How do I make effective image selections? (eg- to replace background)
GaryBakker
Registered Users Posts: 266 Major grins
I am using PSE5. And pretty much a rookie at post processing. I've historically simply used Picasa for some color/contrast fixes, but I'd like to use my Elements 5 software to improve photos that are more than just snapshots.
When I have a photo that is cluttered and I want to either blur the background or perhaps darken it significantly, I have been unsuccessful in cleanly isolating the foreground element so that the finished product doesn't obviously look like a cut-n-paste job.
What is the best method for doing this? I've tried my hand at all the selection tools and none seem to work very well. The resulting outlines are quite obvious.
Advice anyone?
When I have a photo that is cluttered and I want to either blur the background or perhaps darken it significantly, I have been unsuccessful in cleanly isolating the foreground element so that the finished product doesn't obviously look like a cut-n-paste job.
What is the best method for doing this? I've tried my hand at all the selection tools and none seem to work very well. The resulting outlines are quite obvious.
Advice anyone?
SmugMug site => The Bakker Chautauqua
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
0
Comments
There is no one best method. It changes depending on the subject.
The best advice I can give you is to get Katrin Eismann's "Photoshop Masking
and Compositing" book. I'm not sure how well it translates to PSE. Some of the
more advanced techniques are probably impossible in PSE, but you're more
than likely to learn a lot from it anyway.
http://bertold.zenfolio.com
Regards,
I suspect that it might depend on the "fuzziness" of the subject. Nonetheless, regardless of tool, my resulting border between the subject and background never seems seamless. Perhaps I need to check out the book you referenced.
Certainly true. However, some of the photos I'm trying to improve were taken by my daughter who is terrific at composition but ignorant of most of the photographic principles. Though I must confess that while I'd like to claim I always pay attention to depth of field (for example), the truth is I don't. Sometimes, especially with candid people shots, my main concern is simply getting the scene captured.
OK. Here are a few examples of where the background is too cluttered. I'm sure people can point out many other things wrong with these pictures, but let's keep focused on my subject/background issue please.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
You have several problems you must solve, to create the images you are desiring.
PSE 5 does not have all the compositing abilities that the latest edition of Photoshop CS3 does - and most of the images you see with the backgrounds, removed, swapped, blurred were done in Photoshop, not PSE5 I suspect. I do not use PSE 5, so take what I say about it with a large grain of salt. But I am sure there is a reason that the editing Pros use Photoshop and not PSE by a large majority.
The first image you post with the child in front of the fence, suffers much more from the underexposure of its shaded face, than from the strong, bright, horizontal lines of the fence. I agree that the fence is not the best background, but it is the underexposure of the shaded face that hurts this image the most. Shadow Highlight will not correct this as well as proper exposure at the time of shooting.
In the second image, shooting at a wide aperture would blur the background without any selection after the fact as suggested by rsinmadrid. The shooter did get down to the child's level ( and that is a great thing), but if they had gotten even lower, they might have shot the child's face upward against the sky, rather than the village elements behind it. Then there would be no need for selections in Photoshop.
In the third shot of the statue against the tree limbs, again a wider aperture might help, but the fact remains that the limbs are going to be visible to some degree. Using a longer telephoto at a wide aperture will maximize the blurring of the background more than a shorter focal length, and might avoid the need for selections again. As it is, the sky and limbs can be selected with several selection tools - magnetic lasso, color selecting, etc, but the best job will probably be done by the Pen tool - But I do not think PSE5 has a PEN tool. Does PSE5 have a PEN tool??
Some selections are hard and laborious to hide from a critical viewer. But most can be done by a patient editor, with a good software tool. But ,the fact remains, that Photoshop is much better at improving a well composed, and well exposed image, than trying to remedy what should have been done in the viewfinder before the exposure is taken...
PSE5 is not the first choice of professionals for hard core image editing. There may be a reason for this.
K Eisman's book rec'd above is the standard text for Photo editing and compositing. Selecting the child in the first image will be challenging, as will the child in the second image. The statue is easier with a magnetic lasso or a Pen tool. Photshop CS3's new Refine Edge command is very helpful also - but Adobe is not likely to include this command in Photoshop Elements either, I suspect.
The kids are cute and photogenic, but a lot of work for someone can be avoiding by a little more care in composition.... Hard to do at the time, but worthwhile to try nonetheless.
