Which is the best tool for background removal?

[thisisnasrin]

[TABLE="width: 91"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 91"]1. background eraser

2. pen tool

3. magic wand[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[IamSam]

Hello and welcome to PSG.

You should never work destructively so I would advise that you never use the Eraser Tool or the Background Eraser Tool unless your removing a solid color background.

The best tool or technique for background removal depends on the image. Removing backgrounds is about making selections so it would be difficult to suggest one particular tool.

Around 60% of the time I use alpha channels-Brush Tool-Quick Masking-Layer masking-Color Range. Then 30% of time I use the Pen Tool. About 08% I might use Magic Wand Tool or the Quick Selection Tool and the remaining 02% I would use the Lasso Tools and other techniques like Blend If in a layer Style.

But, any given image might require the use of all of the tools and techniques mentioned above!

HTH

 

[TonyCooper]

I'm a bit confused by IamSam's comments. The tool used does not determine if the edit is destructive or non-destructive.
Any tool can be used non-destructively if layers are added.

When I delete a background, I use these steps:

1. Duplicate the Background layer.

2 Add a blank layer and move it between the Background layer and the Background copy layer.
Sometimes I will fill this layer with color to make it easy to see what has been removed. A white
filled layer is often better than the "checkerboard" blank layer.

3. Turn off the "eye" in the Background layer.

4. Any tool, or combination of tools, can be used to remove the background from the top
layer. I prefer to use a Layer Mask and brush with a Wacom tablet pen, but very simple
jobs can be done with other tools.

Anything done to the top layer is non-destructive to bottom Background layer regardless of
the tool used to remove background.

The first step of duplicating the Background layer is always done regardless of what edits
are made. I never do anything other than crop without this step.

On the subject of cropping...There's been a change in the cropping tool in CC2017. If you
uncheck the "Delete Cropped Pixels", a crop becomes non-destructive if the file is saved
as a .psd. A re-opened cropped file can be re-cropped to a larger area. The previously
cropped-out part of the image is still there.

 

[thisisnasrin]

Thanks a lot

 

[IamSam]

I'm a bit confused by IamSam's comments.

Sorry for that, I didn't explain myself. The Eraser Tool, Background Eraser Tool, and Magic Eraser Tool delete pixels and are destructive. Period. I'm not suggesting that their use is in any way destructive to the overall edit, only on the layers in which these tools are used.

The tool used does not determine if the edit is destructive or non-destructive.

Absolutely correct! However, any tool or technique that deletes pixels is considered to be destructive. If used on copies/layers, it's still destructive to that layer. There are other ways to add back deleted pixels..........but not to that layer.

Any tool can be used non-destructively if layers are added.

Your right again. However, any tool or technique that deletes pixels is considered to be destructive to that layer no matter how many layers you use above it.

Any tool, or combination of tools, can be used to remove the background from the top
layer.

Not necessarily true. I will demonstrate below.

Anything done to the top layer is non-destructive to bottom Background layer regardless of
the tool used to remove background.

Absolutely correct.

Let's look at this photo.
I want to remove it's sky.


I make a copy of the original layer and use any of the Eraser Tools to remove the sky.
Note that I also added a white visibility layer to aid while I deleted the pixels from the layer.




Oh, I've made a mistake. I accidentally deleted the part of the tower structure and a light pole.
Can I retrieve the pixel information from that layer? No because the tool I used deleted the pixel information from that layer.
Have I destroyed the underlying layers and ruined the edit? No.
Can I add back the tower from this point of the edit even with the pixels deleted from that layer? Yes.

The question becomes how many more steps do I need to add to my workflow to add back the tower?
Had I just used non-destructive tools and better techniques then I would not need to add any extra steps or layers to correct the problem.

Had I used a layer mask and the Brush Tool, I could add back the tower in a matter of seconds.

There's no doubt that you are 100% right in your statements. But I too am also 100% correct. It's all in how you look at it.

Hope that explains it better.

 

[TonyCooper]

Sorry for that, I didn't explain myself. The Eraser Tool, Background Eraser Tool, and Magic Eraser Tool delete pixels and are destructive. Period. I'm not suggesting that their use is in any way destructive to the overall edit, only on the layers in which these tools are used.


Absolutely correct! However, any tool or technique that deletes pixels is considered to be destructive. If used on copies/layers, it's still destructive to that layer. There are other ways to add back deleted pixels..........but not to that layer.


Your right again. However, any tool or technique that deletes pixels is considered to be destructive to that layer no matter how many layers you use above it.


