banded whiskers

"Peter" wrote in message

Using CS2:
While retouching a picture of a tiger I damaged the whiskers so I erased them and tried to reproduce them by simply painting a white line with a 5 pixel 100% hard round brush. When I zoomed in the whiskers looked OK. But, when I zoomed out to normal size the whiskers looked banded. I tried different brushes, but got the same effect, All I need is a thin solid white line. I had the same problem when I tried PS7. The whiskers on the other, untouched side, look fine.
I reproduced this problem on a different machine. I am drawing the line using my mouse. Could this be related to pressure.
What am I doing wrong?

What does it look like viewed at 100%? That is all that matters – the banding may simply be to do with the resolution of your monitor when viewed at anything other than 100%

"Caitlin" wrote in message

"Peter" wrote in message

Using CS2:
While retouching a picture of a tiger I damaged the whiskers so I erased them and tried to reproduce them by simply painting a white line with a 5 pixel 100% hard round brush. When I zoomed in the whiskers looked OK. But, when I zoomed out to normal size the whiskers looked banded. I tried different brushes, but got the same effect, All I need is a thin solid white line. I had the same problem when I tried PS7. The whiskers on the other, untouched side, look fine.
I reproduced this problem on a different machine. I am drawing the line using my mouse. Could this be related to pressure.
What am I doing wrong?

What does it look like viewed at 100%? That is all that matters – the banding may simply be to do with the resolution of your monitor when viewed at anything other than 100%

Thanks for your response. Unfortunately that is not the issue. It seems that I have that problem with any line with less than about 22 pixels. I tried drawing a similar line on a different machine and had the same problem. The problem is the same whether I use a mouse, the pad on my notebook, or a Wacom tablet. I would really appreciate some help on this as it is driving me nuts. (there are those who say I am there already.)

Since I don’t see widespread complaints on this issue, it must be something in my setup.

—
Peter

From: "Peter"
….
[re jaggy lines]

Thanks for your response. Unfortunately that is not the issue. It seems that I have that problem with any line with less than about 22 pixels. I tried drawing a similar line on a different machine and had the same problem. The problem is the same whether I use a mouse, the pad on my notebook, or a Wacom tablet. I would really appreciate some help on this as it is driving me nuts. (there are those who say I am there already.)

You mentioned using a hard brush – have you tried backing off on the hardness? This will reduce the jaggies. You may get a more natural whisker effect by using the Wacom with a brush whose width is pressure sensitive.

Compare your artificial whiskers carefully with the real whiskers. It may be that you need to blur them on a separate layer, add noise to them, change the color slightly from pure white, or otherwise duplicate the effect of the original photograph.
—
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

"Mike Russell" wrote in message

From: "Peter"
…
[re jaggy lines]

Thanks for your response. Unfortunately that is not the issue. It seems that I have that problem with any line with less than about 22 pixels. I tried drawing a similar line on a different machine and had the same problem. The problem is the same whether I use a mouse, the pad on my notebook, or a Wacom tablet. I would really appreciate some help on this as it is driving me nuts. (there are those who say I am there already.)

You mentioned using a hard brush – have you tried backing off on the hardness? This will reduce the jaggies. You may get a more natural whisker effect by using the Wacom with a brush whose width is pressure sensitive.

Compare your artificial whiskers carefully with the real whiskers. It may be that you need to blur them on a separate layer, add noise to them, change the color slightly from pure white, or otherwise duplicate the effect of the original photograph.
—
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

Thanks, I will try playing with your suggestion. I am a real newbie with PS and barely getting the feel of using a Wacom. Which brushes are pressure sensitive and how are they accessed.

—
Peter

in article 43ab350b$0$37662$, Peter
at wrote on 12/22/2005 3:21 PM:

"Mike Russell" wrote in message

From: "Peter"
…
[re jaggy lines]

Thanks for your response. Unfortunately that is not the issue. It seems that I have that problem with any line with less than about 22 pixels. I tried drawing a similar line on a different machine and had the same problem. The problem is the same whether I use a mouse, the pad on my notebook, or a Wacom tablet. I would really appreciate some help on this as it is driving me nuts. (there are those who say I am there already.)

You mentioned using a hard brush – have you tried backing off on the hardness? This will reduce the jaggies. You may get a more natural whisker effect by using the Wacom with a brush whose width is pressure sensitive.

Compare your artificial whiskers carefully with the real whiskers. It may be that you need to blur them on a separate layer, add noise to them, change the color slightly from pure white, or otherwise duplicate the effect of the original photograph.
—
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

Thanks, I will try playing with your suggestion. I am a real newbie with PS and barely getting the feel of using a Wacom. Which brushes are pressure sensitive and how are they accessed.