I looked at your galleries on Smugmug - you have a lot of lovely, very well done images. I can see why you want "the cutest kid in the world" to look at its very best. Neat shot. But, sometimes, just a little bit of a turn of the head is enough to let the light in to light up their faces. Please, do not take my comments as criticism, but as suggestions for how your images can be even better.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I also recognize that one of the aims of this message board is to educate all readers, not just the original poster. As a consequence I don't take offense at having it pointed out that exhibiting better photography skills would avoid the need to ask the very questions I'm asking. That's useful generic advice that will help me and others avoid these problems in the future.
However, it doesn't help me find an answer to my question. I wanted to find out how to do a task and I thought I'd get some specific advice in this forum, but I'm beginning to suspect that there may not be a technical answer to my question. If the answers are to be a better photographer or buy better software, then with my tools at hand I guess I'm asking a question of if rather than how.
While I love Dgrin and Smugmug, I sometimes feel an condescending elitism towards those of us who are not professional photographers. Heck, I wouldn't even consider myself a serious photographer (as I'd classify the talented and wonderful non-professionals I observe in Dgrin). I use a point-and-shoot as frequently as I use my dSLR. That's almost an unimaginable sin around here.
Sorry for the digression. I think I'm simply a little frustrated with what I'm trying to accomplish.
True, but irrelevent. What's done is done.
True, but irrelevent. I don't have, nor do I intend to purchase CS3.
This is relevent, but not particularly helpful.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
And in return, please do not take the responses in my previous post as personal criticism. I'm apparently struggling to find an answer that doesn't exist.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
You gave a very vague problem description at the onset. You received what I
still consider good advice - to study THE bible of masking and selecting. There
is no better single source. Did you expect someone to give you a summary of
selection techniques in a single post? And without first providing even a single
example? You sound like a gimme-gimme sort of person that didn't get a
solution to his problem handed to him on a platter and is now whining about it.
Do some work yourself. You will find it not only more satisfying, but also more
productive than whining.
http://bertold.zenfolio.com
Ouch. A little harsh I'd say, but I'll accept the criticism anyway.
I naively expected a fairly straightforward 5-step cookbook recipe approach. I was wrong. I guess I have to read the book.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
Well, I'm sorry if it was harsh, but so was your response to pathfinder.
What's more, your response was based on ignorance of the complexity
of the subject. There is nothing wrong with not knowing things, of course,
but calling people elitists in a context of such ignorance is just not fair.
Especially in this specific community. Read up on masking and selecting, and,
when you've realized how involved a problem it is, maybe you'll also realize
how unfair a burden you've put on the people who frequent this forum.
http://bertold.zenfolio.com
There is no single tool in any software program that solves your problem. Rather, there are many different tools that may apply and it takes a long time to understand which tools are appropriate for a given shot. Making a subject stand out from a cluttered background is difficult even when you have mastered advanced post-processing techniques. Hence, the reminder that good composition and suitable DOF are so important. Even if you make a perfect selection of your subject, your adjustments have to yield believable lighting, which is not always easy. Hence the emphasis on proper exposure.
As for elitism on Dgrin, well, I just don't buy that. Everyone on this board is trying to improve their skills all the time and if there is more supportive group anywhere, I certainly haven't found it. I spent a year shooting only with a 3MP P&S, but by reading, experimenting and with a ton of help from people on this forum, I slowly learned what I was doing right and wrong. I still have a lot to learn. And a lot of money to spend, I'm afraid, for good tools don't come cheap. You will need to go through the same process, but if you do, your pics will be as good as many that impress you today.
Regards,
There are indeed many approaches to isolating elements in an image and, yes, they all involve the nature of the edge. If your use of the brush is creating an unnatural harshness, your brush is too hard-edged in relation to the transition range between object and background. Usually you won't achieve the optimum effect with a single brush stroke. I don't know the capabilities of Elements, but if it allows layer masks, and allows you to apply brush strokes at less than 100% opacity, as well as vary the softness/hardness of the brush edge, then you can successfully create a mask for any kind of image by building up the effect gradually, pushing the edge out from within the object, then carving it back from the other direction, back and forth, until the softness of your mask matches the focus of the image.
If, at this point, you have background artifacts showing in the transition range, keep in mind that they're not important. You can paint them out, you can clone them out, you can do layer blends with the new background (assuming Elements allows layers to Screen or Multiply).
Every situation requires a different approach, depending on the aforementioned focus of the image, and whether you are isolating the image against a background that is darker, or lighter than the original.
Be more specific in the kinds of problems you are questioning, and your answers will be more to the point.
—Korzybski
I do not take offense at your response to my post. I spent some time considering it before I posted it. I was quite sensitive to the fact that my post did not directly answer your question regarding how to use PSE 5 to do a selection, but instead gently suggested do a better job at the time of shooting. Probably good advice, but might be mis-intepreted as insensitive. I felt badly that I could not answer your question more directly, but part of the reason is that I do not use PSE 5 because it is too limited in its capabilities. Selections can be challenging with the best of tools, but better tools do help.
