How do I make effective image selections? (eg- to replace background)

GaryBakker · July 12, 2007

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?

LuckyBob · July 13, 2007

My personal solution is to create a duplicate layer, alter it as I feel necessary (bluring, darken, etc.), and use a mask to isolate the objects as needed. The major upside to masking is that if you decide that you missed an area or if you didn't follow the contour of an object properly, you can go back and alter it again non-destructively. You'll most likely need to play with the brush tool a lot to get a feel for how to blend things seamlessly, and no matter how you cut it masking is a fairly slow and arduous process.

pyrtek · July 13, 2007

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

What is the best method for doing this?

There is no one best method. It changes depending on the subject.

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

Advice anyone?

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.

Richard · July 13, 2007

with Bernard. I would add that the best way to solve your problem is to work on your shooting technique rather than on PP. If you compose your pics well and control the depth of field and exposure, you will have less need for PP rescue. If you post some pics on Dgrin, there are many people here willing to give you more specific advice.

Regards,

GaryBakker · July 13, 2007

LuckyBob wrote:

You'll most likely need to play with the brush tool a lot to get a feel for how to blend things seamlessly, and no matter how you cut it masking is a fairly slow and arduous process.

That's an understatement. It is my main difficulty. No matter how careful I am, the end result always seems to be obvious that the picture was masked. No matter how sharp the line between the subject and the background seems to be, when magnified the delineation is never as clear-cut. It's just a gradiation of different colored pixels.

pyrtek wrote:

There is no one best method. It changes depending on the subject.

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.

rsinmadrid wrote:

I would add that the best way to solve your problem is to work on your shooting technique rather than on PP. If you compose your pics well and control the depth of field and exposure, you will have less need for PP rescue.

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.

rsinmadrid wrote:

If you post some pics on Dgrin, there are many people here willing to give you more specific advice.

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.

pathfinder · July 13, 2007

Gary,

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.

GaryBakker · July 13, 2007

pathfinder, contrary to how you or other readers may perceive my reactions below to some of your advice, I greatly appreciate the time and effort you took to respond. I feel honored when a Mod tries to answer my often naive questions.

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.

pathfinder wrote:

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...The kids are cute and photogenic, but a lot of work for someone can be avoiding by a little more care in composition...

True, but irrelevent. What's done is done.

PSE 5 does not have all the compositing abilities that the latest edition of Photoshop CS3 does... PSE5 is not the first choice of professionals for hard core image editing.

True, but irrelevent. I don't have, nor do I intend to purchase CS3.

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.

This is relevent, but not particularly helpful.

GaryBakker · July 13, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

Please, do not take my comments as criticism, but as suggestions for how your images can be even better.

Forgive me, I accidentally neglected to respond to this. Again, I appreciate your suggestions. They help me and others perform better.

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.

pyrtek · July 13, 2007

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

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

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.

GaryBakker · July 13, 2007

pyrtek wrote:

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.

I never said that wasn't good advice.

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.

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.

pyrtek · July 13, 2007

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

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.

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.

Richard · July 13, 2007

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

I'm apparently struggling to find an answer that doesn't exist.

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,

edgework · July 13, 2007

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

I naively expected a fairly straightforward 5-step cookbook recipe approach. I was wrong. I guess I have to read the book.

I've been working with Photoshop for close to 20 years as a retoucher, not a photographer. But what you ask is THE core issue in retouching. Defining the edge. (Where do you think my screen name comes from?) If a 5-step approach was all it took, no one would need people like me and you wouldn't need to ask because you'd already know, just like everyone else.

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.

saurora · July 13, 2007

I don't believe PSE 5 has mask capabilities, or at least the old versions of Elements didn't have it. Advancing to Photoshop (any version) is not an elitist decision. It just becomes unacceptable for many people, even beginners like yourself, to struggle with the restrictions that come with using simpler and less expensive softwares. Don't think for a minute that most of us wouldn't rather spend the money we spent on PS on a new lens instead! There are some very advanced photographers on this forum who continue to use and get by wiith PSE 5. But they are also masters at composition, exposure and yes, getting the backgrounds and everything else pretty much on target in the camera and thus avoiding heavy post-processing. Hopefully a couple will catch your thread and be able to offer you their knowledge of what you can or cannot attempt in PSE 5. As Edgeworks says, every image requires a different approach, and it would be difficult to give an easy answer to this very involved and arduous task.

pathfinder · July 13, 2007

Gary,

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.

jfriend · July 14, 2007

An example in Elements

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

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.

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:

pathfinder · July 14, 2007

Excellent answer John, very well done. I did not know that Shadow/Highlights command was available in PSE. Cropping is always a useful means of directing the viewer's eye also.

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.

jfriend · July 14, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

Excellent answer John, very well done. I did not know that Shadow/Highlights command was available in PSE. Cropping is always a useful means of directing the viewer's eye also.

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.

