refine edge - hard image need help learning

[ibclare]

Thanks Tom. I think I am just weary of so much edit advice that is done with plugins that cost money (trial versions or no) and may be ahead of the PS learning curve. But but but . . . that said, there are obviously plenty of members that want to use them and they are a good adjunct to Photoshop. I think I have become a self-styled crusader for learning PS basics, and using them as much as possible till you have a good handle on them.

I suppose if a newbie wants to do one kind of thing only, learning to use one half of one percent of PS capabilities, then fine for them. They probably own a pirated version of Photoshop in any event given the investment.

If I did professional fashion or wedding photography or such, I am sure I'd own every possible editing plugin available. Meantime, newbies to PS need to know how to do it manually, IMO, and that includes learning how to look at an image, a render, and see what is good about it and what is not working. Beginners accept a lot of work that still needs a lot of work. Haven't we all. It takes trying different methods and learning how to see the defects before being able to produce a great selection. (incidentally, the one I did certainly had defects, but were I to use it in a manipulation myself, would've worked on it more)

Well, I might be wrong. Perhaps if a person has learned all he/she can about renders and wants to take that part of their learning to the next level, they're ready for 3rd party plugins. After all, it is only one part of using Photoshop and they plan to go on with other things. I also respect the fact that using renders can be a large part of what people do in PS, so I'm not a Luddite: go Topaz.

 

[Tom Mann]

I seem to degrade my mask I made with RE...for example, the green by the lower arm..None with RE, if I re do with Topaz, my mask is lousy...I must be the issue.

Here's a few suggestions:

1. Use Re-mask ("RM") before Refine-edges ("RE").

2. Make the width of the blue, "to be computed" strip as narrow as possible. Don't hesitate to make it large where needed (eg, serious fly-away hair), but once you are out of that area, make it narrow again.

3. The output of RM (to feed to RE) should be a mask, not an actual 1st cut of an extracted subject.

4. If the extraction is difficult because of low contrast between the subject and the background, give RM a higher contrast, higher saturation version of the original. Same goes for RE.

5. Use RE's decontamination adjustment to fix color bleed.

6. If there are obvious errors at any point along the way, don't try to fix them by pushing the adjustments to extreme values, just paint them in. The former will lower the quality of the rest of the mask.


If I think of anything else, let me know.

T

PS - If you want to start another thread specifically for the purpose of walking through this extraction using the RM/RE method, don't hesitate. I'll follow along and see if I can spot any problems.

 

[egosbar]

i gave remask a good work out today on this image , its a good plug in and very good when you line up the original and use the keep and mask view for the second image , you can see whats going on very clearly

looks easier then what it is if you want to pick up everything

 

[Tom Mann]

Clare: "... Meantime, newbies to PS need to know how to do it manually, IMO, and that includes learning how to look at an image, a render, and see what is good about it and what is not working. ..."

EXACTLY !

--------

Clare: "... Well, I might be wrong. Perhaps if a person has learned all he/she can about renders and wants to take that part of their learning to the next level, they're ready for 3rd party plugins. After all, it is only one part of using Photoshop and they plan to go on with other things. I also respect the fact that using renders can be a large part of what people do in PS, so I'm not a Luddite: go Topaz. ..."

No, I don't think you are wrong at all. I think the transition to using plugins should almost always be delayed as long as is reasonable, given the situation and needs of the person. What annoys me to no end are the photogs in the wedding industry. They spot another photog using some particular plugin or trivial action (eg, selective desaturation, or the creamy look, or the green-yellow cross processing look ... whatever), they purchase the same item and tout this to potential customers as "their style", when, in fact, (a) is is nothing more than a button push; and (b) it has already become widely used, and in a couple of months it will have as much appeal as a leisure suit. ;-)

However, there are some situations in which I will blatantly encourage intermediate PS users to get a commercial plugin. That is when there is some operation that either simply can't be done using PS, or would involve so many steps and take so much time that the results wouldn't be reproducible on demand. A good example of this are new algorithms that Adobe hasn't yet incorporated. For example before Adobe improved their noise reduction, I strongly advocated 3rd party noise reduction plugins because they did a clearly better job than PS. Another example was content-aware scaling. That was available in the research literature and as a free plugin by a tiny Russian company years before Adobe incorporated it.

Anyway, I have zero doubts that we are on the same side of the fence on this issue.

Cheers,

T

 

[egosbar]

tom what should the color range be set at , ive done the girl image about 4 times now for practice and the first attempt was very good , the last few have not been as good i was wondering if ive changed something

 

[Tom Mann]

Ego: Which girl - the Indian w/headdress or your girl? Also which color range are you referring to?

T

 

[egosbar]

not the indian , im working on the last image for practice , thought it would be easier then it is , im talking about the color range in remask

 

[Tom Mann]

Ego, is the image of the girl that you posted the original that you are working from, or was there a different background and you already replaced it with the dark background that we see.?

T

 

[egosbar]

its the original image

 

[Tom Mann]

Hi Ego - I'm pretty busy all day today but will return to this late tonight (east coast USA).