Hopefully, there are some folks here who use PSE 5 that can better answer your question..
Most of the pros, like edgework, do not use PSE, they use Photoshop. Many of us, myself included, tried to use PSE, but left PSE because of frustrations with its limitations. Like saurora said, we do not waste money that we would rather spend on lenses, but many of us have learned, to our regret, that Photoshop is the tool we need to allow us to create our visions.
There are a few exceptions, but I'll bet that well over 95% of real editing professionals use Photoshop. This is not condescension or elitism, just a simple fact.
After looking at your website and the general quality of the images there ( which I feel are very good) I assumed you wanted honest suggestions on how best to improve the images you are presenting to web. We all shoot images that are less than we might prefer from time to time ( I certainly do) but the fact remains that the better we can do at the time of shooting, the better the images are and the less post processing they need. Ruthless editing is painful, but worthwhile. I have been on the receiving end of criticisms about my images from time to time, and it is never a bowl of cherries. But upon reflectiion, over time, I find it helpful for me to see where I can make my images better the next time. It is a never ending quest for me, and I bet you are the same.
Global editing changes for the entire image can be accomplished fairly quickly, as you know, but if one needs precise local selections - particularly of fine detailed subjects with lots for hair strands, even editing pros can spend hours and hours and hours on one image. I did not get the idea from your first post that you want to spend several hours per image to do selections.
Once again, I am sorry that no one has a simple 3 step selection answer for you - I wish there was one, I would be delighted to use it myself. Maybe someone else will pop in with some better answers for you in this regard.
I take pride in trying to help keep the boards here on dgrin civil, and I hope my post was received in that matter. We all like to hear "nice picture" but it is not really educational - educational posts suggest flaws and ways of improving them, not with smugness, but simple frankness. This is not saying the image is bad, but that improvement is possible and something that we can learn to do, which really is a good thing, I like to think.
I thank you for your cordial response to my first post.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
As some others have said, there are many different things that can help emphasize your foreground and de-emphasize your background. Some are compositional, some are accomplished through camera settings and some can be enhanced in post processing.
I took one of your images and wanted to show you what can be done in Elements with some simple post processing techniques (things you don't need full Photoshop for). There aren't a lot of Elements users here that are able to teach others about new techniques so you will tend to hear how to do something in full Photoshop here or on many boards. But, Elements is a tremendously powerful product that can do a lot, lot more than most people know or realize. I, myself, now own Photoshop CS3, but I used Elements for several years and learned a lot about how to do pretty advanced things with it. My Elements memory is getting a little fuzzy now, but I'll try to recall some things you could do.
What I did to this image was the following:
- I used shadow/highlights to brighten the girls face drawing a lot more attention to it (raised shadows for girl's face and lowered highlights to restore detail in her shirt). You have to be careful how much you do this and what the settings are to keep it realistic looking, but enhanced. It's easy to go too far and get things looking unnatural.
- Added a little local contrast with Unsharp Mask settings of amount = 19, radius = 25, threshold = 0. This is a USM trick that can make some images appear to "pop" more.
- Applied a small amount of smart sharpen.
- Changed the crop to pull emphasis away from the background
The background could be further de-emphasized by:- Blurring it slightly
- Desaturating it slightly
- Darkening it slightly
All these things can also be done in Elements, but, as those are more advanced things to accomplish and still keep it looking realistic (as if nothing was done in post processing), we'll keep it simple for this first example.Here's the result of the basic steps above. Hopefully you would agree that the viewer's eyes are much more drawn to the girls face now and it's easier to not be drawn to the background.
And your original:
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Your treatment did improve the underexposure of the little girl's face, but you did not do a selection with S/H, but a global move, is this not correct too?? Or the selection was done automatically on the level of brightness/ darkness of the image. Not as a user created selection or a mask.
There are other things that can be done to de-emphasize a background as you said, beside blurring it. You can desaturate it slightly, you can create a vingette around the subject and darken the edges of the image, or de-saturate the edge or both. Increasing the contrast of the subject carefully done can emphasize it over the background also.
Maybe we can get some more Photoshop Elements users to respond.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Thanks PathFinder. I think it is harder to find people who really know how to use the tools in Elements. The pros have all gone to CSx, but there's a ton one can do in Elements. I went to CSx myself mostly because of the more powerful RAW processing and workflow tools in CSx/Bridge/ACR, not so much for the image editing tools.
