Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The recommended order for applying edits is:
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Dämn, I hope this get corrected. Seems so unnecessary to create all new extra 120 MB file fo such small fixup.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
works
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
De gros progrès par rapport à l'ancien outil supprimer. Par contre 2 bugs a améliorer : 1) si on recadre la photo avant de l'utiliser, le résultat est beaucoup moins bon, il reste des petites parties de l'objet. 2) idem si on corrige la selection en ajoutant un morceau oublié, il semble que ce morceau n'est pas bien traité. Pour info j'essaie de supprimer une partie d'un vetement posé sur de l'herbe dans un coin
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@MARCEL34521755ixpi: "if you crop the photo before using it, the result is much less good, small parts of the object remain."
Adobe explicitly designed Remove to look at the entire photo, so if you use Remove on a cropped version, you may not be selecting all the pixels of an object, and Remove will generate a replacement that tries to match those remaining pixels.
Their thinking is that if you apply Remove to just the cropped pixels and then change the crop, there won't be odd bits of objects left un-removed.
But this behavior has confused many, many people here thinking that Remove doesn't work very well ("Photoshop works better"). Cropping is the first thing most people do in their workflow.
So some of us have proposed either that Remove looks only at cropped pixels, or that Remove generates a warning when Crop, Lens Corrections, or Transform have been applied, or that when the Remove panel is open, Crop, Lens Corrections, and Transform are temporarily disabled.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I think a fourth option must be considered, (maybe) in comjunction with showing an uncropped version: make selecting compatible with Object Masking: the user could select using the brush and/or the rectangle and let Firefly select the whole object, including the invisible/out-of-crop part of it.
Object Masking selections are soo much better than the current Remove selections. Is there any reason not to reuse the Object Masking component for the Remove selections?
The extra rectangle would help with many rectangular objects (e.g. bricks, windows, doors, etc.) and is more time and effort efficient.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I would also add that all these issues would vanish if there were separate buttons for Remove and Replace (with ...). In the latter case there could be a prompt (cfr. PS) the describe with what.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
My words. Remove and Replace should semantically be different!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@ThierryH: "if there were separate buttons for Remove and Replace (with ...). In the latter case there could be a prompt (cfr. PS) the describe with what."
I think there are two separable issues here: 1) Why does Generative Remove seemingly "replace" the selection rather than "remove" it, and 2) Should LR offer Photoshop's Generative Fill, where the replacement can be guided by a text prompt.
1) LR's Generative Remove always creates a replacement for the selection that, in its judgment, best matches the surrounding pixels. In my experience helping dozens of people here, nearly all of the complaints about Remove replacing rather than removing arise because the user didn't select the object's shadows, reflections, cropped-out pixels, and discontiguous pieces of the desired object. So LR generates a replacement that tries to seamlessly match the remaining scene. If you select a tree but leave parts of its trunk or branches unselected, it's going to generate a replacement that matches the remaining trunk and branches. If you select a person who has an arm draped around another person but don't select the part of the arm visible on the other side of that person, it could generate a replacement person to match the draped arm. If you select some but not all of a fence, it will replace the selection with variations on the fence. (All examples here.)
In general, if Generative Remove didn't try to match the unselected bits and pieces seamlessly, it would generate replacements that look unnatural.
2) I've only played a little with Photoshop's Generative Fill and can't make an informed judgment about whether it would useful to be in LR.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@ThierryH: "Object Masking selections are soo much better than the current Remove selections."
In my observations, Masking > Objects and Remove > Object Aware are nearly identical, except that Object Aware adds a boundary around the object to help make the Generative Remove create a better replacement.
Can you post an example showing where Object Masking and Object Aware generate much different selections? Export the original unmodified photo as a full-resolution JPEG and attach it here, and show screenshots of the two different selections. The unmodified JPEG will let us and Adobe understand the issue better.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@ThierryH: "I think a fourth option must be considered, (maybe) in comjunction with showing an uncropped version: make selecting compatible with Object Masking: the user could select using the brush and/or the rectangle and let Firefly select the whole object, including the invisible/out-of-crop part of it."
An issue with that approach is that Object masking and Object Aware selections are driven by what the user selects. If there is enough of what we consider an "object" that is cropped out and isn't selected (because it's outside of the crop), then when we select the visible pixels inside the crop, the cropped-out pixels won't be included in the object selection.
