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!

Revealing part of an underneath layer


O

OliverGreen

Member
Messages
19
Likes
1
Hello again,

I'm editing an image and I've spent lots of time refining the details. I had to grab the image from a background and it did not leave so easily, at least for me, but I've gotten passed that. I'm now doing some finishing touches. There's some small parts of the image that lost detail in the transfer from backgrounds and some of it got muddy in areas as well. I am wondering what the best way to take individual parts of the image and put them in place underneath the edited image so that when I erase everything the quality piece of the image is revealed.

Thanks,

J
 
The cupcake is muddled and I want to use the unedited cupcake in it's place. Same thing for several other tiny spots in the image.

Any help is appreciated
 
Ok, I apologize, but I'm not understanding the problem.

Based on your screen shots, it appears as though you have taken one image of the happy subject, duplicated it, applied a layer mask, made a selection of the happy subject which was then added to the layer mask.

Screen Shot 2014-12-11 at 7.59.34 AM.png

You say, "There's some small parts of the image that lost detail in the transfer from backgrounds and some of it got muddy in areas as well.".............I don't understand how this can happen when there only seems to be one duplication of the original. You should have no detectible degradation of the image after one duplication.

You say, "The cupcake is muddled and I want to use the unedited cupcake in it's place." I see no muddling of the cupcake image itself, but I do see some masking issues at it's base.

Screen Shot 2014-12-11 at 7.59.55 AM copy.png

Screen Shot 2014-12-11 at 8.00.16 AM copy.png

The only thing standing between your original image and the duplicate image is the layer mask. If anything, all you need to do is to make corrections to the layer mask to solve your problem.

Did you leave out of your description some long complicated processing that you made to the duplicate (masked) image that may have caused the "muddiness"? Maybe a slight blur or something? If you did, that would explain a lot!

Another option would be to just duplicate the original again and drag the layer mask onto the new duplicate, then turn off or delete the "muddied" one. If your do this, convert the duplicate to a Smart Object and use smart filters that allow you to change and mask effects. Also use adjustment layers that can be changed or masked as well.

Again, I apologize..........I'm just not understanding your issue. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
Ditto Sam...I didn't quite fully understand it either.

Where did the cupcake come from?

Its a magical, mystical, cup-cake conundrum!

Regards.
MrTom.
 
dv8_fx said:
I think the cupcake is part of the headress. He didn't include the top part of hair and the headress base so it looks out of place (muddled) .....
Click to expand...

When I originally made the image mask from the background I wasn't getting an easy transfer. The muddling I'm talking about is in the bottom left of the cupcake. I'm very aware that the hair is missing there and I erased it to clean it up. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

The issue is sort of minor I guess, but it bothers me and I want to fix it.
 
OliverGreen said:
I tried to make an arrow pointing to the area but for whatever reason it won't let me paint over the space layer.
Click to expand...

edited..... Wait a minute I see it. Like it's faded.

I think the that area on the mask is faded. Probably caused when you were painting black to hide the hair and the brush was slightly intruding into the white. Touch it up with a slightly soft edge brush using white.
 
With all due respect to the OP there is just too much 'guesswork' in deciphering the initial description of the problem.

OliverGreen said:
...I had to grab the image from a background and it did not leave so easily...
Click to expand...
A background?
Does that mean another image entirely?

Leave so easily?
What problems were encountered in whatever the OP tried to do?


OliverGreen said:
...There's some small parts of the image that lost detail in the transfer from backgrounds and some of it got muddy in areas as well...
Click to expand...
Image?
What image is that then?...and there's that 'backgrounds' again....hmmmm...I dunno for sure but certainly 'sounds' like something has been copied from another image.

Muddy?...Pass.

OliverGreen said:
...I am wondering what the best way to take individual parts of the image...
Click to expand...
Now, which image are we talking about?


OliverGreen said:
...and put them in place underneath the edited image so that when I erase everything the quality piece of the image is revealed...
Click to expand...
The most confusing part of all...'in place underneath the edited image'.....underneath?
Underneath what edited image?
I can't see anything that's been 'edited'...not from the layers anyway, and would whatever it is that's going 'underneath' even be seen when it's there?
There is only one layer with a mask so....I dunno on that one.

Then the OP says 'erase everything'.....er.....right....and 'quality piece' of the image.....'revealed'....????
I pass on that one too.

Believe me I've tried to read between the lines on all of that but the penny just isn't dropping.

With a little clarification from the OP I'm sure it will all make sense.....but at the moment the 'sketchy' info supplied just doesn't cut the mustard.

Its a Christmas Cup-Cake Confusion of the first order. :bustagut:

How's that for a half-baked reply?
(Ya see what I did there?...half-baked!)

Dough!

Regards.
MrTom.
 
There goes Tom with his weird sense of humor.....LOL.....

Tom... I think what he meant was the slightly faded bottom edge of the cupcake. Like I said, is originally part of the headdress and not a separate, dragged in object......


Oliver... I edited my earlier post...
 
You know you love it!

Better than being a miserable old git!
(I don't usually do requests but I could do 'miserable old git' if you prefer...I'm here all week.)

Weird?

Ok, I'll give you that one.

Regards.
MrTom.
 
dv8_fx said:
edited..... Wait a minute I see it. Like it's faded.

I think the that area on the mask is faded. Probably caused when you were painting black to hide the hair and the brush was slightly intruding into the white. Touch it up with a slightly soft edge brush using white.
Click to expand...

Sorry if my post is unclear I'm really new to the lingo here. Thanks for understanding me DV, but Which brush do I use? just the regular brush? color replacement brush? There's 4 of them right?
 
OliverGreen said:
...Sorry if my post is unclear I'm really new to the lingo...
Click to expand...

No need for apologies, I'm just playing with you, but if you could just clarify exactly what you've done, what you are trying to do and what colour socks you are wearing it would be greatly appreciated.

dv8_looks to be on the right track anyway...he'll sort ya ooooot!

Regards.
MrTom.
 
MrTom said:
No need for apologies, I'm just playing with you, but if you could just clarify exactly what you've done, what you are trying to do and what colour socks you are wearing it would be greatly appreciated.

dv8_looks to be on the right track anyway...he'll sort ya ooooot!

Regards.
MrTom.
Click to expand...

You are such a tease, you know that? :bustagut:
 
Back
Top