Content Aware in CS 5

canon400d

A friend of mine was on holiday and took this photo. He approached me as he knew I had CS5 and he asked me to remove the scaffolding from this building. I have tried several times using Content Aware spot removal tool but am unable to take out all the scaffolding.
I really would appreciate if anyone can take out all of the scaffolding and explain exactly how it was done.
Cheers
Bob

arodney

There is no magic bullet here. Content Aware might help, but the task is going to take time and a good Photoshop operator using the clone tools. But doable given the time and energy.

Sam

My gut reaction says this will be time consuming and labor intensive. You will need to link to the original raw (I hope) file.

Sam

MarkR

Any chance of a reshoot once the scaffolding comes down?

If you are bound and determined to do this, work big, work in layers. Check out Retouchpro.com and Katrin Eismann's Photoshop Restoration and Retouching. Be prepared to spend time on this.

canon400d

MarkR wrote: »

Any chance of a reshoot once the scaffolding comes down?

If you are bound and determined to do this, work big, work in layers. Check out Retouchpro.com and Katrin Eismann's Photoshop Restoration and Retouching. Be prepared to spend time on this.

Thanks everyone. I did tell him that he was asking a lot but I would do my best to help him out. He took this photo whlist on a bus holiday which is Inverness Castle 300 miles away.
Cheers
Bob

Peano

canon400d wrote: »

I really would appreciate if anyone can take out all of the scaffolding and explain exactly how it was done.

Content aware will be of little to no use. Lots of fine cloning required.
If you want someone to do it for you, you'll have supply the full-size
image. And if they're any good, you'll probably have to pay them.
This is a time-consuming job.

Icebear

I'm not trying to be an ass-hole here (comes naturally, I guess) but just buy a post-card. The sky in this shot is worse than boring, the foreground uninteresting, and the light flat. Someone has taken a great photo of this castle at some point in the past. Why not just consider this shot just a good documentation of the restoration. It's not going to be worth the time and effort. Once the scaffolding is removed, it's still a blah image. Sorry.

Peano

Icebear wrote: »

I'm not trying to be an ass-hole here (comes naturally, I guess) but just buy a post-card. The sky in this shot is worse than boring, the foreground uninteresting, and the light flat. Someone has taken a great photo of this castle at some point in the past. Why not just consider this shot just a good documentation of the restoration. It's not going to be worth the time and effort. Once the scaffolding is removed, it's still a blah image. Sorry.

I disagree (with the possible exception of the first clause ). The sky and all the rest can be fixed. The real problem is what the OP indicated -- taking out all that scaffolding.

MarkR

Icebear wrote: »

I'm not trying to be an ass-hole here (comes naturally, I guess) but just buy a post-card. The sky in this shot is worse than boring, the foreground uninteresting, and the light flat. Someone has taken a great photo of this castle at some point in the past. Why not just consider this shot just a good documentation of the restoration. It's not going to be worth the time and effort. Once the scaffolding is removed, it's still a blah image. Sorry.

As Peano pointed out, many of the other flaws are easily fixable for this image, depending on how much emotional investment the OP's friend has in the image.

The scaffolding-- well, there's a case where "fixing it in Photoshop" is actually probably harder than reshooting the original image once the scaffolding comes down!

I speculate that if the OP's friend new how much time and effort would be involved in removing the scaffolding, he wouldn't have asked. Blame Adobe and their slick marketing.

canon400d

MarkR wrote: »

As Peano pointed out, many of the other flaws are easily fixable for this image, depending on how much emotional investment the OP's friend has in the image.

The scaffolding-- well, there's a case where "fixing it in Photoshop" is actually probably harder than reshooting the original image once the scaffolding comes down!

I speculate that if the OP's friend new how much time and effort would be involved in removing the scaffolding, he wouldn't have asked. Blame Adobe and their slick marketing.

I have read and appreciated everyone's comments so I decided to have a go with Content Aware and this is what I ended up with after 20 minutes of my time. I could have put a different sky in if need be but the guy only wanted the scaffolding removed.
I would really appreciate everyone's remarks in view of what has been said.

Cheers
Bob

Peano

canon400d wrote: »

I decided to have a go with Content Aware and this is what I ended up with after 20 minutes of my time.

If your friend finds that acceptable, your friend is extremely easy to please. I don't mean this in
a snarky way, but if it's free, it's darn well worth it.

Dan7312

On the one hand you can see some kind of foggy black stuff between the towers on the left side of the image, both in the sky and the bricks. A little cloning of the sky and bricks would really help.

On the other hand my guess is that your friend will be quite happy with the results. A more dramatic sky would be nice, but if your friend thought there was a problem with the sky in the first place he probably would have mentioned it.