This is the problem with answering questions from newbies. Once you are identified as a person that will help them, they continue to ask endless questions in the hope of not having to figure it out for themselves.

in article 43ab350b$0$37662$, Peter
at wrote on 12/22/2005 3:21 PM:

Thanks, I will try playing with your suggestion. I am a real newbie with PS and barely getting the feel of using a Wacom. Which brushes are pressure sensitive and how are they accessed.

Such people as Peter do not know how to learn. Such people only know how to ask other people how to do something. Such people as Peter have not learned how to learn.

"Larry Linson" wrote in message
news:BFD0CF76.61009%>

Such people as Peter do not know how to learn. Such people only know how to
ask other people how to do something. Such people as Peter have not learned
how to learn.

I disagree completely, and you are welcome to post anything you want, even you are interrupting a thread that does not concern you, and even if it makes you look silly.

But, taking up your theme, if you want people to learn, Larry, start by setting an example.

1) Learn that there will always be new people asking old questions.

2) Learn to ignore posts that you don’t want to answer.

3) Learn that your unjustified remarks degrade the quality of this group, because people are less likely to ask questions because they are concerned about being criticized in front of everyone else.

That’s three things – can you learn them, Larry, or are you the very "kind of person" you criticize: a person who can’t learn?

Given your years of poor behavior in various newsgroups, I think I know the answer already. Because it is nearly Christmas, perhaps you will be revisited by the ghosts of Newsgroups past, and you will discover that you have a chance to redeem yourself. Perhaps, but …. naaaaah.

Happy holidays to all of you, even Larry.
—

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

use pencil tool and not the brush
"Peter" wrote in message

Using CS2:
While retouching a picture of a tiger I damaged the whiskers so I erased them and tried to reproduce them by simply painting a white line with a 5 pixel 100% hard round brush. When I zoomed in the whiskers looked OK. But, when I zoomed out to normal size the whiskers looked banded. I tried different brushes, but got the same effect, All I need is a thin solid white line. I had the same problem when I tried PS7. The whiskers on the other, untouched side, look fine.
I reproduced this problem on a different machine. I am drawing the line using my mouse. Could this be related to pressure.
What am I doing wrong?

TIA

—
Peter

in article 7%Mqf.4075$, Mike Russell at
wrote on 12/22/2005 10:42 PM:

2) Learn to ignore posts that you don’t want to answer.

I did want to answer the post, so I chose to respond. If you don’t like my response then you are free to reply, just like you did, just like I did. That is what makes a newsgroup interesting. Different ideas flowing back and forth.

3) Learn that your unjustified remarks degrade the quality of this group…

I disagree. I think any remark is justified — just by the fact that someone wanted to respond. That is the only justification needed.

,

because people are less likely to ask questions because they are concerned about being criticized in front of everyone else.

That is their problem. It is not my responsibility to be concerned with what "people" are less likely to feel.

That’s three things – can you learn them, Larry, or are you the very "kind of person" you criticize: a person who can’t learn?

You have yet to mention three things of value. So obviously I see no reason to "learn" them.

"Larry Linson" wrote in message news:BFD1B367.61401%

You have yet to mention three things of value. So obviously I see no reason
to "learn" them.

Forgive me, then, for offering gratuitous advice.
—
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

in article fE_qf.34866$, Mike Russell at
wrote on 12/23/2005 2:13 PM:

"Larry Linson" wrote in message news:BFD1B367.61401%

You have yet to mention three things of value. So obviously I see no reason
to "learn" them.

Forgive me, then, for offering gratuitous advice.

You are free to feel that you did something wrong if you need to.

Not my problem.

Larry Linson wrote:

in article fE_qf.34866$, Mike Russell at
wrote on 12/23/2005 2:13 PM:

"Larry Linson" wrote in message news:BFD1B367.61401%

You have yet to mention three things of value. So obviously I see no reason
to "learn" them.

Forgive me, then, for offering gratuitous advice.

You are free to feel that you did something wrong if you need to.
Not my problem.

I think you read too much Voivod…

in article a9139$43ac87f2$3e3be867$, Trace Elliot at
wrote on 12/23/2005 3:27 PM:

Larry Linson wrote:

in article fE_qf.34866$, Mike Russell at
wrote on 12/23/2005 2:13 PM:

"Larry Linson" wrote in message news:BFD1B367.61401%

You have yet to mention three things of value. So obviously I see no reason
to "learn" them.

Forgive me, then, for offering gratuitous advice.

You are free to feel that you did something wrong if you need to.
Not my problem.

