Now's the Time for Some Destructive Edits

[david190]

In my workflow, I generally do the global edits first, then the clean-ups and finally sharpening at the end.  I also try to work in a non-destructive manner.  Here are the layers for my current project:

1.  Background layer
2.  Adjustment layer - Levels
3.  Adjustment layer - Hue & Saturation
4.  New layer - clone tool to make clean ups
5.  New layer - spot healing brush to make clean ups

So far, all of my edits have been made non-destructively.  At this point in my workflow, I would like to remove an object like this: on an image layer (a pixel layer), I'll select an area to copy, then hit Ctrl-J to duplicate the selection, then move the copied area over the part to be removed.  Now here is my (easy) question: how is the best way to create a pixel layer to work on?

Many thanks in advance for your help!
 

[ritage]

If I understand your question correctly, the simple answer is to non-destructively merge all layers. Make the top layer active and press Ctrl-Alt-Shift-E. This creates a new merged layer at the top, leaving all previous layers unchanged. It is referred to as Stamp Visible.

However, again if I understand your question, if I wanted to change something in my image, I would start by duplicating the background layer. Make all desired changes first on or above that layer, apply Stamp Visible to all, and then proceed with your Steps 2 through 5 so enhancements are applied evenly to the entire image.

This is not to say that your method is wrong, it just seems to me to complicate things.

Rita

[david190]

Rita - thank you very much! The Stamp Visible command is what I was looking for. However, I don't understand the point in your second paragraph. If I copy the Background layer, I'll end up with a set of layers like this:

1. Background layer
2. Copy of Background layer
3. Adjustment layer - Levels
4. Adjustment layer - Hue & Saturation
5. New layer - clone tool to make clean ups
6. New layer - spot healing brush to make clean ups

I know I'm not seeing something really fundamental here but when you say "Make all desired changes first on or above that layer [the Background layer]", isn't that what I was doing before when I didn't copy out or duplicate the Background layer - that is, I made my edits "above" the Background layer? I guess I don't see why my first method is complicating things or, put another way, why the second methods is less complicated. Thanks.

[ritage]

David, I most likely misunderstood. You say you would like to remove an object and move something else over that area. I took this to mean that you would like to replace part of the image with something else, e.g. replace one person or face with another person or face. In that case I would do this first on a duplicate of the background layer (to preserve the original background in case you'd not get it right on first try) and then go to Adjustment Layers and cleaning up tools.

If such a replacement is done after everything else has been fixed, there would certainly be more cleaning up to do.

Rita

[david190]

Rita,

Actually, I am removing an object, not replacing it.  If I want to remove a window, I do the following: (1) select and copy part of the building that I'll later move over the window, (2) paste the copied portion to a new layer, (3) use the move tool to move the copied portion over the window that I am removing.  That's it.  It seems to me that can be done later in the workflow process, after the non-destructive edits.  What do you think?

[Sepiana]

Feb 16, 2016 20:02:11 GMT david190 said:

Rita,

Actually, I am removing an object, not replacing it.  If I want to remove a window, I do the following: (1) select and copy part of the building that I'll later move over the window, (2) paste the copied portion to a new layer, (3) use the move tool to move the copied portion over the window that I am removing.  That's it.  It seems to me that can be done later in the workflow process, after the non-destructive edits.  What do you think?

david190, welcome to PSE&M!

You are in good hands here, with Rita. I am just adding some input to your question.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that you don't want your copy/paste job to look unreal, like a cut-out job. You want the copy/paste job to look natural, smooth, to blend in with the background. This means that you also need to pay attention to the lighting, tone, saturation, etc. You want them to be consistent throughout the copied portion and the background image.

Now back to your question. It all boils down to the nature of the image. In some cases, doing the adjustments first is the way to go; in other cases, you may want to do the copy/paste job first and then do the adjustments.  I myself have done both ways and got the results I wanted.

BTW, which version of Elements are you using?

[ritage]

Feb 16, 2016 20:30:17 GMT Sepiana said:

Feb 16, 2016 20:02:11 GMT david190 said:

Rita,

Actually, I am removing an object, not replacing it.  If I want to remove a window, I do the following: (1) select and copy part of the building that I'll later move over the window, (2) paste the copied portion to a new layer, (3) use the move tool to move the copied portion over the window that I am removing.  That's it.  It seems to me that can be done later in the workflow process, after the non-destructive edits.  What do you think?

david190, welcome to PSE&M!

You are in good hands here, with Rita. I am just adding some input to your question.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that you don't want your copy/paste job to look unreal, like a cut-out job. You want the copy/paste job to look natural, smooth, to blend in with the background. This means that you also need to pay attention to the lighting, tone, saturation, etc. You want them to be consistent throughout the copied portion and the background image.

Now back to your question. It all boils down to the nature of the image. In some cases, doing the adjustments first is the way to go; in other cases, you may want to do the copy/paste job first and then do the adjustments.  I myself have done both ways and got the results I wanted.

BTW, which version of Elements are you using?

I completely agree!

Rita

[david190]

Thanks so much for the helpful responses - I now know I need to make sure the removal doesn't look like a removal occurred!