My mistake assuming you use Photoshop. Your absolutely right about what
the content aware fill can do and not do. Works great on flesh,
gradient backgrounds. That frees up time to attempt trickier parts like
furniture, patterns, etc.... The outined path is the traced acme logo.
If you opened my file in Photoshop you would be able to see it and use
it as a selection..
article <56B7B441.8040503@yahoo.com>, retrowavelength
<retrowavelength@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >recently learned of the "content aware" fill option
>
> I've seen that menioned before and looked into it a little. I'm using an
> older photoeditor (actually two different programs) & wondered if that
> was a reason to move up to the more costly Photoshop. Decided I'd not
> pursue it, though. It seemed able to work well in areas where all one
> needs is a gradient filled in, but if there're image details behind the
> logo (e.g., wallpaper patterns, model's moles, etc.) then it didn't work
> as well, since it tries to extrapolate into a masked space from what is
> around the edges of the mask. (Did I describe that right?) In other
> words, often what it does is disguise where the logo (or other masked
> flaw) was but can't actually restore original photo bits that were
> hidden or missing. To do that, one often must have another image or copy
> of the same image that reveals what was obscured or missing.
>
> >more acme's to look thru. Would you know where I could find them?
>
> I had their URL but deleted it after finding they'd cleared out the
> files. I have quite a number of them saved, though.
>
> >btw, my files were saved with a outlined path of the logo
>
> I'm probably being dense, or just unfamiliar with the lingo, but can you
> clarify what you meant?
>
> --rwl
>
|
|
![Favorite](javascript:myfavor('http://www.nzbot.com/article/alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintage/8819', 'Re: - "Betty_Cushman.jpg" (1/2) Acme delogo 01')){kind=link}