| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/08/2009 12:33:29 AM · #1 |
In Advanced editing, we are able to "clone out incidental power lines, twigs, dust specks, stray hairs, and similar minor imperfections".
In the "100 Years Old" challenge, let's say there is a small plaque or other sign that is visible in the composition. Being at a historic place there are many such signs that give stats on the historic building or artifact.
Can these be cloned out?
|
|
|
|
03/08/2009 12:38:30 AM · #2 |
Kinda depends on how big of an element they are in the image I'd say. In principle, yes, if they are incidental enough.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/08/2009 03:45:41 AM · #3 |
| I would consider that ok in most cases. |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 03:53:13 AM · #4 |
Please submit a ticket (under the Help menu) to the SC with before/after versions of the image and a decription of your editing steps, and you will probably get a fairly reliable assessment of whether the object(s) you want to remove is/are "incidental" enough.
This rule is based on a subjective interpretation and it's quite unlikely that all SC members will agree on any particular image. |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 06:20:47 AM · #5 |
I asked this question of SC recently and was given a pretty good guideline.
"If you can see it in the thumbnail view you can't clone it out" |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 02:10:12 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
I asked this question of SC recently and was given a pretty good guideline.
"If you can see it in the thumbnail view you can't clone it out" |
Oh wow - that's something I never thought about but it makes sense since anything that big would be a "major" element!! |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 02:23:54 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Jutilda:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
I asked this question of SC recently and was given a pretty good guideline.
"If you can see it in the thumbnail view you can't clone it out" |
Oh wow - that's something I never thought about but it makes sense since anything that big would be a "major" element!! |
Ditto! That's a heck of a useful rule-of-thumb...
R.
|
|
|
|
03/08/2009 04:07:44 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's a heck of a useful rule-of-thumb... |
That's the direction I offered, and it's a good general guideline if applied with common sense. A background jet contrail or a tree trunk along the edge of the frame might be visible even in the thumbnail and still be minor enough distractions to clone out, while a mosquito could be major enough to keep in a portrait if the model's looking at it cross-eyed on his nose. It's a matter of visual prominence... a question of, "Hey, where did that [cloned out thing] go?" At a glance, an object supported with fine fishing line appears to be levitating, while one held up with rope is obviously hanging. When in doubt, submit a ticket for opinions. |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 10:12:49 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
When in doubt, submit a ticket for opinions. |
Which I did last night and haven't heard a thing as far as a response or guidance goes. I just replied to my original ticket with another comparison image example. I hope to hear something before tonight's deadline!
Message edited by author 2009-03-16 01:10:41. |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 10:53:17 PM · #10 |
I have heard from the SC (thanks, SC!).
After the challenge voting is over, I'll post the "before" and "after" images.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2009 01:06:21 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by AperturePriority:
I have heard from the SC (thanks, SC!).
After the challenge voting is over, I'll post the "before" and "after" images. |
As promised, here are the "before" and "after" images.
Message edited by author 2009-03-17 00:36:14. |
|
