Dan Margulis Applied Color Theory

Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur

Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Louis Dina"
Sun Sep 9, 2007 7:36 pm (PST)

I photograph a lot of wild animals, many of which have fur (otters, beavers, foxes, rabbits, etc). I always shoot raw and leave all sharpening off in camera raw so that a totally unsharpened images is brought into Photoshop.

I am wondering if anyone has suggestions for handling fur, since I find that there is a very fine line between sharpening and losing that soft, fuzzy quality. I have tried a number of techniques, but am not 100% satisfied with any of them (blurring, localized sharpening, slightly high radius sharpening, blend if sliders, etc)..

Any have any suggestions to apply maximum sharpening without losing that touchable quality?

Thanks,

Lou Dina
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Alistair Owens"
Sun Sep 9, 2007 8:00 pm (PST)

Lou,

Have you tried just sharpening on the Luminance channel in LAB? This might give you the results you are looking for. Also I always tend to favour some sharpening in the RAW converter. Despite its interface, I find DPP sharpening set to 3 or 4 provides a very sound basis upon which to build on in Photoshop.

Regards

Alistair Owens
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "George Machen"
Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:05 am (PST)
 
Check out these two products:

<http://www.focusmagic.com/>
<http: //www.fixerlabs.com/EN/photoshop_plugins/focusfixer.htm>

They use a mathematical process called "deconvolution," which is a different approach to sharpening which largely, if not entirely, avoids the halos at edges with USM. It may be what you need for animal fur because it's more subtle than USM.

Deconvolution is described here:

<http://www.reindeergraphics.com/index.php?option= com_content&task=view&id=212&Itemid=158>
<http://www.reindeergraphics.com/index.php?option= com_content&task=view&id=179&Itemid=127>

... but they would be the first to admit that their Photoshop plug-in really isn't intended for the audience on this list, but rather for science & medical labs; there's just too much baggage with their package for our kind of work.

Basically, the out-of-focus bokah in a photo is caused by a convolution combination of the object photographed with the shape-spread of the lens aperture. Deconvolution aspires to reverse the convolution by applying the inverse operation with assumed parameters. The above plug-ins allow one to play around with those assumed parameters until the image looks better.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokah>

Extra-credit reading with high falutin' mathematics:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconvolution>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolution>

- George Machen
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Howard Smith"
Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:55 am (PST)

Louis,

Try this. Choose a channel that shows good fur detail. Paste a copy of it above the background layer. Change blending mode to Soft Light. Create a Curves Adjustment Layer above the channel copy. Click Ctrl-G to group it with the channel copy. Adjust the master curve to get the best detailing in the fur. Now make the background layer active and use Unsharp Mask with Amount 50, Radius 50, Threshold 0. Immediately use Edit/Fade Unsharp Mask to get the best sharpening. Go back to the channel copy and adjust its opacity. If you get any unwanted color shifts, use Curves or Hue/Saturation to correct the background layer..

If the background is unfavorably affected by all this, a simple channel mask, enhanced with Curves, should take care of the problem. Depending on the image you might want to blur the mask to avoid the cut-out look.

I'm no wildlife photographer, but this procedure worked well with a photo of a fawn lying in a bed of ferns, with a young cottontail in a flowerbed, and with two polar bears that appeared as yellowish, flat, and almost formless creatures in the photo. A couple of minutes work transformed them back into dirty white polar bears with good fur and muscle detail.

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Jim Donovan"  
Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:28 am (PST)

Hi Lou, Try this method,I find it dose work well with some images that have very fine detail like fur.Make a dupe layer,under filters select other,the High Pass. You will get a grayed out image that has hi-lites where you will be sharpening and one radius control to mess with.Set the blending mode to overlay on the dupe layer,click it off and on to see the effects of your sharpening.Experiment with several dupe layers set at different radii, kind of double or triple or more hit sharpening. Works well with Grass,Fur,fine fabric and so on. The key is to play around with different settings on multiple layers with multiple radii. You could write a Theseus on sharpening and not even scratch the surface,it's never ending. Good luck! Jim Donovan
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Louis Dina"
Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:35 pm (PST)

Thanks for all your suggestions so far regarding handling fur in Photoshop.