For a 20 minute investment of your time I think the results are very good.

canon400d wrote: »

I have read and appreciated everyone's comments so I decided to have a go with Content Aware and this is what I ended up with after 20 minutes of my time. I could have put a different sky in if need be but the guy only wanted the scaffolding removed.
I would really appreciate everyone's remarks in view of what has been said.

Cheers
Bob

MarkR

I suspect that the clone stamp, while it would have taken longer, would give superior results.

The real question is: is the client (your friend) happy with it?

Peano

MarkR wrote: »

The real question is: is the client (your friend) happy with it?

That's one question. Suppose the friend is happy. Suppose he makes a print and
hangs it on the wall. Will others be equally oblivious to these glaring flaws? I wouldn't
bet on it. You'd be a better friend if you didn't palm this off on him.

pathfinder

Bob, as you have figured out, yes, you can remove the scaffolding in Photoshop, but to do it imperceptibly, is a great deal harder.

Like Peano said earlier, to do it well, will require a great deal of painstaking, meticulous work on a hi resolution image.

Images of mine that I cannot edit satisfactorily myself, in just a few minutes, I delete, and return the electrons back to the universe for re-use.

canon400d

pathfinder wrote: »

Bob, as you have figured out, yes, you can remove the scaffolding in Photoshop, but to do it imperceptibly, is a great deal harder.

Like Peano said earlier, to do it well, will require a great deal of painstaking, meticulous work on a hi resolution image.

Images of mine that I cannot edit satisfactorily myself, in just a few minutes, I delete, and return the electrons back to the universe for re-use.

Yes I realise all the flaws in the image which has been pointed out. I should have said that I did point out the flaws to my friend and he remarked that he had heard so much about photoshop and that he wondered if it could be done.
Thanks once again for all your kind help which I truly appreciate.
Cheers
Bob

Peano

canon400d wrote: »

I did point out the flaws to my friend and he remarked that he had heard so much about photoshop and that he wondered if it could be done.

It can be done, but it's a bit like looking at a beautiful statue and wondering
whether it could be done with a hammer and chisels. It could, of course, but
it takes a lot of time and skill with those tools. The devil is in the details.

canon400d

Peano wrote: »

It can be done, but it's a bit like looking at a beautiful statue and wondering
whether it could be done with a hammer and chisels. It could, of course, but
it takes a lot of time and skill with those tools. The devil is in the details.

I see exactly what you mean Peano. You have certainly brought out the detail here. Brilliant much better than my capabilities.
Cheers
Bob

hnjngo

I did it!
So im okish at stuff like this, so i figured id get some practice in. I used cs6 with combination of clone tool, masks, duplications, healing brush, patch tool, and content aware move tool. (Mostly clone, and healing brush)

Job took about 4-5 hours, including sky swap, and cleaning foreground.

Master Photoshop operators how did i do?



Original:

Peano

Nice job on the building. The sky looks overdone to me; doesn't fit with the light on the subject. I would go for something
more like this. There are a number of repeated patterns in the cloning below the building. Need to watch out for that.

hnjngo

Peano wrote: »

Nice job on the building. The sky looks overdone to me; doesn't fit with the light on the subject. I would go for something
more like this. There are a number of repeated patterns in the cloning below the building. Need to watch out for that.

Thanks, I absolutely agree with the sky, it was kinda a slap on job, i count find one that suited better. Is there a good place for free stock images?

I wasn't exactly sure how to avoid the repeated patterns, bc alot of it was covered by scaffolding, any suggestions?

Peano

hnjngo wrote: »

Thanks, I absolutely agree with the sky, it was kinda a slap on job, i count find one that suited better. Is there a good place for free stock images?

I created a new sky using the method shown here, and added clouds with free cloud brushes you can find through Google.

I wasn't exactly sure how to avoid the repeated patterns, bc alot of it was covered by scaffolding, any suggestions?

I was referring to the repetitions in these areas:

Dan7312

I think you dropped the flag that is flying over the building on the right.

hnjngo wrote: »

So im okish at stuff like this,

hnjngo

Dan7312 wrote: »

I think you dropped the flag that is flying over the building on the right.

Yes, i thought it looked cleaner without it, you think its better with the flag?

hnjngo

Peano wrote: »

I created a new sky using the method shown here, and added clouds with free cloud brushes you can find through Google.

I was referring to the repetitions in these areas:

oh, the grass and flowers, ok i'll be more careful next time. Thanks

Dan7312

It is cleaner without the flag, but I just think of castles as having flags and pennants flying over them.

hnjngo wrote: »

Yes, i thought it looked cleaner without it, you think its better with the flag?