Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dead Moroz Moving the selected object of the mask to a new layer is good idea indeed, that should save pretty much time for the user. We should investigate how this can be done through the part of Photoshop API supported in PSP.
However, I still think it's better to make a mask than cutting out the selected object, because PSP can make a selection from it, or the user can edit this mask (invert, smooth, etc.) to get the exact selection he wants. What do you think? |
moroz (i'm purposely leaving out the 'dead'

),
well, when i first tried out growcut i was expecting it as the final stage to simply extract the image to a new layer. it did an excellent job of selecting what i wanted selected and i just figured this was an extraction tool and that i would get my extraction as the final step. so, ok, that wasnt the case. and, like you say, it isnt that difficult to make an extraction from the mask. so, again, ok.
i think what would be ideal would be to have the option, after you've done all the preliminary work of lining up the selection, of either making the mask on that layer, making the mask to a new layer or making an extraction to a new layer. THAT would be ideal.
now, i've NO idea what this would involve as far as programming and coding and i, like others, dont want to seem critical and ungrateful for what is truly an amazing FREE program. so, to that end, thank you! i'm also aware that your main target audience here is for
PS users and quite probably rightfully so. so, again, thanks for including us
psp users here!
i also dont know if you have access to
psp 7, 8, 9, or 10, so maybe an explanation of what
psp does and has as far as selection abilities might help here. i'm sure you know we have 'magic wand' and 'freehand, point to point, and true freehand' and also the normal boxed selection. but, one thing
psp has that maybe
PS doesnt have (dont know) is we can paint a mask with the normal paint tools, including paint brush, airbrush, smudge, push and so on and all at varying opacities and densities, just like a normal image painting. but, the really nice thing is we can convert that mask instantly to a selection and then do everything you can do with a normal selection. and when done, we can, if we wish, switch this back to a mask again. it's a VERY handy feature in
psp 10 (and i think 9).
so, what i'm sort of looking at here as an idea is some combination of the above
psp features combined with your 'growing/eating' selection process in growcut. not quite exactly sure what at this point, but i just know there's something there that could be done.
also, the last time i used growcut i was thinking that there shld be some modifiers that the user could select to modify the way the 'eating' routine selects pixels. something like 'strong', 'medium', 'soft', 'by color', much the same way you can modify the magic wand tool. now, i know you do have some of this in your 'hard', 'soft', and 'border' buttons. i was just thinking that there could be more.
also, the 'refine borders' could still use some work. i'm still ending up with jagged borders at times that i then have to use the 'soft' tool on to try to even out.
now, just so you know, i dont think it's all bad. i love the way the algorithm eats or un-eats pixels and it does this generally very intelligently. i mostly like the 'refine borders' too. and, so far, i prefer the 'growing' program more than the 'green outline' program. i just love seeing it eat the correct pixels and even when it doesnt pick out the right ones, i love the way you can get it to eat more. very slick!
oh, and one last comment. the 'soft' tool often doesnt want to do anything even with repeated attempts to make it do so. i often have to come at it from different directions or slightly different areas to get it to get what i want. i would suggest a pure 'eat this pixel' tool for those difficult areas that i know would be correct, but that the smart routine just cant quite say are ok. this would be like an override tool that unconditionally would eat X number of pixels that you clicked on. it might have to be just a one pixel tool to work right, but that would be ok.
so, again, thank you. i think you've got the makings of an excellent tool here. are you planning to eventually make this a commercial product?
Craig