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:

jfriend · July 14, 2007

Desaturation and darken the background

jfriend wrote:

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...

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:

pathfinder · July 14, 2007

Excellent example, John.

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?

jfriend · July 14, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

Excellent example, John.

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?

I don't think there's a Pen tool.

pathfinder · July 14, 2007

jfriend wrote:

..... 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.

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.

GaryBakker · July 14, 2007

jfriend wrote:

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.

(bolding mine) I think if I’d have known there were so few Elements users I might not have bothered to post my question.

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.

jfriend wrote:

What I did to this image was the following: [specifics deleted for brevity, but not forgotten]

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.

pathfinder wrote:

There are other things that can be done to de-emphasize a background as [jfriend] said, beside blurring it. You can desaturate it slightly, you can create a vignette 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.

Can you please say more about “creating a vignette”? I don’t know what that means.

jfriend wrote:

Here's an example of 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.

Nicely done. When you say “painting on the mask”, can you tell me exactly what are you doing? Burning?

jfriend wrote:

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:

(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?

pathfinder wrote:

Is there a Pen tool in Elements as well?

Hmmm. I have a Pencil tool. What does a Pen tool do?

GaryBakker · July 14, 2007

edgework wrote:

I've been working with Photoshop for close to 20 years as a retoucher, not a photographer. But what you ask is THE core issue in retouching. Defining the edge. (Where do you think my screen name comes from?) If a 5-step approach was all it took, no one would need people like me and you wouldn't need to ask because you'd already know, just like everyone else.

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).

Your advice here is very helpful and relevant. It appears that I need practice. And then more practice. Perhaps 20 years worth of practice.

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.

edgework wrote:

Be more specific in the kinds of problems you are questioning, and your answers will be more to the point.

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.

GaryBakker · July 14, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

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, …

I didn’t feel your post was insensitive. I was just frustrated that it seemed to skirt around my question. I apologize for not expressing my frustration more constructively. I’m a little embarrassed about it. (But perhaps even more embarrassingly, I misspelled “relevant” / “irrelevant” wrong three times!)

pathfinder wrote:

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.

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.

pathfinder wrote:

I did not get the idea from your first post that you want to spend several hours per image to do selections.

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.

pathfinder wrote:

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.

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.

GaryBakker · July 14, 2007

rsinmadrid wrote:

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.

saurona wrote:

As Edgeworks says, every image requires a different approach, and it would be difficult to give an easy answer to this very involved and arduous task.

pathfinder wrote:

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 think I get the message.

It's more art than science.

GaryBakker · July 14, 2007

And lastly, an apology.

pyrtek wrote:

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.

rsinmadrid wrote:

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.

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.

jfriend · July 14, 2007

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

Nicely done. When you say “painting on the mask”, can you tell me exactly what are you doing? Burning?

You create a mask when you want to block some portion of either a lower layer or a particular adjustment layer (like levels or hue/saturation). Where the mask is white, the full effect of the adjustment layer or the layers below shows through to the final image. Where the mask is black, the effect is blocked.

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.

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

(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?

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.

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

Hmmm. I have a Pencil tool. What does a Pen tool do?

Here's an idea what the pen tool does: http://www.photoshoplab.com/pen-tool-crash-course.html.

pathfinder · July 14, 2007

Yes, the Pen tool is one way of selecting a specific portion of an image - the Pen tool is used to create a Path, which can then be converted to a selection. The edge of the selection with the Pen tool can be narrower and more precise than most of the other selection tools, but it is not the easiest bike to learn to ride.

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.

BinaryFx · July 15, 2007

Selections and masks are related more than not. For example, one can save a selection as a layer mask in Photoshop. This layer mask is simply an alpha channel, it is being used to create transparency in this case. Alpha channels are simply non imaging/printing and can be used for saving selections, as well as being used as masks. One can also load a selection off a channel or layer transparency (which is just a hidden alpha channel). One can use a selection on either the image pixels or a layer mask, depending on the task at hand.

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/

GaryBakker · July 16, 2007

jfriend wrote:

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. ... That's what painting on the mask means.

Ahhh. I get it. I've used this technique before to isolate color. I just didn't know the terminology.

jfriend wrote:

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.

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.

BinaryFx wrote:

Selections and masks are related more than not. For example, one can save a selection as a layer mask in Photoshop.

As mentioned above, this is pretty much what I have been doing. Hence, my confusion on the terminology.

jfriend wrote:

Here's an idea what the pen tool does: http://www.photoshoplab.com/pen-tool-crash-course.html.

Thanks for the link. A picture is worth a thousand words. I can see where this would be useful.

pathfinder wrote:

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.

Nice. It looks like this could be very effective in the right circumstances. Used sparingly of course. Thanks.

pathfinder wrote:

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 edge effects along the horizon.

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?

BinaryFx wrote:

A good example of what the OP was asking about can be found here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=10613736

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.

How do I make effective image selections? (eg- to replace background)

Comments