James
One of the favoured ways of covering up parts of an image is to use the clone tool.
g.
It’s a little tough to suggest a tool without seeing the original images, but here’s a couple thoughts…
The clone stamp would probably be the way to go if something needs to be completely hidden, but it may depend on how simple the background is.
If something just needs to be obscured or de-emphasized, the smudge or blur tool are possibilities.
Interesting challenge…and I don’t think I want to see the originals! LOL
So let me see if I understand your goal. Say for example you have a hand showing through a piece of sheer silk fabric and you need to be able to obscure the details of hand without affecting the fabric?
Somehow you need to select the flesh tones in the fabric area and blur them. You could try using the Magic Wand tool to select just the skin tones or whatever color of the body parts to be obscured :). This will select more flesh than you want, so you will need to unselect those areas with the Lasso tool in subtract mode. Once you have the correct area of flesh selected, you can then blur it with Filter>Gaussian blur or just use several instances of Blur. Hopefully there is sufficient contrast in the sheer fabrics and the skin. You may need to zoom way in to see the individual pixels to be sure you’re selecting skin and not silk.
I’m sure some of the pros here can explain it better than I. But the challenge of it intrigues me.
Patti
Scratch that Blur idea I just posted. I think DS Nelson’s idea of using the Clone Stamp is better, assuming you can find a sufficient enough area to clone. 🙂
Patti
I think whoever told him this would be a piece of cake for a novice using any software ought to give him a demonstration to prove how easy it is. 🙂 I can see where maintaining the integrity of the depiction of the garment while removing the "offending" body parts could get to be pretty tricky.
Maybe someone (not me) could e-mail him and arrange a private transfer of one of these images. I agree with post #2, it’s hard to suggest a method without seeing the original. And this gentleman is a new Elements user, which makes it even more important to be very specific in the directions.
Where’s Jodi when we need her?!
I’d vote for the clone stamp as suggested by Grant. Maybe try at a lower opacity setting. The smudge tool since it is on fabric might be worth a try too as suggested by DS Nelson. Hey, I wonder if he could create some fake luminosity at the location…kind of like glare that would shield the piece of anatomy in question. Maybe with dodge tool. Hey, Jodi where are you. We all know you’ve got the answer to this one. Very curious to see what some of the suggestions are on this one.
Terri
Patty,
Depending on the silk structure you should be able to use the clone tool to blot out the body parts. However you need to enlarge the image to maximum pixel size and then use the clone to reduce the body parts.
Unfortunately I believe that this will be very difficult to do as the result will be a solid silk cloth in that particular area only whereas the rest is I assume see through. 🙂
Robert
The easiest way is to mail these images to Grant; this way all the experts here can work on it in the "Challenge"
Leen
The easiest way is to mail these images to Grant; this way all the experts here can work on it in the "Challenge"
Bad boy! I’ll bet there was a grin on your face when you wrote that! LOL
:)Patti
If I post it Leen better enter.
g.
I agree with Leen. And I’m NOT joking.
Where’s Jodi when we need her?!
Maybe she’s at Victoria’s Secret, trying to get some ideas.
(g,r,&d)
Gee, I can see the challenge entries now. Women with 8 nipples, etc. LOL.
If Victoria’s Secret was smart they would be asking Jodi for idea.
g.
Terri
"Women with 8 nipples," would that make her a real dog?
G.
Terri, after seeing what you did with the fire hydrant, I can’t wait to see what you’d do with this!
Dan
Women with 8 nipples," would that make her a real dog?
Another name comes to mind, but I was told it was not nice to call people that.
I can see this topic has become a hot one! LOL
🙂 Patti
Okay James, we’re rarin’ to go.
It may be mute as no one has entered a semi clad or unclad person for the Challenge … yet. If anyone is waiting from me to post a nudie of mois they will have a long wait as I am not, nor is the world ready for anything that ugly. It took me 37 years to train my wife not to laugh at me when I stripped so do you honestly believe I would subject you people to that? Now if anyone is brave enough to submit a skimpy self portrait and try to call my bluff you maybe in for a surprise.
g.
Well, I am hoping this is an upstairs issue as opposed to a downstairs issue.
Grant,
I wouldn’t think of calling your buff… er bluff.
Hmmmm – I can see things have been a little out of control here today….sorry I missed the fun!
😉
Chuck (in Corpus Christi)
wow, a girl takes a few days off from the forum to take care of ‘other’ stuff and comes back to this thread….how refreshing 😉
Anyways, I would not make a good subject for the challenge image. My boobs are way tiny and it would just be too easy for everyone to bloat them with the liquify tool and of course if you went the other way I would have to kill you. So either way. it would not be a challenge and some lives could be lost in the process. An itsy bitsy tiny penis would be fun though….’uncut’ please 🙂
But Jodi do you have any CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions to offer this poor guy (who will probably never venture on to this forum again!)???? 🙂
People you did go a touch out of control I think. This was a guest for goodness’ sake! Think of our reputation!
It’s OK, James; it’s safe to come back. They’re a little weird but harmless. You just gave them an opening they couldn’t resist.
