f9e_d.jpg
Google Image Result for http://www.steamcar.net/img/85-5.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nice one tricky, the whole thing with those two images in my opinion was getting the perspective right, the car, the way it was angled for the background didn't really need that much reflection work, i had actually replaced the sky and then stopped working on that particular set of images as the client said it didn't matter what background and car as long as they met a set of certain parameters..
 
iDad, I'm not so sure your server isn't blocking my replies, I've replied to each and every email I have recieved, which I believe Dezigns can confirm.

I'm sorry you do not seem to be recieving replies from me, but I have zero clue as to why. I can assure you I am replying. I don't just ignore emails.

Other people replying in this thread; the mockups haven't been great so far; BUT I am not putting that down to your results, it is purely the source images, I know that. As stated, feel free to use your own car/backgrounds, with the proviso that the car is a 'high end' car and the background is suitably industrial/victorian/mill-like.
 
I'm done, you see what I can do others may want to give it more tries I am not wasting time proving what has already been seen you are either taking a risk at one of use or you are not. You will always find someone better somewhere.
 
Trell said:
iDad, I'm not so sure your server isn't blocking my replies, I've replied to each and every email I have recieved, which I believe Dezigns can confirm.

I'm sorry you do not seem to be recieving replies from me, but I have zero clue as to why. I can assure you I am replying. I don't just ignore emails.

Other people replying in this thread; the mockups haven't been great so far; BUT I am not putting that down to your results, it is purely the source images, I know that. As stated, feel free to use your own car/backgrounds, with the proviso that the car is a 'high end' car and the background is suitably industrial/victorian/mill-like.
Click to expand...

The problem with this is that in order to use "our own backgrounds/cars" we would have to purchase them to have the rights to them. Why don't you just purchase a couple of pictures of the internet of a car you are looking for with a suitable background? This is a joke and your attempt to farm work out to people over the internet with garbage images you probably don't even own is also laughable. I thought this would be fun and that's why I even bothered posting but you being the boss and us being the customer, you should supply the images at Hi Res, we do the work. That's how this thing works.

You can't even do that so I'm sorry people here even took you seriously. It would probably take 30 minutes per image of someone who has a good perception of what looks proportionate / right - which goes into placing the car believably, being able to mask the car realistically without having a feathered edge, and then being able to play with the lighting to some degree which we are really limited to being able to do. It basically comes down to pairing the car highlights with the highlights in the background image. For 25 bucks, lol, I'll pass.
 
I agree, as I have said before the pictures are all wrong for the intended purpose. People are just wasting their time trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
 
Woah.

I've gotta speak up here. Nowhere have I said I am offering just 25$ per image in this thread, nor have I given that impression. The price is negotiable.

Secondly, I've said totally the images are not perfect by any means, I have a client of mine asking for these kind of images; and this is something that I cannot do myself, so I asked a designer friend, and he reccomended here.

Saying that you're sorry people took me seriously...wtf.

I apologise if you don't feel you have had as much information as you wanted, a simple PM to me or an email could've answered any questions you had.
 
Trell, I think it would help if you did two things.

1. Specify what you are paying and don't just say it's negotiable. At least specify a range, for example $20-$30 per image depending on complexity... (or whatever, that's just an example I have no idea what you are paying). People have asked what the pay is, and I don't see any response from you.

2. Provide samples of the actual images you will use for the job. People need to see what they will be working on, not just a pic pulled from the web at low res that may or may not look anything like the actual photos they will be working on. this could make a big difference not only in the quality of the end result but also in the amount of work involved.

Without these two things it's difficult to get the best responses.
 
Back
Top