Perhaps it makes more sense to post an image, so I will try to do that after sending this post. First, the conditions under which I shoot these creates (for the local wildlife center) are far from ideal. Usually low light, cramped quarters, desired to maintain minimal contract and disruptions, etc. The image to be posted in the files section of this site (beaver.jpg at jpg setting of 10 so I don't have to upload a monster TIFF) is an example of a shot taken, out of necessity, with an on-camera flash pointed straight up and bounced off a white cardboard so it is a little less harsh. The beaver has naturally oily fur, which tends to reflect light and create lots of highlights. I set white balance and sliders conservatively in ACR and did zero sharpening, then set highlights, shadows and color balance in Photoshop (again, no sharpening). Assuming this is the final color balance and tonal range (which is wouldn't be, but is for this example), how can I sharpen it without making the fur look less soft. I would actually prefer it had a softer feel to offset the harsher lighting.

So far, I have had the best success leaving most of the fur totally unsharpened, then doing local sharpening of some whiskers, noses, eyes, and perhaps some fur highlights through a layer mask with a soft brush. Sharpening overall increases the contrast range, brightens the shine of individual hairs, and makes the fur look crisp, and course, instead of soft.

I run into this all the time, since I in cramped, poorly lit areas, am photographing animals that don't hold still, don't have the ability to set up lights, and usually don't have a white surface I can use to bounce flash from.

I'll try to post the image under the heading, Beaver".

Thanks again,

Lou Dina
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Howard Smith"
Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:56 pm (PST)

Say, Jim, that's a good one! I tried substituting your High Pass layer for the channel copy mentioned in my earlier reply to Louis Dina. By first changing the duplicate layer's blending mode to Overlay, you can see the results of moving the High Pass slider so you'll know when you've got the best setting. I kept everything else that I had already described. Works great on my polar bears. Haven't tried it on anything else, but it should work well.

One never knows when someone else's comment, suggestion, or technique will lead to a whole new avenue of things to explore. Now, that's what really makes this Forum worthwhile.

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Stephen Marsh"  
Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:16 pm (PST)

Lou, I have mentioned this free plug more than once, but it may be worth exploring for your fur:

http://www.reindeergraphics.com

Click on the free plugs menu, then Adpative Equalize.

"Adaptive Equalization. A free component of Fovea Pro and The Image Processing Tool Kit.

Our Adaptive Equalization plugin implements a technique for increasing the local contrast of images by reducing overall dynamic range. It is particularly useful for making small surface marks visible, or revealing detail in shadow areas, while preserving color information."

Sincerely,

Stephen Marsh.
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Howard Smith"
Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:18 pm (PST)

Lou,

Your beaver image looked good to me without corrections, but I've sent along a mildly sharpened version offline to see if that's what you had in mind.
In addition to the layers included with the image, I did a very mild Unsharp Mask sharpening of the background layer (50% Amount, 50% Radius, 0% Threshold; Edit/Fade Unsharp Mask to reduce the effect). I failed to note that the channel copy layer was inverted and blurrled, accompanied by a Highlight Layer Mask to limit contrast improvement to detail in the highlights. If it's what you want, feel free to post it. Otherwise don't give it another thought. It was fun working on it whether it proves useful or not. It's a pity we don't see more images like the few that have been posted this year.

Which brings up a question. When a Forum member posts an image with a question about what might be done with it, should we request formal approval before posting a different version, or is it just considered  acceptable to go ahead and post our own interpretation?

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Louis Dina"
Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:15 am (PST)

Hi Stephen.

I downloaded the Adaptive Equilize plugin and played with it on my images. It will take getting more familiar with the filter before I get the results I want with it, but it is incredibly useful for pulling out hidden detail. Didn't seem to be the ticket for this image (at least with my limited experimentation).

More importantly, Reindeer Graphics had a "Find Edges" plugin that is quite slick. That has actually solved my problem. After listening to the many helpful suggestions to my request, and spending a lot more time playing with my Beaver images, I concluded that the problem is "hot spots" and extended highlights caused by the oil in the fur and exaggerated by flash (used out of necessity). Of course, sharpening only made the matter worse, which is why I avoided sharpening the fur in favor of localized sharpening around eyes, nose, etc. Using the find edges filter allowed me to easily select only the brightest highlights, then add a "paint layer" to tone them down with a color sampled from slightly darker fur. Being able to tone down the brightest, most offensive highlights retained the softness of the fur and maintained the overall look and tonal range. Then I could apply gentle sharpening on the toned down image very successfully. Now it looks soft but with better detail, without losing the essence of what makes soft fur......well, soft fur. Too much detail/contrast seems to be the enemy here, especially bright highlights.