Shadow/Highlights is in the more recent versions of PSE (I think starting with PSE3 or PSE4). I think it doesn't have quite as many options in the dialog as the CS version, but it's definitely there. And, though it works without a manual selection or a mask (yes you can use masks in Elements), the very nature of how shadow/highlights works is to select for you based on tonal values which makes it an easier tool to fix this issue than other global tools.
The other techniques you and I mentioned above can also be done in Elements, either with selections or masks. Elements has a full suite of selection tools and you can do masks in Elements by either using the mask in an adjustment layer to control the effect of the adjustment layer or by using the mask in a null adjustment layer (and adjustment layer with no changes made to it's settings) combined with a layer grouped above it like this:
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Here's an example of a some desaturation and darkening of the background. This was done with a hue/saturation adjustment layer (available in Elements) and quick painting on the mask built into that adjustment layer with a large, soft brush.
And my previous edit:
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
The ability to use masks to gain precise control of selections done with a Magnetic Lasso, a Magic Wand ( which selects for color -kind of ) or commands like Shadow/Highlights, or other contrast/saturation controls are the basics for more precise image editing. I underestimated the abilities of PSE5 I guess.
Is there a Pen tool in Elements as well?
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I don't think there's a Pen tool.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
I missed responding to your comment about the RAW converter earlier.
I agree that the power of Adobe Raw Converter 4.1 was compelling for me as well. Refine Edges is another command that vastly improved my ability to quickly build selections. I would not want to return to PSCS 2 because of ARC 4.1 and Refine Edges alone.
The Shadow/Highlight adjustments that you did to the child's image, could have been performed in ARC 4.1 - even if it was a jpg. The ability to handle contrast and color globally in RAW is quite a significant advantage.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Thank you jfriend for your time spent providing actual examples and for your excellent advice. You did an excellent job showing me (and others) what can be done in Elements.
Thank you for providing your step-by-step detail. You have no idea how much I appreciate it. As I mentioned elsewhere, I usually have a pretty good idea of what needs to be done, but lack the post-processing experience and knowledge to execute on what needs to be done.
Can you please say more about “creating a vignette”? I don’t know what that means.
Nicely done. When you say “painting on the mask”, can you tell me exactly what are you doing? Burning?
(bolding mine) Can you please tell me what you mean when you say “selections or masks”? I thought one did a mask, then did selections on the mask to isolate the effects of the tool. Am I confusing apples and oranges?
Hmmm. I have a Pencil tool. What does a Pen tool do?
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
And it is reassuring to have it acknowledged that defining the edge is not a problem that only I have experienced. It makes me feel less incompetent.
Sadly, I thought my original post was specific. Not exposure. Not curves. Not crop. Not DOF. Not focus. Not composition. Not “what’s wrong with this picture?” But “how do I successfully define edges when masking so that it doesn’t look fake?” Or that’s what I thought I was asking, albeit somewhat clumsily.
Unfortunately and somewhat painfully, I have learned that even that question is not specific enough. I guess in this forum I need to provide a before and after view; let people know what I did; then find out how to do it better. I’ve thrown away all my “afters” and I am not knowledgeable enough to even know what the right questions are.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
If I wanted that, I’d have posted in the Whipping Post forum.
Just kidding. Mostly.
By the way, you have no idea how appreciative I am of these simple words: “the general quality of the images … are very good.” It gave me a warm glow in my chest. I have but a simple collection of snapshots that document our family’s travel experiences. I’m not trying to create art but I appreciate a good picture nonetheless.
Certainly true. But for a particular image that I like and would like to make even better, I wouldn’t hesitate to spend hours doing it. I usually have a pretty good idea of what needs to be done, but lack the post-processing experience and knowledge to execute on what needs to be done. Hence, my original post.
Thank you for acknowledging my attempt to express my frustration by focusing on the advice itself, rather than on the person from which it was given. I could've done a better job. Obviously.
And I want to express gratitude for your diligence to keep this message board civil. I certainly recognize and appreciate what you do. All too often posters on message boards can easily slip into personal and sometimes virulent attacks.
And again, I want you to know that I recognize that one of the purposes of this board is education. I support that. I just was taken a bit off-guard when I was initially given general photography advice when I expected specific post-processing advice. My error.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
It appears that I stepped over bounds of good taste, and raised some hackles with my using the phrase “condescending elitism”.
I won’t rescind it completely because I’ve observed that type of behavior elsewhere on this board, but I should never have used it in this thread. I used the phrase in an inappropriate context. I’m sorry.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)
Painting on a mask is done with the paint brush tool and a white or black color selected. To block the effect from a specific area, you would set the brush color to black, select the mask as the current layer and the current item in the layer and then paint on your image. The white or black ink will go onto the mask.