I think you read too much Voivod…

Just sharing my truth.

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43ab350b$0$37662$, Peter
at wrote on 12/22/2005 3:21 PM:

Thanks, I will try playing with your suggestion. I am a real newbie with PS
and barely getting the feel of using a Wacom. Which brushes are pressure sensitive and how are they accessed.

Such people as Peter do not know how to learn. Such people only know how to
ask other people how to do something. Such people as Peter have not learned
how to learn.

I appreciate your helpful appraisal of my learning ability and desire. Unfortunately you seem to be happier making ignorant comments than trying to be helpful. Too bad I did not meet your standard of learning ability. Perhaps it would be helpful for beginners like myself if publish your posting standards for to be sufficiently sophisticated to meet your criteria for response.

I apologize to the helpful people on this group for wasting their time with this response.

—
Peter
There’s one in every group

"" wrote in message

use pencil tool and not the brush

Thanks, that did it. The hardest part with a program as complex as PS is selecting the best tool for each job. I could not believe that my problem could not be easily solved.
I see there are multiple uses for some tools, that go past the documentation.

—
Peter

in article 43b09ed5$0$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:45 PM:

Unfortunately you seem to be happier making ignorant comments than trying to be helpful.

I don’t worry about how "helpful" I am to you. People like you need to learn how to function on your own.

in article 43b09ed5$1$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:49 PM:

The hardest part with a program as complex as PS is
selecting the best tool for each job.

You need to learn how to experiment and not be limited by the manual.

On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 20:15:50 -0800, Larry Linson wrote:

in article 43b09ed5$1$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:49 PM:

The hardest part with a program as complex as PS is
selecting the best tool for each job.

You need to learn how to experiment and not be limited by the manual.

You mean there’s a manual <g>?

Jh

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43b09ed5$1$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:49 PM:

The hardest part with a program as complex as PS is
selecting the best tool for each job.

You need to learn how to experiment and not be limited by the manual.

Thank you for your kind and helpful comments. I will keep them in mind.

—
Peter

in article 43b17a9b$0$30186$, Peter at
wrote on 12/27/2005 9:43 AM:

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43b09ed5$1$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:49 PM:

The hardest part with a program as complex as PS is
selecting the best tool for each job.

You need to learn how to experiment and not be limited by the manual.

Thank you for your kind and helpful comments. I will keep them in mind.

You probably will not keep them in mind because you have not learned yet that you are your own best teacher.

Unfortunately — for you — you were told by someone else how to complete your task. Because you were told how to do it — you will stop experimenting and thus will not learn something new.

The act of experimenting with a medium teaches you how to use that medium. Software is no different.

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43b09ed5$0$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:45 PM:

Unfortunately you seem to be happier making ignorant comments than trying to
be helpful.

I don’t worry about how "helpful" I am to you. People like you need to learn how to function on your own.

Quit a valuable tip. Now if only you learn common courtesy………

—
Peter

Larry Linson wrote:

in article 43b17a9b$0$30186$, Peter at
wrote on 12/27/2005 9:43 AM:

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43b09ed5$1$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:49 PM:

The hardest part with a program as complex as PS is
selecting the best tool for each job.

You need to learn how to experiment and not be limited by the manual.

Thank you for your kind and helpful comments. I will keep them in mind.

You probably will not keep them in mind because you have not learned yet that you are your own best teacher.

Unfortunately — for you — you were told by someone else how to complete your task. Because you were told how to do it — you will stop experimenting and thus will not learn something new.

The act of experimenting with a medium teaches you how to use that medium. Software is no different.

That makes me wonder what you are doing here. You’re not helping, so it must be you’re here to learn.

"Peter" wrote in message

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43b09ed5$0$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:45 PM:

Unfortunately you seem to be happier making ignorant comments than trying to be helpful.

I don’t worry about how "helpful" I am to you. People like you need to learn how to function on your own.

Quit a valuable tip. Now if only you learn common courtesy………

Assuming you are the same Larry Linson who was quite helpful in the Access group, I wonder if you would have gotten an MVP with your attitude. If you think it is so basic that I could have found it, why not at least give me a hint as to where and how to solve my problem. I saw nothing in the documentation, or other PS books, that provided this answer. Nor am I a person to be easily intimidated by your arrogant attitude. From what I see here, most of the folk are quite helpful and willing to either drop a hint or provide an answer. As I and most others here would much rather be working with and learning PS than getting into, or reading this type of discussion, let’s just end it now. I concede you won.

