Healing & Clone Tools
Is there a good tutorial on using the Healing and Clone layers? I'm having a bit of difficulty getting a handle on using them, and am getting unpredictable results. Thanks.
-Alan D.
-Alan D.
0
-
Welcome to the absolute worst Healing and clone tools anyone could ever imagine. Each layer is only allowed one offset for the source of the healing. So if you make your fist spot and set the clone point say 10 pixels over and 10 pixels up. All cloning masks on that layer will take the source as 10 over and 10 up.
My suggestion, do your cloning and healing in photoshop (or your preferred pixel editor).
Ya their examples of removing a wire or a plane from a sky is ok. But would like them to show how to remove blemishes from someone without using all the layers and then just saying "you get the idea". Actually I don't think I have ever seen a video where they clean up blemishes, with the clone and heal tools.
Robert0 -
I'd suggest that Capture One is not intended to be the tool for uses like Robert mentions. It's not meant to be a replacement for something like Photoshop or equivalent. It's not that long ago that it had no clone or heal capability at all, and some would argue that that was appropriate since it is primarily a raw converter. Nevertheless, there are quite a few situations where you can use the clone or heal features to deal with an isolated blemish of some kind without having to resort to another app.
Ian0 -
Thanks, everyone. So those tools ARE kind of squirrely. Seems a pain to have to go to another app just to get rid of a stray hair or blemish, but oh well. Also, it seems intuitively that adjustments in the RAW domain would be better than doing same on a jpg or tiff derivative. 0 -
[quote="Ian3" wrote:
I'd suggest that Capture One is not intended to be the tool for uses like Robert mentions. It's not meant to be a replacement for something like Photoshop or equivalent. It's not that long ago that it had no clone or heal capability at all, and some would argue that that was appropriate since it is primarily a raw converter. Nevertheless, there are quite a few situations where you can use the clone or heal features to deal with an isolated blemish of some kind without having to resort to another app.
Ian
I agree that C1 hasn't been well designed as a tool to clone/heal/repair an image as Robert mentions.
However the ability to perform such retouching is quite useful in a RAW processing application and –- having used Lightroom for quite some time -- it does seem as though C1's implementation is very awkward and limiting.
Why on earth is it designed this way?0 -
Focuspuller - I'd agree with all the replies to your question. These 2 tools leave a lot to be desired (the sort of related "Remove Spot" tool works well though).
If you want to do any serious heal or clone work you'll need to have another program and call it as external editor from within C1. I don't know what others you may have but if the answer is "none", since this is a Mac user forum, I'd strongly recommend that you check out the Mac-only Affinity Photo which is packed with great features at a great price.0 -
Yeah, I'm getting the distinct impression H&C in C1 is not ready for Prime Time. I do have Affinity Photo installed and will check that out. Thanks.
-Alan D0 -
I don't use it a lot, but I am finding Affinity Photo good for the few things I can't do in C1. It has a lot of good clear tutorial videos online which are worth checking out.
Ian0 -
It is, of course, true that there are other applications available that are better for doing more extensive and precise cloning/healing of an image. However there are advantages to being able to perform such functions on a raw image.
Lightroom has a rather good implementation of cloning/healing. I sincerely hope that Capture One redesigns their implementation.
Does anyone here know why it was designed the way it is currently in C1?0 -
I can make a guess.
If you think how they do the layers. They feed the image, mask and instructions to perform to the GPU. Then for each little sub-processor they tell it the area of the image to work on. So the first one take the first (Say) 100x100 area, then based on the mask values produces an out image for that 100x100 square, and so on picking an area not already done and repeating the process. So their current healing and clone, does the same, they load image and mask, give it the clone instruction set, and the offset for the clone/heal point. All the little sub-processors would get the same clone/heal offset. Everything works the way all the other adjustments work.
Now, to make it work like it should, I am not sure they could use the GPU, as they would be working on only a small section of the image at a time, and would have to change the offset of the clone/heal for what could be every pixel.
