How far should serious photographers go with Photoshop?

WeeHector

Senior Member
Anyone who has ever worked with Photoshop knows about the amazing corrections which can be made and the more difficult changes to photos using the tampon tool which enables one to wipe out small distracting details. However, the last two versions have included a tool, which until then, existed only in the realms of sci-fi. I refer, of course, to the Content Aware tool. For those who have never tried it, it is like having an X-ray machine which sees through solid objects. Of course, it is nothing of the kind, but is a remarkable piece of software which tries to work out what is hidden behind the objects one wants to eliminate. It won't show something totally hidden, but will create, in seconds, a logical framework on which one can work.

To give an example; a few weeks ago I met a couple who have an African Grey Parrot (Psittacus erithacus erithacus) which I wanted to photograph but which was in too bad a mood to let out of its cage. The logical method would be to take 2 photos from different angles and use parts of one to replace what is hidden behind a bar of the cage. Several hours work, with the problem that living creatures tend to move.

This is the original photo;

Parrot.jpg

Using the Content Aware tool in PS I came up with this (minimal changes to show how it works) in just a few minutes;

Parrot2.jpg

Of course, it's not perfect and several errors are visible when blown up to full size. However, it does give a good template to work from.

So, how many of our really serious photographers make use of this amazing tool or is it just looked on as a gimmick?
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
So, how many of our really serious photographers make use of this amazing tool or is it just looked on as a gimmick?
I would say, off the top of my head, the vast majority of us use Photoshop... or something similar.

As the photographer, how far I "take it" is entirely up to me.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I use it a lot to remove distractions, but as a photographer I try not to "alter reality" too much. I ascribe to the practice of "I'll remove something but never add to a photo" (of course, I'll add when it's more a project than something I'm representing as something I shot in a single frame). I use it for power lines, random people, pieces of garbage, etc. It's also a great tool to fill in the empty background you get when you stitch panoramas together.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
lol @ tampon tool. :D Are you referring to the Spot Healing Brush tool and using the option to select content aware? I make heavy use of this for smoothing out the stage floor in the theater photos I mentioned in another thread. It works really well for small blemishes--I also use it to remove electrical wires when a better vantage point isn't available when taking photos.
 

mikeh32217

Senior Member
I have used it on occasion and it's an awesome tool.

Before After
Balloon-2.jpgBalloon.jpg

I took this picture a couple of years back on a cross country trip I made in a semi with an ex-brother-in-law and we were going through Albuquerque, NM and they were having some kind of balloon fest? and most were far off but I saw the opportunity to get one shot of one that was fairly close. Taken from a moving vehicle and had to almost get on the floor to take it. I took 5K photos on that trip and when I got home and started to process the main problem with 90% of them was power lines. Anyway this is an example of one of the few times I've used this extraordinary tool!
 
Content Aware tool is the best thing since sliced bread. Power lines and poles are everywhere and really ruin a photo. I taught my wife the basics of PhotoShop recently and I will hear her at the Desktop computer saying "yea, I just took out a building!" There is nothing better than seeing a beautiful old building in the perfect location and there on the side of the building is a new sign or worse Graffiti. Content Aware healing brush will remove it in a second. Sometimes you do have to use the cloning tool to finish up the coverup.
 

mikeh32217

Senior Member
Content Aware tool is the best thing since sliced bread. Power lines and poles are everywhere and really ruin a photo. I taught my wife the basics of PhotoShop recently and I will hear her at the Desktop computer saying "yea, I just took out a building!" There is nothing better than seeing a beautiful old building in the perfect location and there on the side of the building is a new sign or worse Graffiti. Content Aware healing brush will remove it in a second. Sometimes you do have to use the cloning tool to finish up the coverup.

Amen, Most of the shots I took on that trip where either blurry (because taken from moving vehicle and either tried to take when light wasn't right or hadn't learned how to shoot from moving vehicle yet) so I ended up with about 10% of them decent enough to work with. We spent a lot of time traveling through the northwest and the scenery was so breath taking I just shot away without worrying thinking I could work with it later in photoshop.
 
I know there are two distinct schools of thought on this subject. There are ones that think you should do nothing to a photo other that push the button and print it. No processing at all other than what the camera decides to do to it. Then there is the other side that thinks it is OK to process the photo to make it into their idea of a great shot. Either type is perfectly OK. I get really tired of either side telling the other that they are wrong. They are both right. Same goes for the JPEG vs RAW. So what you are comfortable with and what gives you the end product you are comfortable with.

Now when it comes to the Nikon vs canon debate there is only ONE correct answer.
 

mikeh32217

Senior Member
I know there are two distinct schools of thought on this subject. There are ones that think you should do nothing to a photo other that push the button and print it. No processing at all other than what the camera decides to do to it. Then there is the other side that thinks it is OK to process the photo to make it into their idea of a great shot. Either type is perfectly OK. I get really tired of either side telling the other that they are wrong. They are both right. Same goes for the JPEG vs RAW. So what you are comfortable with and what gives you the end product you are comfortable with.

Now when it comes to the Nikon vs canon debate there is only ONE correct answer.

There is no right way or wrong way, everyone does it differently and that's what makes art...art!

Nikon vs. ??? Ain't no question there. :)
 

WeeHector

Senior Member
I would like to say that the photo I posted in the OP was done in the knowledge that I could alter it to make the bird visible. Had the feature in PS not been available, it's a photo I wouldn't even have taken. It's an incredible tool which can help you out when there is no other alternative.

PS: As for Nikon versus thingamyjig I don't think there is much of a debate, unless you want to change the name of the site to "thingamyjigites.com". :D
 
Last edited:

donaldjledet

Senior Member
Is this tool only available in photoshop?
Cause I work on the road there are always power lines and billboards in the way.
​As I drive down the road.
 

WeeHector

Senior Member
Is this tool only available in photoshop?
Cause I work on the road there are always power lines and billboards in the way.
​As I drive down the road.

I read at the time this came out that it was developed, not by Adobe, but by a third party. Unlikely that you will find this in any other software unless someone comes up with a different algorithm which does the same thing.
 

riverside

Senior Member
I read at the time this came out that it was developed, not by Adobe, but by a third party. Unlikely that you will find this in any other software unless someone comes up with a different algorithm which does the same thing.

Gimp has had it for quite some time (here) and its available as a plugin for other programs. Different names likely due to Adobe's ferocious appetite for crushing lawsuits.

According to another website these are the basis of the assorted algorithms:

http://www.logarithmic.net/pfh/thesis

[URL="http://gfx.cs.princeton.edu/pubs/Barnes_2009_PAR/index.php"]http://gfx.cs.princeton.edu/pubs/Barnes_2009_PAR/index.php



[/URL]
 
Top