Tom

 

[MikeMc]

I played some moe with Topaz RM....still didn't see the need over CS5. I then watched a you tube on RM from Topaz, and after the boring lady stops a few in, the reasons became aware to me. This is a quick simple masking tool, that can stand alone or start a complex mask with RE that works well. I will admit the thought process for Topaz is simpler than PS, but Topaz also has some great quick tools

[video=youtube_share;qcfm8Do2EjI]http://youtu.be/qcfm8Do2EjI[/video]

 

[ALB68]

Ego,
Obviously not Tom here,,but the color range setting in there can be thought of as what we used to call tolerance. You would mainly use that with with the One Color selection tool under which it is placed. I'm sure by now you have tried that tool. It works OK IMHO but I have not used it much. Higher is better depending on the graphic.

not the indian , im working on the last image for practice , thought it would be easier then it is , im talking about the color range in remask

 

[ALB68]

With that particular image she is demo ing, I could do it quicker, easier and get just as good of a cutout using a channel mask. Just my two cents.

I played some moe with Topaz RM....still didn't see the need over CS5. I then watched a you tube on RM from Topaz, and after the boring lady stops a few in, the reasons became aware to me. This is a quick simple masking tool, that can stand alone or start a complex mask with RE that works well. I will admit the thought process for Topaz is simpler than PS, but Topaz also has some great quick tools

[video=youtube_share;qcfm8Do2EjI]http://youtu.be/qcfm8Do2EjI[/video]

 

[egosbar]

thanks tom , i would like to work with you with this one on the girl not the indian , im finding it hard to get a great mask , i can get a passable one with a fair bit of work , just looking to master this , i think refining your mask is a skill that high the list of mastering

ill have another go tonight , ive watched all the and especially the hair one , they as usual they make it look easier as there is limited color

this particular image of the girl has more saturation i think then it looks on first glance

be interested to see what people can come up with , put it on a white backround if anyone tries it and we can see the results ,

be a good test , i love the way topaz gives you 2 or 4 views of each different view so you can see whats going on in all of the images

 

[egosbar]

oh most tuts just use the blue and then fill in red

there was one that done it different starting with red and green very roughly and working from there , it done a good job but again maybe it was easier then it looks , ill post the link tonight

 

[ALB68]

What are you referring to Ego?

oh most tuts just use the blue and then fill in red

there was one that done it different starting with red and green very roughly and working from there , it done a good job but again maybe it was easier then it looks , ill post the link tonight

 

[bgoodman4]

Thanks Tom. I think I am just weary of so much edit advice that is done with plugins that cost money (trial versions or no) and may be ahead of the PS learning curve. But but but . . . that said, there are obviously plenty of members that want to use them and they are a good adjunct to Photoshop. I think I have become a self-styled crusader for learning PS basics, and using them as much as possible till you have a good handle on them.

Interesting point of view, I never thought of it that way. The way I looked at it was that if I had found a plug-in that made it easier for me to accomplish something, and, if someone was trying to get a similar result, it would make sense for me to point them to the plug-in. I can see the wisdom of what you are saying,,,,just because I went through the process and found an easier way to do something certainly does not mean that the process is of no value.

HOWEVER, that being said where do you draw the line? Does it mean that before you use a specific specialized PS tool, for example content aware fill, do you have to, or should you, learn to accomplish what CAF does using cloning tools etc, first? There are lots of tools in PS that simplify the process that would have been nec (and time consuming) in previous versions of PS. Are you saying that learning the old ways before learning the new ways necessarily leads to better results?

For that matter the same argument can be made regarding film and darkroom work. For the BEST understanding it would be advisable to spend time mastering film cameras and darkroom work (I loved darkroom work by the way).

So where do you draw the line?

One of the things I like about forums like this,,,,especially this one but there have been others,,,, is that there are often multiple suggestions on how to accomplish the same thing. This gives the person asking for help a number of options to choose from, as well as allowing each of us (and anyone reading the thread) the opportunity to potentially discover a new way to do something.

 

[egosbar]

nope i cant get a very good mask on the girl , i can get it ok but its a tough one , id like to see and learn of someone who could mask this image very well

i tried remask and got it ok then went to refine mask and stuffed it lol

how do you put a image on here that flashes from one to another on top of each other ?? ive seen it and its a good way too look at the quality of the mask

 

[MikeMc]

I started playing with this, the Indian, and a few in my albums.

I must admit to my surprise that consistently all of my masks turned out much better in PS using RE over all my efforts to use Topaz ReMask. What I did find was Topaz will shine for a quick mask,without a need for crisp edges....when changing exposures within an image, changing DOF...I can get a good mask in seconds with Topaz, BUT if I want to lift a part, RE wins hands down.

I have watched tuts till I was numb, I'm with Clare on this...I'm sticking with PS

 

[English_Wolf]

I am new to CS6 and the reason I switched from anything else is that I got tired of plug-ins, ready made solutions that do not do what I am looking for. I am/was a portrait photographer and I am rather puzzled if not a bit disgusted by the 'edits' offered and sold as 'great' or 'professional'.

CS5 has a steep learning curve and this is why I am here, to learn CS6. I am getting lost in the multitude of ways to achieve anything but I hope to be able to stand on my own two feet soon.