Not necessarily true. I will demonstrate below.


Absolutely correct.

Let's look at this photo.
I want to remove it's sky.


I make a copy of the original layer and use any of the Eraser Tools to remove the sky.
Note that I also added a white visibility layer to aid while I deleted the pixels from the layer.




Oh, I've made a mistake. I accidentally deleted the part of the tower structure and a light pole.
Can I retrieve the pixel information from that layer? No because the tool I used deleted the pixel information from that layer.
Have I destroyed the underlying layers and ruined the edit? No.
Can I add back the tower from this point of the edit even with the pixels deleted from that layer? Yes.

The question becomes how many more steps do I need to add to my workflow to add back the tower?
Had I just used non-destructive tools and better techniques then I would not need to add any extra steps or layers to correct the problem.

Had I used a layer mask and the Brush Tool, I could add back the tower in a matter of seconds.

There's no doubt that you are 100% right in your statements. But I too am also 100% correct. It's all in how you look at it.

Hope that explains it better.

Even using the eraser tool on that layer, the erased pixels can be restored with the History Brush tool provided the file
has not been saved and closed.

My own workflow is using a Layer Mask, but I will sometime use the Eraser tool to delete large areas of background
and then creating a Layer Mask for a more precise edit. Not often, since there's no read advantage to ever using the
Eraser tool for background removal.

 

[IamSam]

Even using the eraser tool on that layer, the erased pixels can be restored with the History Brush tool provided the file
has not been saved and closed.

You are again 100% correct. This is only another unnecessary step that could have been avoided by not using a destructive technique or tool in the first place and is only applicable at the time of the actual edit, as you stated, once the document has been saved and then reopened, then there are no saved history states for the History Brush to use.

My own workflow is using a Layer Mask, but I will sometime use the Eraser tool to delete large areas of background
and then creating a Layer Mask for a more precise edit.

I understand, but it could be a bit unnecessary. If your using a layer mask and the Brush Tool anyway, wouldn't it make better sense to just quickly enlarge the brush and blitz the background from the layer mask? I understand we all have our methods.

........since there's no read (I assume you mean "real") advantage to ever using the
Eraser tool for background removal.

Again your 100% correct. There's almost no advantage to using destructive techniques or tools for removing backgrounds. Which is why I originally suggested to the OP that I would not use the Eraser Tools.

 

[TonyCooper]

It's a change of subject, but this exchange leads to the question of when the Eraser tool is
the best tool to use.

In my case, I make all cloning edits on a blank layer above the layer that I want to change.
Sometimes, if extensive cloning is done on an image, and some areas of cloning are not
acceptable, I will use the Eraser to remove the cloning in those areas. If the overall layer
is unacceptable, I'll delete the layer and start over. Sometimes, though, there are just
parts that are unacceptable.

\

 

[TonyCooper]

I understand, but it could be a bit unnecessary. If your using a layer mask and the Brush Tool anyway, wouldn't it make better sense to just quickly enlarge the brush and blitz the background from the layer mask? I understand we all have our methods.

When using the Layer Mask brush technique, I usually set some softness to the brush. The Eraser is
100% hard, so I can wipe out large areas with the Eraser without leaving traces. Then I go to a Layer Mask
with a brush with some softeness and clean-up.

Not a necessary technique at all. Just sometimes a convenient and quick removal step.

Sometimes, when using my Wacom pen with a Layer Mask, lack of the right pen pressure
leaves a residue. Using a white or other color filled layer under the masked layer generally
reveals what was not cleanly removed.

 

[IamSam]

It's a change of subject, but this exchange leads to the question of when the Eraser tool is
the best tool to use.

Great idea!

In my case, I make all cloning edits on a blank layer above the layer that I want to change.
Sometimes, if extensive cloning is done on an image, and some areas of cloning are not
acceptable, I will use the Eraser to remove the cloning in those areas. If the overall layer
is unacceptable, I'll delete the layer and start over. Sometimes, though, there are just
parts that are unacceptable.

I do the exact same thing.

As I stated in my response to the OP, one other uses of the Eraser Tools that I use all the time is that I will quickly remove solid color backgrounds that are in contrast to the subject with the Magic Eraser Tool (set to about a 16 tolerance). It can do as good of a job as any other technique you can come up with. The only problem I often encounter is when the subject and the background have similarly colored connected pixels and the tool will include some I don't want it to. There's no need to preserve solid color backgrounds. They can quickly be replaced with a solid color layer below it. You can even merge the two layers to restore it to it's original state.

 

[thisisnasrin]

Thanks All for help me.