What do you think the best and easiest way to remove a background and change it to another in photoshop would be. I have done a search of turtorials and some recommened the Lasso Tool, Eraser Tool, others talk about the Hightlighting Tool and even the smart hightlighting tool? any opinions on whats best and quickest way?
The easiest? I really like Mask Pro 4.1. I have used Vertus Fluid mask as well but at $185 its a little pricey.
The cheapest... just do a google search and there are processes a little more involved that the tools you mentioned. The process is rather lengthy as it involves seperating the color channels and working with those. Some are time consuming but do a good job especially with tricky items like hair.
I use Vertus Fluid Mask 2 to 4 hours a day and I love it. The latest version 3 is amazing and I find that the Adobe builtin software cant touch it. Plus, Vertus has real time training available on their website. Like the other poster said it isnt as cheap as some others but its the time you save on every job you need it on where you make back the money and more.
If you are trying to save your time and produce the best masks, I recommend it highly!
The "best" method depends very much on the particular image. Lynda.com has a raft of masking/extraction video tutorials. The methods you mentioned are barely the beginning.
You might start off with the quick select tool in Photoshop CS3 (if you own it). This is a really great new feature in CS3. When using the quick select tool, make sure that you use the superb refine edges button after you have made your selection. This is the easiest way to make your quick selection work. If this is not getting the job done, then you might want to try a demo of Mask Pro or Fluid Mask. They can help when you have really tough problems like hair, smoke, fog, etc.
UCSB wrote:
You might start off with the quick select tool in Photoshop CS3 (if you own it).
I respectfully disagree. It would a lot smarter to start off with an assessment of the image, and then choose your methods accordingly. If you're dealing with things like flyaway hairs or a busy, multicolored background, the quick select tool is not going to help.
A tool is a solution to a problem. First identify the problem. Then choose a solution.
Peano wrote:
I respectfully disagree. It would a lot smarter to start off with an assessment of the image, and then choose your methods accordingly. If you're dealing with things like flyaway hairs or a busy, multicolored background, the quick select tool is not going to help.
A tool is a solution to a problem. First identify the problem. Then choose a solution.
Perhaps you haven't used the full capacity of the quick select tool. It is is very easy to add to or subtract from he selections with the three separate tool versions. Accuracy of selection is accomplished by brush size.
Don't confuse the quick select tool with the magic wand tool.
jerryrock wrote:
Perhaps you haven't used the full capacity of the quick select tool. It is is very easy to add to or subtract from he selections with the three separate tool versions. Accuracy of selection is accomplished by brush size.
Don't confuse the quick select tool with the magic wand tool.
I'm pretty familiar with the quick selection tool and use it often. It's great for some jobs, but not at all helpful on others.That's why Deke McClelland (for instance) has 33 hours of video tutorials on Lynda.com devoted entirely to masking techniques. Many extractions just can't be done with the quick selection tool.
Here's an example. Even with the white background in this image, you could never extract all those flyaway hairs with the QS tool. A few minutes of trying will convince any skeptics. http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5465/maskba5.jpg
Here's a more difficult example. Suppose you wanted to replace the background on the left with the background on the right. The problem here is you have a soft-focus edge around the hair. The techniques that will extract the flyaway hairs in the first example won't work on this soft-focus extraction. And the quick select tool won't work on either of them.
That's why I said it isn't a good idea to start with any particular tool. Start with an analysis of the image to see what kind of extraction problem you have to solve. Then choose your tools. http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/8494/mask1lr3.jpg
You are right, masking can be a complex task with many options. Skill, experience and software are important for good results. Certainly the characteristics of the individual photo will ultimately determine the most logical approach.
I subscribe to lynda.com. Of the masking tutorials that you have viewed on lynda.com, which to you think were the most beneficial?
I downloaded both and viewed parts of many lessons in the advanced tutorial during download. There's enough detail and substance that I will definitely go back and view those carefully.
I do agree that using the right tools for the job makes the job easier. There are a variety of ways in Photoshop to get the job done effectively, but tool choice is not limited to software. By combining the quick select tool with a 20" widescreen Wacom Cintiq, I can make any selection I need very effectively (including the "fly away hairs"you keep referring to).
There are 33 hours of video tutorial on the subject because they can get people to pay money to view them.
jerryrock wrote:
I do agree that using the right tools for the job makes the job easier. There are a variety of ways in Photoshop to get the job done effectively, but tool choice is not limited to software. By combining the quick select tool with a 20" widescreen Wacom Cintiq, I can make any selection I need very effectively (including the "fly away hairs"you keep referring to).
There are 33 hours of video tutorial on the subject because they can get people to pay money to view them.
You should record some tutorials showing how the quick selection tool can make any extraction "very easy." Show Deke McClelland that his advanced masking techniques aren't needed.
Thanks to everyone for all their help and suggestions! I see this is a very complex part of postprocessing, and I don't think there is any way of doing it Quickly or Easily! I am looking into this because I have a large amount of P/U truck photos that would look a lot better, if backgrounds were different.
jerryrock wrote:
"Mmm hmmm. Let's see you do it. Replace the white background with a green background and post it alongside the original for comparison."
Then I would have to charge you for a demonstration!
I didn't ask for a demonstration. I just challenged you to do it. You can't do that extraction with the quick selection tool, and you know it. The QS tool is fine where it works, but it doesn't work on many things. That's true of practically every tool in Photoshop. Why are you reluctant to say so?
Image1 wrote:
Thanks to everyone for all their help and suggestions! I see this is a very complex part of postprocessing, and I don't think there is any way of doing it Quickly or Easily! I am looking into this because I have a large amount of P/U truck photos that would look a lot better, if backgrounds were different.
Thanks Again
John
Subjects like trucks with clean edges are generally easier to extract. If you want to extract them with real precision, the pen tool is the thing. It's a tricky tool to learn, but once you get the hang of it, you can cut out hard-edged objects as if you were cutting with a scalpel.
jerryrock wrote:
"Mmm hmmm. Let's see you do it. Replace the white background with a green background and post it alongside the original for comparison."
Then I would have to charge you for a demonstration!
Dark hair on white is so easy it shouldn't cost more the a nickle...
Looks pretty good to me. Did you use the QS tool? I am still using the magic eraser, or eraser tool and taking 46 mins for each photo, and they are pretty easy ones that aren't flyaways.
Which one would you say does a good job on generally most photos?
No. The best Tool to use is always located between your two ears. That gray matter that contains knowledge. Jerryrock is correct when he writes the best method to use to extract something depends a lot on the image content. Generally the best method is masking. This is because when you use a mask nothing is lost your whole image is still there. If something is missing in the resulting image it can be recovered by working on the mask. You might say a mask is a work in progress as long as you keep your layers around you can work on the mask.
Again the best tool is always knowledge. Most would jump in and make the original background layer a normal layer add a layer mask and mask off the background then place a new background layer below this layer. Using your knowledge you realize that you could also replace the background by leaving the original background layer alone intact, place a new background image on top of the image and mask that layer to let objects below show through.
Which method is better in this case. The second method in clearly better in this case because the original image has a white background. Because the original image has a white background placing a new background on top and changing its blending mode to multiply does most of the work for you. You don't need to work very hard to create a mask that will work well.