I had tried a similar approach, using the method Bruce Fraser suggests for finding and sharpening edges in his Sharpening book. He uses Calculations to create a mask channel using the Red and Green channels and Pin light. Then he applies curves to the new channel, invests it and applies a small gaussian blur and 2nd set of second set of curves to create a final high contrast edge mask. I was able to do this successfully too, but it takes a lot more work and getting all the mask settings properly set. The Reindeer "Find Edges" plugin does this fast and easy, and has a few different settings to help you fine tune it. So, Stephen, you gave me a very workable solution by referring me to Reindeer. Thanks.

Howard, thanks for the image you sent me. It looks good. It took me awhile to realize that it was the extended highlights in the image that were really causing me the troubles. I tried separate sharpening layers set to lighten and darken, which helped some, but didn't address the initial problem (at least from my perspective), which was too many oily hairs reflecting bright highlights.

I'll post and "after" Beaver shot so people can see what I was after. It's sometimes hard to communicate what you are looking for. This might not be what others would do with this image, but it was what I was looking for.

Thanks again, folks.

Lou Dina
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "John Bongiovanni"
Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:08 am (PST)

"Howard Smith"wrote:

Say, Jim, that's a good one! I tried substituting your High Pass layer for
the channel copy mentioned in my earlier reply to Louis Dina. By first
changing the duplicate layer's blending mode to Overlay, you can see the
results of moving the High Pass slider so you'll know when you've
got the best setting. I kept everything else that I had already described.

Could you clarify this, Howard? Are you just using the High Pass filter as described above, or are you also doing sharpening? If the latter, on which layer? Thanks.

John Bongiovanni
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Louis Dina"
Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:50 am (PST)

Jim,

This sounds like what Lee Varis calls "octave sharpening" in his Skin book. He creates four duplicate layers and puts them into a group, sets each to luminosity, then sharpenes each layer with a different radius and layer opacity (he uses Unsharp Mask instead of High Pass). On the bottom luminosity layer he uses Unsharp settings of 500/0.5/0 and 100% opacity. The next layer up he uses a radius of 1.0 and opacity of 50%, then 2 radius/25% opacity and 4 radius/13% opacity on the top layer. You can then adjust the opacity of the entire group and/or any individual layers in the group.

I already had this programmed as an action so I ran it on the fur (after toning down the shiny fur highlights per a previous post) and it had a very nice effect. If I understand your post correctly, they are fairly similar.

Thanks for the good suggestion. That will be a part of my "fur" arsenal in the future. The key to what I want is toning down the highlight shine first, but this was a helpful post. I hadn't thought of using this type of sharpening on fur.

Regards,

Lou Dina
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: Howard Smith
Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:40 pm (PST)

This is the procedure on which I finally settled. Use Ctrl-J to duplicate the background layer. Change the duplicate's blending mode to Overlay. Choose Filter/Other/High Pass and adjust the High Pass Radius while watching the effect on the image. Create a Curves Adjustment Layer above the High Pass filter layer. Click Ctrl-G to group it with the High Pass layer so it will affect only that layer. Use Normal blending mode, though you can experiment with Overlay mode and see what happens. Use the master curve to adjust the tones in the High Pass filter layer. Click on the background layer, then choose Filter/Sharpen/Unsharp Mask. Use an Amount of 50% and a Radius of 50%. Threshold 0%. The effect is pretty strong, of course, but you can tone it down with Edit/Fade Unsharp Mask. Use Apply Image to paste a copy of the Green channel into a new, blank layer at the top of the layers stack. Invert it with Ctrl-I. Create a Layer Mask for that layer with Select/Color Range/Highlights. Use Filter/Blur/Gaussian Blur to get the maximum detail in the pale highlights. Lou used what appears to be a very promising plug-in recommended by Stephen Marsh. For lack of time I just toned down the white guard hairs by painting on yet another new, blank layer in Darken mode, using a medium brown color selected from the beaver's fur. Lou Dina used a little more time for more precise work with localized sharpening, etc., as he describes in his post. My approach enhanced the background as well, but Lou prefers a more muted background which is probably best if you want to concentrate on the beaver itself. Almost forgot to mention that you can also try using Unsharp Mask on the High Pass filter layer. You can see that there must be dozens or even hundreds of combinations of blending modes and opacities with which to experiment. Every once in awhile one of these strange combinations produces a real winner.