—
Peter

Peter wrote:

Using CS2:
While retouching a picture of a tiger I damaged the whiskers so I erased them and tried to reproduce them by simply painting a white line with a 5 pixel 100% hard round brush. When I zoomed in the whiskers looked OK. But, when I zoomed out to normal size the whiskers looked banded. I tried different brushes, but got the same effect, All I need is a thin solid white line. I had the same problem when I tried PS7. The whiskers on the other, untouched side, look fine.
I reproduced this problem on a different machine. I am drawing the line using my mouse. Could this be related to pressure.
What am I doing wrong?

TIA

Hi Peter,

is the background very similar on both sides of the tiger’s face? If so, you could copy the untouched whiskers to a new layer, flip them and line them up on the other side of the tiger’s face. Clean them up a little on the new layer.

Regards,
Brian.

"Brian" <cooloox_at_optusnet.com.au> wrote in message

Peter wrote:

Using CS2:
While retouching a picture of a tiger I damaged the whiskers so I erased them and tried to reproduce them by simply painting a white line with a 5 pixel 100% hard round brush. When I zoomed in the whiskers looked OK. But, when I zoomed out to normal size the whiskers looked banded. I tried different brushes, but got the same effect, All I need is a thin solid white line. I had the same problem when I tried PS7. The whiskers on the other, untouched side, look fine.
I reproduced this problem on a different machine. I am drawing the line using my mouse. Could this be related to pressure.
What am I doing wrong?

TIA

Hi Peter,

is the background very similar on both sides of the tiger’s face? If so, you could copy the untouched whiskers to a new layer, flip them and line them up on the other side of the tiger’s face. Clean them up a little on the new layer.

Thanks Brian. Unfortunatly for your suggestion the shot is a 3/4 profile. The sides are not even close to similar.
Actually my original problem was to get rid of unwanted background on one side. The whiskers were causing a problem similar to hair. I am posting my ultimate and probably inelegant solution so maybe others may benefit. I created an an adjustment layer, increased the contrast to the max so I had clear whiskers, then make a sleection of only the whiskers, then ctrl J, erased all unwanted background on the original, deleted the adjustment layer and merged down. I did this after duplicating the original so I did not ruin it if I messed up.

—
Peter

in article 43b195b6$0$30199$, Peter at
wrote on 12/27/2005 12:07 PM:

"Larry Linson" wrote in message

in article 43b09ed5$0$32799$, Peter
at wrote on 12/26/2005 5:45 PM:

Unfortunately you seem to be happier making ignorant comments than trying to
be helpful.

I don’t worry about how "helpful" I am to you. People like you need to learn how to function on your own.

Quit a valuable tip. Now if only you learn common courtesy………

I was indeed courteous to you, even helpful to you, you just chose to see it otherwise.

in article b709e$43b1a9e6$3e3be867$, Trace Elliot at
wrote on 12/27/2005 12:53 PM:

The act of experimenting with a medium teaches you how to use that medium. Software is no different.

That makes me wonder what you are doing here. You’re not helping, so it must be you’re here to learn.

Every interaction has the possibility to teach.

in article r1Jsf.8383$, Peter at
wrote on 12/28/2005 7:49 PM:

As I and most others here would much rather be working with and learning PS than getting into, or reading this type of discussion, let’s just end it now. I concede you won.

Who is stopping you from doing as you wish? Not me.

There was nothing to "win".

Aha. Another kill filter…hmmm

in article r1Jsf.8383$, Peter at
wrote on 12/28/2005 7:49 PM:

As I and most others here would much rather be working with and learning PS than getting into, or reading this type of discussion, let’s just end it now. I concede you won.

Who is stopping you from doing as you wish? Not me.

There was nothing to "win".

dont be a usenet spelchecker

"rumpledickskin" wrote in message

Aha. Another kill filter…hmmm

in article r1Jsf.8383$, Peter at
wrote on 12/28/2005 7:49 PM:

As I and most others here would much rather be working with and learning PS
than getting into, or reading this type of discussion, let’s just end it now.
I concede you won.

Who is stopping you from doing as you wish? Not me.

There was nothing to "win".

dont be a usenet spelchecker

I have seen that nickname before Rumple. Are you the same one who plays Unreal Tournament VCTF?

"rumpledickskin" wrote in message

Aha. Another kill filter…hmmm

in article r1Jsf.8383$, Peter at
wrote on 12/28/2005 7:49 PM:

As I and most others here would much rather be working with and learning PS
than getting into, or reading this type of discussion, let’s just end it now.
I concede you won.

Who is stopping you from doing as you wish? Not me.

There was nothing to "win".

dont be a usenet spelchecker

I have seen that nickname before Rumple. Are you the same one who plays Unreal Tournament VCTF?

Nope. I play guitar.
dont be a usenet spelchecker