Is there a Photoshop plugin that can easily extract an image?

[Denvers Dawgs]

Is there a free(high hopes) or a pay plug-in for PS that can make extracting an image easier. I recently saw a program plug-in that was $150 or so that made it simple to extract an image (no tracing then erasing if needed). Free

[live4ever]

An image from what?

[pijetro]

Circling the desired object with the magnetic lasso tool, and right clicking "new layer via cut" should be a lot cheaper than a plugin

There's many ways to create selections (magic wand, range, lasso)..
But i've never seen any quicker and accurate way to do this..


I'll be watching this post..

[Denvers Dawgs]

Circling the desired object with the magnetic lasso tool, and right clicking "new layer via cut" should be a lot cheaper than a plugin

There's many ways to create selections (magic wand, range, lasso)..
But i've never seen any quicker and accurate way to do this..

I'll be watching this post..

I have seen a plug-in ($150) that will extract what you want from an image very simply and cleanly. Basically the same as doing a Filter/extract process, but no need to actualy trace the object totally.

In response to live4ever's comment:
Say taking an image and cutting out a person only, with no background ect....

[Cornucopia]

Depending on the image, sometimes the MagLasso tool works great, sometimes terribly. Then otherwise, you have to resort to zooming in and manually tracing. Hair is particularly daunting.

There are a number (>10) of plugins that work on extracting/"cutting out" a foreground image from a background. Do a google search on "Photoshop" "plugin" and "matte", "mask", "key" etc. Guess what...None are Free (this is a complex feature that is in demand and people are willing to pay good money for if it works right and helps speed things up).

Scott

(I guess it also depends on what your level of acceptability is too)

[guns1inger]

From around version 5 or 6 photoshop shipped with an extract tool that does a much better job thatn just the lasso tools. It is called "Extract" and found under the Filter menu.

[Denvers Dawgs]

Yea I have the CS version, and I have used the extract function....it does work great, but tracing is so slow and time consuming depending on the type of pic/image. I did see that one for $150, but for my novice expertise, not worth my money yet.....

[guns1inger]

None of the plugins will give you an instant extract. The closest you would find to this would be something like Primatte, essentially a green screen for stills. But extracting objects from standard photographs takes time, like it or not. The better masking plugins assist with things like hair and smoke, but you still have to do the bulk of the grunt work yourself.

[Denvers Dawgs]

ok thanks.........

Well I did find that plugin that cost $189 again it was called Fluid Mask 2.0 http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-blog/06/06/fluid-mask-for-mac.html

[scorps]

Digital Film Tools Snap. But I'm afraid it is'nt free.

http://www.digitalfilmtools.com/snap/

[rallynavvie]

I've always heard from people who have used the aftermarket plugins that the built-in extract tool is far better for use with this even if it is a little time-consuming. I use the smart-trace feature most of the time and just do a little section at a time so that if I make a mistake the undo data won't take too much work away. Beats the old alpha channel knockout method for extracting.

[Denvers Dawgs]

I've always heard from people who have used the aftermarket plugins that the built-in extract tool is far better for use with this even if it is a little time-consuming. I use the smart-trace feature most of the time and just do a little section at a time so that if I make a mistake the undo data won't take too much work away. Beats the old alpha channel knockout method for extracting.

Is this the filter/extract trace with green line way? If not how do you do yours?

[painkiller]

Check out Bert Monroy.
He gave Photoshop tutorials on G4TechTv awhile back.
He demonstrated the EXTRACT method using Photoshop 7.

http://www.bertmonroy.com/tutorials/tutorials.htm

[ozymango]

Depending on the image, sometimes the MagLasso tool works great, sometimes terribly. Then otherwise, you have to resort to zooming in and manually tracing. Hair is particularly daunting.

Hair's a killer! I hate hair!

I usually most often use the path tool myself for extracting stuff (out of habit, 'cause a friend showed me how a long, long time ago and I got pretty good at it), so the "extract" feature is like magic. Not to be too off topic, but I'd have to be extracting ten images a day to make it worth my $$$ to invest in a more expensive tool, though I can see that if someone's working for an ad agency or print shop that does this stuff all the time, it's a cheap and wonderful tool.

For me, because my goal of "cutting" an image means it's gonna get placed in some other image, the extraction part is only half the battle -- matching the edges and colors and lighting and tonal values so the composite final image "looks good" is where the time and blood is shed. That always ends up being more about "art" than science, in that you can often figure out ways to disguise "flaws" in an image (like weird edges and artifacts that would take forever to clean up) by creative covering, texturing, a few paint dots here and there ...

[rallynavvie]

Yeah, I use the extract feature where you trave with the green highlight pen and fill the parts to extract. Zoom in on part of the image you want to extract from within the filter dialog (where you highlight the outline) and then check the "smart highlight" or whatever that feature is called. Then size your brush to be maybe 50% larger than the useable outline you're going to use to highlight, meaning if the outline is blurry you'll want a larger brush, but if it's hi-res and clear you can use a smaller brush. Once I extract I then use the eraser, clone stamp, or smudge tool to clean it up. I've done a lot of pretty good extractions this way, but it is time-consuming.