Here's an example. I've cropped the photo to include just the right-side 1/3 of the bookshelf, selected it with Object masking, and set Exposure to -4. Then I uncropped the photo, and you can see that the object selection only included the visible pixels and little bit of the cropped-out pixels, leaving the entire left side of the bookshelf unselected:
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I have tried the new Remove tool twice on two different files and each time it failed and could not be used. In one file I tried to remove the roof of a house sticking out through trees in a small part of the photo. In the second file I tried to remove a small object. In both instances the software generated different versions of what I was trying to remove and did not actually remove anything. This was true for all three versions and even the refreshed versions.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@MarkNF: "the software generated different versions of what I was trying to remove and did not actually remove anything. "
See this article for how to remove objects more reliably:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/generative-remove-replace/
Most complaints about Remove are addressed in the article. But if it doesn't help, please attach a full-resolution JPEG exported from the unmodified original photo, so we and Adobe can see the issue in detail. With nearly everyone who has posted a problem photo, we've been able to show how to remove the desired objects.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I’m attaching a jpeg (exported from LR to my desktop) of one of the files that has not been processed. When I use PS’s Remove tool it works perfectly. I am trying to remove the house in the upper right corner.
Thanks for your help.
Also, please disregard the Replies I sent via email.
Mark
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]
@MarkNF, LR's Remove did quick job of removing the house from the JPEG you posted:
That indicates the original photo was cropped in LR and there were house pixels cropped out and not getting selected by the Remove brush. Remove will then try to match those unselected pixels. This is why Photoshop works -- the rendered photo that LR sends to Photoshop doesn't contain cropped-out pixels, and what you see is what you get.
The cropping could come from Crop, Lens Corrections, or Transform. Temporarily undo each of those, apply Remove, then reapply them. This article gives more details:
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
John, the jpeg posted in this thread is straight out of the camera, no processing of any kind, no cropping. It was taken with a mirrorless camera, no Import presets applied except copyright info, no Lens Correction and no Transform. Did you say that you were able to get the LR Remove tool to eliminate the house on the upper right?
Just as an fyi, although I do not see how this would matter, the jpeg is the result of an in-camera focus stacking. Again, in-camera and not by LR or PS.
Mark
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Also, this seems to be the same issue that theother poster mentioned about replacing a rail. In my photo the house roof is replaced by different roofs. And in the other photo (not posted here) a similar issue.
Mark
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@MarkNF: "Did you say that you were able to get the LR Remove tool to eliminate the house on the upper right?"
Yes, view my previous post in a web browser to see the images I included. I've attached a screen recording here (again, view this post in a web browser to see the attachment).
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@MarkNF: "the jpeg posted in this thread is straight out of the camera, no processing of any kind, no cropping."
The attachment in your original post is only 2400 x 1800 and is stripped of all the camera EXIF metadata. Was it exported from LR at reduced size?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
John, I'm reposting a jpeg image, straight out of the camera with no processing of any kind. I've exported it from LR Classic using settings of 4,000 for width and height, and 300 dpi. Also, all exif data attached. I hope that should be sufficiently hi-res.
I do not understand why the tool works for you and not me.
Thanks for your help.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I posted this message (the ones beginning with "Hi Again" and "I cannot find my original post") in error, please ignore it. Sorry.
Mark
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@MarkNF, using the high-res 6000 x 4000 JPEG you posted, my LR's Remove does a good job of removing the house in the upper-right corner. I've attached two screen recordings. The first one shows it removing the house, first using Object Aware option, then without (Object Aware tends to exclude the black satellite dish). The second one shows what happens when you don't quite select all of the bits and pieces of the house partially hidden by the trees -- Remove does an excellent job of generating a replacement house that matches the unselected bits!
If you import that exact JPEG back into your LR, zoom into the house, being careful to select a large boundary around it, and try Remove again, does it work well?
If you're still having problems, perhaps post a screen recording showing what happens in your LR.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
So a tool where Adobe decides to implement censorship on what can and cannot be processed is not something I am interested in. How long before you apply the same censorship to Photoshop and Lightroom.? I am purchasing a tool to use as I see fit. I am not processing anything I do not own and I am not modifying images other than to expand portrait to landscape and to remove background content. Your "censorship" has on several occasions refused to function because of supposed guidelines. In most cases it was people wearing bathing suits. In some cases they were fully clothed. I do not need a censor. I need tools that work.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]
@waltweiss: "Your "censorship" has on several occasions refused to function because of supposed guidelines. In most cases it was people wearing bathing suits."
Do you get any kind of notification when Remove doesn't remove a person in a bathing suit? There haven't been any other reports of this here.
I downloaded about 20 beach photos from Google of men and women, half in skimpy bathing suits and half with full-frontal nudity, and each time Remove did a good job of removing them. For example:
More likely, you're encountering the "replace instead of remove" issue. See this article for how to remove objects more reliably:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/generative-remove-replace/
Most complaints about Remove are addressed in the article. But if it doesn't help, please attach a full-resolution JPEG exported from the unmodified original photo, so we and Adobe can see the issue in detail. With nearly everyone who has posted a problem photo, we've been able to show how to remove the desired objects.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I want the people in bathing suits - I dont want things in the background.
For example, this was shot in an airplane hangar and there was a helicopter and part of a cessna in the background. I had to use content aware and clone tool to get rid of it because Lightroom generative remove refused due to "guidelines"
I still have a lot more to do to the image - but got frustrated with the repeated "guidelines" warning - which only said to review the guidelines