Easier/quicker way to do this?

[WayDen]

My friends & I took some pictures a couple of months ago, and they were all taken with the auto mode on the camera. I thought they would look better with depth of field added (the objects are supposed to get "blurrier" the further back it is from the main subject), so I manipulated the picture to give it that specific look.

The problem is, it just seems to take forever, and never quite comes out looking like the picture was taken using DOF (the biggest give away is the tiny hairs that would be blowing in the wind - I just can't find a way to extract them without looking "out of place") . I used a lens blur to fake the DOF after trying out different blurs, and it looked the closest to what I was trying to accomplish.

First off, I tweaked the colors to make it a brighter photo. Then, I took out the date, cropped & resized, added surface blur to the skin, & whitened the teeth slightly. I also created some hair for the two girls on the right, because the blur just didn't look right behind the "holes" in the hair that the two girls had. So I just covered it up by cloning/recreating hair.

Here's the original picture.

Here's the finished picture.

Is there anything else I could've done to this? And has anyone tried to recreate depth of field before? I've done it to two other picture since, and this method is just time consuming. Also, one thing that bugs me is the girl on the far left has a severe edge to her hair, but I tried to blend it with the background, and it just never came out looking good....

Any critique/help/advice would be greatly appreciated!

[byRo]

Originally Posted by WayDen

... Also, one thing that bugs me is the girl on the far left has a severe edge to her hair, but I tried to blend it with the background, and it just never came out looking good....

Any critique/help/advice would be greatly appreciated!

CHEAT !!

No that's not an accusation, that's my advice.
You can take all day trying to mask single hairs, and in the end (as you have discovered) it just won't "look right".

My trick would be to use the smudge tool at very low size (2 pixels), soft, and high opacity (70 - 90%) then push out just a few wisps of hair (not too many) at the right places.

Here's a quick wisp-push I did for the young lady at the left.
If you are lucky enough to have a tablet (I´m not ) you can probably do a lot better job.

BTW great job . You took a dull snapshot and turned it into an impressive group portrait.

Rô

[Juergen D]

Hi,

In a setting like this, I think making a *soft* selection can be helpful. I selected the girls using a soft Selection Brush in masking mode. I generously over selected, well beyond the hair. Inverting and placing the selection on new layer. Applied the Gaussian Blur (10.0) on the full image layer below. Using a layer mask on the layer with the girls (above) I painted out the area around their heads. Again with a soft brush, most of time set to about 80% opacity. One does not have to be particularly precise here either, as a matter of fact, slight imperfections does make the transition from sharp to blur look more natural.

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/6...ffield1vv5.jpg

Note, I did not do any other touchups or corrections, except for a slight rotation and removal of the date.

Juergen

[WayDen]

Originally Posted by byRo

My trick would be to use the smudge tool at very low size (2 pixels), soft, and high opacity (70 - 90%) then push out just a few wisps of hair (not too many) at the right places.

Here's a quick wisp-push I did for the young lady at the left.
If you are lucky enough to have a tablet (I´m not ) you can probably do a lot better job.

BTW great job . You took a dull snapshot and turned it into an impressive group portrait.

Rô

Thanks for the tip! I don't know why I didn't think of that - now I feel like an idiot! But again, thanks!

Originally Posted by Juergen D

Hi,

In a setting like this, I think making a *soft* selection can be helpful. I selected the girls using a soft Selection Brush in masking mode. I generously over selected, well beyond the hair. Inverting and placing the selection on new layer. Applied the Gaussian Blur (10.0) on the full image layer below. Using a layer mask on the layer with the girls (above) I painted out the area around their heads. Again with a soft brush, most of time set to about 80% opacity. One does not have to be particularly precise here either, as a matter of fact, slight imperfections does make the transition from sharp to blur look more natural.

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/6...ffield1vv5.jpg

Note, I did not do any other touchups or corrections, except for a slight rotation and removal of the date.

Juergen

Wow! That looks really good - I'm going to have to try that method on the next picture that I do this with. I really like the results that you achieved - it really looks like depth of field! Thanks Juergen!

[duwayne]

I just couldn't resist. This photo look very good as a black and white. Nice contrast and shadows.

[WayDen]

Originally Posted by duwayne

I just couldn't resist. This photo look very good as a black and white. Nice contrast and shadows.

Wow, you're right! It does look really good as a b&w!

I might have to add a b&w version to my flickr page....