For example, to desaturate the background slightly:
- Create a hue/saturation adjustment layer
- Turn down the saturation on the adjustment layer until you like the effect on the background.
- Select the paint brush tool.
- Select a black color
- Make the brush diameter about 1/2 the size of the girl's head
- Make sure the brush has a soft edge not a hard edge
- Then paint on the image with the black brush around the girl's face and watch the full color be restored to her face because the hue/saturation adjustment layer effect is being blocked from the face. Because the brush has a soft edge and because the saturation effect is a mild effect and because there isn't a lot of color in her hair, you don't have to paint very accurately, just make sure the color is restored to her skin and that nothing in the background is blocked enough that it looks too colorful.
- If you goof anywhere, you can just switch the color to white and paint the reverse to restore the effect somewhere.
That's what painting on the mask means.Here are a few references on masks in Photoshop.
- Using layer masks with Photoshop
- Masks are easy
- Masks are easy - really
- Understanding Masking
- A masking movie
Selections and masks are different things. You can use a selection to isolate a portion of the mask. But, you can use a selection on your main image too with no mask involved. For example, you could create a selection that outlined the sky and then use that selection to make just the sky darker. I generally prefer to use layers and masks rather than selections on the main image pixels, but there are cases where you need to work on the main pixels.Here's an idea what the pen tool does: http://www.photoshoplab.com/pen-tool-crash-course.html.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
There are 34 pages of text and exercises in Chapter 4 Pen Tool Power in K Eisman's "Phothsop Masking and Compositing" and that is just a beginning to learn to use the pen tool. I am still learning it, and find I depend more on using the Magnetic Lasso, or the Polygonal Lasso, or the Magic wand. If I can, I avoid selections entirely, and use global editing tactics.
One technique that is very powerful and avoids selections is the Blend If sliders in the LAB color space, which limits effects to only specific portions of the image that are a specific hue. But this in not available in PSE again. Very useful for darkening skies without any edge3 effects along the horizon.
A vignette is when you darken the edge of an image, and keep the central portion undarkened, to help keep the viewer's eye from drifting off the edge of the paper -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vignetting
You can create a vingette by using the marquee tool to select your central subject of interest, blurring the edge of the selection with the Feather command, Inverting the selection, and then using a radial gradient of white to black or use the Brightness/Cantrast command to darken the edge of the image. It is better to do this on an adjustment layer so that the amount can then be fine tuned by the Opcacity Slider.
Vingetting was done by artists centuries before photography existed. Compare the brightness of the edge of many classical paintings with the central subject area.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
It may also come down to lexical semantics for some people from traditional backgrounds where mask is a natural term, and they may use it when talking of selections, which confuses people who use the Photoshop specific terms to describe two different things (which are both related).
A good example of what the OP was asking about can be found here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1006&message=10613736
Some general links to masking and extraction here:
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/links.html#M
Regards,
Stephen Marsh.
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/
I understand now. I read somewhere that one should never to work directly on the main image, so I've always created and manipulated a duplicate layer. My attempts to modify (darken, lighten, blur, sharpen, etc.) areas of the picture have been to select the portion of the image that I wanted to modify, then erase the rest of the layer, and then do the modification (or vice versa of these last two steps). I see now that I could mask the entire image, then modify the entire image, then "paint on the mask" to accomplish the same thing. Masking seems easier. Well, maybe not easier, but more acceptable to trial-and-error with the black and white painting. And thanks for the links to additional information. As mentioned above, this is pretty much what I have been doing. Hence, my confusion on the terminology. Thanks for the link. A picture is worth a thousand words. I can see where this would be useful. Nice. It looks like this could be very effective in the right circumstances. Used sparingly of course. Thanks. Hmmm. I have the PSE plug-in "smart curves" that has the ability of working in the LAB color space. I'm at work and I don't have PSE on this computer so I can't provide a screen shot right now. Here is the link to the web site of the plug-in: http://free.pages.at/easyfilter/curves.html. Could working with curves in the LAB color space do what you're talking about? Awesome. This exactly, precisely, and accurately describes an example that duplicates my "defining the edge" problems. (By the way, I see that this 2004 posting was by jfriend at Smugmug. I'm going to take a not-so-giant-leap and conclude that that jfriend and Dgrin's jfriend who has been extremely helpful in this thread are the same person.) And thanks for your sharing your categorized library of links to post-processing topics. While some subset of them may be not applicable because I'm using PSE, there is a wealth of information that you've cataloged.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." (Einstein)