My approach is just a starting point. You can adjust the opacities of the various layers, use the referenced plug-in, use a layer mask to paint in localized sharpening from an underlying globally sharpened layer, and any number of other things. Likely no two of us will use the same approach, but I learned quite a lot from Lou Dina's explanation. It was very educational just to see how a wildlife photographer looks at an image. As I have said many a time, each person's ideas can serve as stepping stones toward developing still more techniques for special purposes. We need more of these ideas, but we can often learn some valuable things from heated controversies as well. You never know where the next great idea is coming from.

If my explanation isn't quite clear, please don't hesitate to contact me here or offline.

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

Re: Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur
Posted by: "Jim Donovan"
Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:41 pm (PST)

This sounds like what Lee Varis calls "octave sharpening" in his Skin
book. He creates four duplicate layers and puts them into a group,
sets each to luminosity, then sharpenes each layer with a different
radius and layer opacity (he uses Unsharp Mask instead of High
Pass). On the bottom luminosity layer he uses Unsharp settings of
500/0.5/0 and 100% opacity. The next layer up he uses a radius of
1.0 and opacity of 50%, then 2 radius/25% opacity and 4 radius/13%
opacity on the top layer. You can then adjust the opacity of the
entire group and/or any individual layers in the group.

You Betcha Lou!!! Works like a charm eh. Yes it is similar to Lee's octave sharpening. Keep playing with it you will continue discover better ways to sharpen. It is never ending and by far the most complex pre-press step there is. Glad I could help! Jim Donovan
___________________________________________________________________________

FocusMagic and FocusFixer - was "Suggestions for Photoshopping Fur"
Posted by: "Louis Dina"
Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:40 pm (PST)

A little feedback on FocusMagic and FocusFixer. I downloaded both on
a trial basis and played around with a number of different images to
test them out vs. USM. I tried them on high, medium and low
frequency detail images.

First thing I noticed is that the preview window is small in both
plugins, which makes it hard to determine if you have the best
setting or not. The windows cannot be enlarged.

FocusFixer (FF) has a radius slider, and a threshold slider to help
alleviate sharpening noise. No Amount adjustment, which I found
wanting. FocusMagic (FM) has a radius and Amount slider, but no
Threshold, though it does have a drop down box to allow the user to
select a few different presets for dealing with noise amplification.
FM also has an "auto-detect" feature that sets the radius to what it
thinks is optimum. FM also seems to apply more default sharpening
than FF, which I liked since I always sharpen on a duplicate layer so
I can adjust opacity. Both products do a decent job, and generally
have reduced halos (especially light halos) compared to USM used in
standard mode. Both are SLOW, probably 30-60 seconds or
longer,depending on the settings and the image.

Having said that, I find I generally prefer USM. With USM, I can
sharpen only the Red or Green channel, or both, or all three. I can
also create separate lighten and darken layers and reduce the lighten
layer opacity to reduce light halos. Or I can use blend if sliders
to control where sharpening is applied, or use an edge mask, etc.
One of the biggest advantages of USM (other than being free with PS)
is that you get to see a preview of your entire image while you are
setting Amount, Radius and Threshold, which I find really helps to
get the best possible setting. It is also very fast compared to the
two plugins mentioned above. I found that I was able to get as good
or better sharpening with USM than with the plugins on most images,
and the results seemed more natural, especially on low frequency
images (bowls of fruit, pottery, etc). USM does tend to have more
noticeable halos if it is applied carelessly, but I found the many
methods above handle these concerns effectively. While I am waiting
for the plugins to chug along, I can be adjusting USM to get exactly
what I want. So, unless they make some improvements, I don't
personally see enough reason to buy these plugins. There are
probably some images where these products may outdo USM, but I only
worked on a dozen images or so, and didn't see any marked improvement.

Just thought I'd pass along my experiences. I don't mean to dissuade
anyone from trying these products out, since they do a creditable
job, just not enough to make me part with the money.

Lou Dina