Jodi, How about distort<spherize filter? We could make you look like Anna Nicole!
Oh geeze Beth, I do apologize….of course you are right.
James, I’m going to throw in my 2 cents to suggest something other than using the clone tool. I would suggest that you do not try to cover up ‘things’ by hiding the truth of the items in question. I would suggest to put an obvious mosaic type blur over the areas that are showing just too much. This way the customer knows what they are getting….they will know what to expect when the package arrives on the doorstep. You can use the lasso tool or marquee tool to make the designated selections and use a filter ( go to toolbar>filter>pixelate>crystalize…choose size of the tile and your done.
If you would prefer more precise help with the clone tool then please come back…but honestly though…I would be one that would prefer to know if my boobs or balls were going to show.
Somehow I have a picture of Jame’s jaw dropping. Maybe a few others too.
Terri, where have you been ? Anna took a bunch of pills and has lost a pile of weight…i think her butt still rolls but my hub disagrees 🙂
Jodi, Yeah but I think she still has those big round plastic boobies.
Terri
ya and now they look even more ridiculous.
Sigh, Another victim of Barbie brainwash.
Terri, did you know that women have even had ribs removed to give the ‘slimmer’ waste effect re; Barbie effect ?
This is why ‘ Roseane’ was such an important show 🙂
James, I agree with Jodi’s suggestion that you blur those areas instead of trying to remove anything. People do know what should be "under there", and if the body parts aren’t able to be seen some might get a mistaken impression of how the garment would look when worn. Blurring would remove the potentially objectionable parts from the picture and still portray the garment accurately. Blurring can be done tastefully. If you need detailed instructions on how to do it, I’m sure someone would be willing to get themself under control enough to explain the process. 🙂
(Hey, these really are nice, creative people; they just get a little wild every once in a while.)
Whatever technique is used it will have to be a fine line because on one hand he should be tasteful but on the other side of the coin he is selling a product. Blur would probably be an excellent idea but he also has to look at how he’s much obscuring his product. That is really the issue here. That’s why I really think he might want to try clone stamp with a low opacity setting. Conceal but not obliterate. Funny I always thought models wore some sort of body stocking beneath sheer fabrics when doing catalog shoots.
Terri
By the way, excuse the levity on this issue.
Another approach: Photograph the underwear on a manikin at an angle as close to your shots of real models as possible. Copy the manikin photo into the model photo as a new layer. Use the Transform>Distort tool to position the underwear from the manikin to cover the sensitive areas on the model. Use the clone and/or smudge tool to clean up any stray underwear seams so the layers blend together.
Bob Warren
Bath
" CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions to offer this poor guy "
I for one think this is either a put-on or the silliest marketing scheme I have ever come across. Just think about poor mislead Aunt Gertrude out in the Midwest purchasing a "racier high-end elegant sheer silk lingerie" and having the naughty bits air brushed out. Gertrude, not know that all would be revealed, would slips it on for old Uncle Ned. Ned’s reaction may be "My God Gertie for $500 you would think that they would have ironed out the wrinkles" No, I suspect showing the naughty bits might sell more of these products to the targeted audience. But I could be wrong, being a Canadian I am not even aware that men and woman had naughty bits.
g
Thanks to all! And to Grant: This is no joke! I have to publish two separate representations of the "racier" pictures: the visitor to the catalog site will be able to choose which version to see. I already have several hundred customers, and customer complaints are driving the need for the modifications.
I will put your various suggestions into (attempted) practice, and let you all know how it goes.
My email is Anyone who wishes a sample picture from the catalog, and might have concrete suggestions for me, please send me your email addy, and I wiil forward a sample to you.
Thanks again,
GOOSE
James
Thank you for the clarification. I guess I am one of those strange individuals that can’t fathom the immaturity of some of those that are buying adult products. While I am not making a value judgement I am much happier that is you who have to deal with these people than I. I don’t have a problem with posting one of your images as a challenge but be forewarned these people have great senses of humour and you are libel to end up with a green scaly iguana modeling your PJs.
Grant
Yep, the conservative element will get you every time. I wonder if he’s already being blocked by kiddy patrol and other internet childproofing software. Around here, yes Grant in the Midwest, they raise a hue and cry when "racy" shops open. They also get mighty upset at the prospect of a Hooters opening in their community. Even the choice to view or not view will still set the more conservative element off sorry to say. In business, I think you are going to find you can’t make everyone happy. Some it seems, live to complain.
Terri
Hey, got two sets of those! However, did you know! Nothing like a nice pair of flannel PJs.
I suppose I will never be able to understand all this complaining about something one doesnot have to look at. If people think something like this is pornography, it is because they prefer to see pornography because pornography is on their mind.
If these people would act like like they react, I suppose the Midwest people would have been extinct within 50 years. Hypocrites!
Leen,
(who sleeps the cheapest way, elementary)
Why not just put a lable over the sensitive area(s) with the wording "censored" or with a bit more fun like smily’s or other well known icons.
That may solve everything. You have solved how to cover the image with out disrupting it too much in a technical/digital sense and you have satisfied the more prude readers of the magazine.
Robert
