CS2 Question
windoze
Registered Users Posts: 2,830 Major grins
or maybe its for cs3 but either way I hope this makes sense to someone.......
if for whatever reason i want to remove a selection from an image and then be able to work on the subject i selected in a new layer and still work on the other layer with the subject missing can i do something like this:
1) open an image ( layer 1 ) ,
2) duplicate that image ( layer 2 )
3) use the extractor to remove my subject onto a new layer ( layer 3 )
4) If i now command click ( mac ) on that new layer ( layer 3 ) I get marching ants around my subject
5) now i go back to layer 2, i click and hit delete so that the subject is removed from Layer 2 leaving only the background.
if i did that right i now still have 3 layers:
the original, the background and the subject and Now i can work on layers 2 and 3 independently of each other.
there may be other and better ways to do that but if i chose to do it that way here is my question -
after step 3 - if i click on that middle layer and hit delete, why does the subject disappear??? I want it to do that but why does it?
troy
if for whatever reason i want to remove a selection from an image and then be able to work on the subject i selected in a new layer and still work on the other layer with the subject missing can i do something like this:
1) open an image ( layer 1 ) ,
2) duplicate that image ( layer 2 )
3) use the extractor to remove my subject onto a new layer ( layer 3 )
4) If i now command click ( mac ) on that new layer ( layer 3 ) I get marching ants around my subject
5) now i go back to layer 2, i click and hit delete so that the subject is removed from Layer 2 leaving only the background.
if i did that right i now still have 3 layers:
the original, the background and the subject and Now i can work on layers 2 and 3 independently of each other.
there may be other and better ways to do that but if i chose to do it that way here is my question -
after step 3 - if i click on that middle layer and hit delete, why does the subject disappear??? I want it to do that but why does it?
troy
0
Comments
—Korzybski
I didnt think it would be that obvious........ it sounded like a good way to do things though.
If i wanted to apply an effect / filter to the background and not have it affect the subject.....
thought this might be a good way to get both things separated from each other. Ive read about this way, not actually have done it myself.
BUT, the thing is if it did work, Im still trying to figure out how Photoshop would know to "delete" the subject from the lower layer, considering if my steps would actually work.
thanx for the info - it made sense to me!
troy
I'm totally confused as to what you're trying to do...however:
If you can get a selection you'd like to extract:
1) Make the selection
2) Press CTRL-J (Win) which will create a new layer out of the selection
3) With the original layer active, reselect the selection (select - reselect)
4) Add a layer mask to the original layer
5) Invert the mask - hiding the selected area
Now you're done without destroying anything and just have two perfectly aligned layers.
This way, you can also play with the mask to eliminate or gradient the transition area if your selection was not perfect.
- Gary.
Hi gary, Im going to try your way next but first I wanted to see if i could make my way work out and understand it too....
I figured it out!!!!!
step one - open an image
step two - make two copies of the image
step three - on the top layer, extract my subject ( in this case a boy )
step four - ctrl click on the layer thumbnail of the boy -> and i have to turn off the eyeballs on the bottom two layers to see this. I then ctrl clik ( on a pc ) and the boy has those marching ants around him
step five - i click on the thumbnail of my middle layer and click delete -> PRESTO the boy disappears from the image. ( I had to then click off the other two eyeballs to see this )
so i ended up with my original untouched layer, a background layer and a subject layer. I can now work on my subject. i can work on the background layer applying an effect i didnt want on the subject. do some cleaning up and cloning and when all three layers are visible - it looks fine. I just got to see about that "gap" that edgework talked about but i think it does get filled by the original image on the bottom.
troy
Have you thought of layer masks? They might both simplify your work
flow and give you more control over how the background/foreground
come together.
Oops. Didn't see GJMPhoto suggesting essentially the same thing.
Both should work...I do believe using masks is quicker, safer, and will result in a smaller PSD. It will also have the added benefit of allowing you to utilize layer comps to try different selections, etc...since nothing is destroyed. Try it!
- Gary.