So what they would need to do would be, feed the GPU the following:
Original Image, Mask and Vector Map, (Where you would produce a vector for every pixel in the image), then run it though the algorithm. With this you could set up the clone spot for every pixel. Not suer if most GPUs could do that, and how to determine/create/view the vector map could be a fun exercise.
Robert0 -
[quote="PhaseoneUser55657" wrote:
I can make a guess.
If you think how they do the layers. They feed the image, mask and instructions to perform to the GPU. Then for each little sub-processor they tell it the area of the image to work on. So the first one take the first (Say) 100x100 area, then based on the mask values produces an out image for that 100x100 square, and so on picking an area not already done and repeating the process. So their current healing and clone, does the same, they load image and mask, give it the clone instruction set, and the offset for the clone/heal point. All the little sub-processors would get the same clone/heal offset. Everything works the way all the other adjustments work.
Now, to make it work like it should, I am not sure they could use the GPU, as they would be working on only a small section of the image at a time, and would have to change the offset of the clone/heal for what could be every pixel.
So what they would need to do would be, feed the GPU the following:
Original Image, Mask and Vector Map, (Where you would produce a vector for every pixel in the image), then run it though the algorithm. With this you could set up the clone spot for every pixel. Not suer if most GPUs could do that, and how to determine/create/view the vector map could be a fun exercise.
Robert
It isn't clear to me why cloning/healing is done in conjunction with layers.
Why not like the spot/dust function, instead using source/destination pairs for each area to be patched?0 -
So here's a question. If I am using Heal tool to remove stray hairs, I have to create a separate layer for every hair, or make a brush big enough to encompass all the hairs I want to remove?
-Alan D0 -
The number of layers required, depend on if the vector to the source point is different.
Lets say that you are working on the left side, and to eliminate a stray hair needs to take the source as being to the left of the stray hair. Now, you need to remove one on the right, but if you need to take the source to the right, then you need another layer, and so on.
My opinion is unless it is something really simple, don't use the healing and clone layers, and just fix it in "Photoshop".
Robert0 -
[quote="PhaseoneUser55657" wrote:
The number of layers required, depend on if the vector to the source point is different.
My opinion is unless it is something really simple, don't use the healing and clone layers, and just fix it in "Photoshop".
Robert
I agree with you Robert. The way clone/heal is currently implemented in C1 that is the conclusion I draw as well.
However it doesn't need to be that way. I suspect many would prefer to have the ability to perform those edits on the RAW file, if possible. I would.0 -
Ok so if I understand this correctly vis a vis the Healing brush, as I move the brush along a hair, say, the source will move in the same relation as the relation established when I first placed the pen on the image, which would explain why I suddenly start brushing in eyebrows in the middle of a forehead. If true, wouldnt it be better for the source to remain stationary or at least optionally stationary or relative?
-Alan D0 -
[quote="Focuspuller" wrote:
Ok so if I understand this correctly vis a vis the Healing brush, as I move the brush along a hair, say, the source will move in the same relation as the relation established when I first placed the pen on the image, which would explain why I suddenly start brushing in eyebrows in the middle of a forehead. If true, wouldnt it be better for the source to remain stationary or at least optionally stationary or relative?
-Alan D
Those are the options Photoshop offers for the clone stamp and healing brush tools (selected via the "Aligned" checkbox). And yes, it would be a useful option for Capture One as well.
I would be very happy, though, if C1 simply didn't require that every repair on a layer have the same relative source point.0 -
And I just noticed another annoying issue, which may have needed another topic, but it is related. When I select "Only display mask when drawing" and put the brush aside and want to see the mask, I press M and the mask appears. When I pick up the brush again the mask option has been changed to "Never display mask." This is a real pain and am wondering if there is a work around to have the mask only appear when drawing, but can be toggled for an evaluation and remain appearing only when drawing. 0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
17 comments