Question about using the Rubber Stamp Tool . . .

Hi everyone,

This has been bugging me for some time.
I often keep a layer as a copy of the one I’m working on. I may be making erasures on a layer to allow for some underlying image to "surface". And occasionally (well maybe almost always) I do a little overcutting. No problem, I just go to my "copy" layer, and set the rubber stamp, and then I
go to the layer I have overcut and stamp the original image back in as needed. Or, I overcut intentionally, so that I can gain a better perspective
of what it is I am doing and then I use the rubber stamp (often times in airbrush mode) to fill in the cut as I see fit. I find that by both cutting
and filling, I’m able to crate a more realistic result when, say, putting one face over another. A little ying, a little yang.
Anyway, my problem is that by using this technique, it requires that the source and destination cursors be aligned pixel accurate and to the very same pixel. And in the past I have always done this by selecting a brush of
size one, and then aligning on an obviously identifiable pixel. But it’s tedious. So, my question is, how do the big boys deal with this? What should I be doing?
And please, don’t go telling me about the "alignment" check box. This is for
stroke alignment, and not for initial source-destination alignment. (And I personally think the checkbox is misnamed.)
Anyway, I’ll be kick’n back here and waiting for replies.
Thanks all,
– Stan Shankman

"Stan Shankman" wrote in message

Hi everyone,

This has been bugging me for some time.
I often keep a layer as a copy of the one I’m working on. I may be making erasures on a layer to allow for some underlying image to "surface". And occasionally (well maybe almost always) I do a little overcutting. No problem, I just go to my "copy" layer, and set the rubber stamp, and then I
go to the layer I have overcut and stamp the original image back in as needed. Or, I overcut intentionally, so that I can gain a better perspective
of what it is I am doing and then I use the rubber stamp (often times in airbrush mode) to fill in the cut as I see fit. I find that by both cutting
and filling, I’m able to crate a more realistic result when, say, putting one face over another. A little ying, a little yang.
Anyway, my problem is that by using this technique, it requires that the source and destination cursors be aligned pixel accurate and to the very same pixel. And in the past I have always done this by selecting a brush of
size one, and then aligning on an obviously identifiable pixel. But it’s tedious. So, my question is, how do the big boys deal with this? What should I be doing?
And please, don’t go telling me about the "alignment" check box. This is for
stroke alignment, and not for initial source-destination alignment. (And I personally think the checkbox is misnamed.)
Anyway, I’ll be kick’n back here and waiting for replies.
Thanks all,
– Stan Shankman

The best method is probably to take a snapshop (in the history palette) of your unaltered image. (To do this, right click on the step in the history list) Then once you’ve done your editing choose the history brush, select the snapshop as the source (click on the box next to the snapshot so a paintbrush icon appears), then paint back the old pixels!

I often keep a layer as a copy of the one I’m working on. I may be making erasures on a layer to allow for some underlying image to "surface". And occasionally (well maybe almost always) I do a little overcutting. No problem, I just go to my "copy" layer, and set the rubber stamp, and then I go to the layer I have overcut and stamp the original image back in as needed. Or, I overcut intentionally, so that I can gain a better perspective of what it is I am doing and then I use the rubber stamp (often times in airbrush mode) to fill in the cut as I see fit.

I find that by both cutting
and filling, I’m able to crate a more realistic result when, say, putting one face over another. A little ying, a little yang.
Anyway, my problem is that by using this technique, it requires that the source and destination cursors be aligned pixel accurate and to the very same pixel. And in the past I have always done this by selecting a brush of size one, and then aligning on an obviously identifiable pixel. But it’s tedious. So, my question is, how do the big boys deal with this? What should I be doing?

In article ,
"Stan Shankman" wrote:

I often keep a layer as a copy of the one I’m working on. I may be making erasures on a layer to allow for some underlying image to "surface". And occasionally (well maybe almost always) I do a little overcutting. No problem, I just go to my "copy" layer, and set the rubber stamp, and then I go to the layer I have overcut and stamp the original image back in as needed. Or, I overcut intentionally, so that I can gain a better perspective of what it is I am doing and then I use the rubber stamp (often times in airbrush mode) to fill in the cut as I see fit.

Wow, you’re doing things the hard way. You need to learn about layer masks.

I find that by both cutting
and filling, I’m able to crate a more realistic result when, say, putting one face over another. A little ying, a little yang.
Anyway, my problem is that by using this technique, it requires that the source and destination cursors be aligned pixel accurate and to the very same pixel. And in the past I have always done this by selecting a brush of size one, and then aligning on an obviously identifiable pixel. But it’s tedious. So, my question is, how do the big boys deal with this? What should I be doing?

Forget erasing. Never erase the contents of a layer; instead, use a layer mask.

A layer mask is just what its name implies–a mask that hides part of a layer and reveals part of a layer. If you paint in black on a layer mask, it looks like you are erasing the part of the layer–it vanishes, just like it does if you use the Eraser tool. However, it is still there, only hidden. If you paint in white in a layer mask, the original layer comes back.

When you erase part of a layer, it’s gone. When you use a layer mask, it looks like it’s gone, but it’s still there–it’s just hidden. You can bring it back any time.

Hi everyone,

This has been bugging me for some time.
I often keep a layer as a copy of the one I’m working on. I may be making erasures on a layer to allow for some underlying image to "surface". And occasionally (well maybe almost always) I do a little overcutting. No problem, I just go to my "copy" layer, and set the rubber stamp, and then I
go to the layer I have overcut and stamp the original image back in as needed. Or, I overcut intentionally, so that I can gain a better perspective
of what it is I am doing and then I use the rubber stamp (often times in airbrush mode) to fill in the cut as I see fit. I find that by both cutting
and filling, I’m able to crate a more realistic result when, say, putting one face over another. A little ying, a little yang.
Anyway, my problem is that by using this technique, it requires that the source and destination cursors be aligned pixel accurate and to the very same pixel. And in the past I have always done this by selecting a brush of
size one, and then aligning on an obviously identifiable pixel. But it’s tedious. So, my question is, how do the big boys deal with this? What should I be doing?
And please, don’t go telling me about the "alignment" check box. This is for
stroke alignment, and not for initial source-destination alignment. (And I personally think the checkbox is misnamed.)
Anyway, I’ll be kick’n back here and waiting for replies.
Thanks all,
– Stan Shankman

Anyway, my problem is that by using this technique, it requires that

source and destination cursors be aligned pixel accurate and to the

same pixel. And in the past I have always done this by selecting a

size one, and then aligning on an obviously identifiable pixel. But

tedious. So, my question is, how do the big boys deal with this? What should I be doing?

contrarian that I am and self taught, I do know the layer mask methods and use them for certain things like hiding the background and changing it.
But most often I am retouching faces and portraits. Often I do stuff and if I don’t like the result I will erase it.
I ALWAYS keep the original image on the first background layer, then I duplicate it and work on the layer above the orig. Then if I mess up an area I can erase to see the original layer under. To fill in the erased areas on the above layer, I make another duplicate layer of the original, place it under the retouched, erased layer, then use merge down, so I have a complete image on the retouch layer, plus my unretouched original on the background layer.
You can also lasso an area and use paste above it and merge down to restore an area to the original.