Computer Graphics with Photoshop

Author

Crop to Selection?

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Sorry - me again. I know you can crop to a marquee selection, and also
to a lasso selection. But when I do this, I still end up with the bits
in the resultant (rectangular) image that I'd been trying to crop out.

If you can't get rid of unwanted pixels with the crop to selection
method, what is the point of having it? You may as well just use the
crop tool, right?

Can anyone tell me otherwise?

Thanks in advance,
Jo

Bill Hilton

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

>From: Mrs Beeble Brock mrsbeeblebrock@extra.com.nz

>Sorry - me again. I know you can crop to a marquee selection, and also
>to a lasso selection. But when I do this, I still end up with the bits
>in the resultant (rectangular) image that I'd been trying to crop out.
>
>If you can't get rid of unwanted pixels with the crop to selection
>method, what is the point of having it? You may as well just use the
>crop tool, right?
>
>Can anyone tell me otherwise?

If I understand your question then you should try Select > Inverse and do the
crop to fix your problem.

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Thanks for your reply Bill. Maybe I didn't explain my problem as well as
I could have.

I have lots and lots of scans and on each page are many images that I
need save as individual jpgs. They are odd shapes and some of them
protrude into the others' space.

In a perfect world I could use the lasso to select the exact shape I
need, then when I select Image > crop it would delete everything outside
my selection.

Your suggestion leaves me with the main page separated from the
selection, but then I still have to delete the unwanted bits and then
crop anyway.

I read the book Photoshop for Dummies and it told me there was a way to
crop odd shapes but I can't remember for the life of me exactly what the
method was and that book has now been returned to the library in another
city.

Jo

Bill Hilton wrote:

>
>
>
>
> If I understand your question then you should try Select > Inverse and do the
> crop to fix your problem.

jjs

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

"Mrs Beeble Brock" <mrsbeeblebrock@extra.com.nz> wrote in message
news:sW57d.8640$JQ4.609606@news.xtra.co.nz...

> In a perfect world I could use the lasso to select the exact shape I need,
> then when I select Image > crop it would delete everything outside my
> selection.

"Crop" means to cut to a square or rectangle. That's what it means, and that
is what it does. Now what you can do in this world that is imperfect because
it doesn't care that you don't understand what Crop means is this: Select,
New Layer by Cut, and repeat until all the images are on a separate layer,
then save layers as images.

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Thank you for your helpful reply. You may like to read this definition
of crop which gives no reference to rectangles:
v. cropped, crop·ping, crops
v. tr.

1.
1. To cut or bite off the tops or ends of: crop a hedge; sheep
cropping grass.
2. To cut (hair, for example) very short.
3. To clip (an animal's ears, for example).
4. To trim (a photograph or picture, for example).
2.
1. To harvest: crop salmon.
2. To cause to grow or yield a crop.

I don't think there is anything wrong with my understanding of the word
and I will therefore assume you simply forgot to place the ;) emoticon
in your message.

jjs wrote:

> "Mrs Beeble Brock" <mrsbeeblebrock@extra.com.nz> wrote in message
> news:sW57d.8640$JQ4.609606@news.xtra.co.nz...
>
>
>
>
> "Crop" means to cut to a square or rectangle. That's what it means, and that
> is what it does. Now what you can do in this world that is imperfect because
> it doesn't care that you don't understand what Crop means is this: Select,
> New Layer by Cut, and repeat until all the images are on a separate layer,
> then save layers as images.
>
>

Tacit

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

>I don't think there is anything wrong with my understanding of the word
>and I will therefore assume you simply forgot to place the ;) emoticon
>in your message.

In the context of digital imaging, "crop" means "crop to a rectangle." All
pixel-based images are always square or rectangular, without exception.

When you crop a selection, it crops to the smallest rectangle that will contain
the entire selection, because "cropping" a pixel-based image always means
cropping to a rectangle, without regard to the *content* of the image.

It sounds like you want to remove some of the *content* of the image, which is
something else entirely; cropping won't do what you want.

--
Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

John McWilliams

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Mrs Beeble Brock wrote:

> Thank you for your helpful reply. You may like to read this definition
> of crop which gives no reference to rectangles:
> v. cropped, crop·ping, crops
> v. tr.
<< Snipped bits out >>

> 4. To trim (a photograph or picture, for example).

However, you may like to learn that in Photoshop, cropping- or
specifically, using the Crop Tool- does mean perforce: rectangles.

Morehowevereven, I think you can achieve what you want by making a
selection, hitting Cmd-J (Alt -J on 'Doze?), creating a new layer with
that selection. Repeat until all objects are in their own layer, and
then creating separate files from there if you wish.

--
John McWilliams

Odysseus

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

In article <20041001190131.10984.00001186@mb-m14.aol.com>,
tacitr@aol.com (Tacit) wrote:

>
> In the context of digital imaging, "crop" means "crop to a rectangle." All
> pixel-based images are always square or rectangular, without exception.
>
> When you crop a selection, it crops to the smallest rectangle that will
> contain
> the entire selection, because "cropping" a pixel-based image always means
> cropping to a rectangle, without regard to the *content* of the image.
>
> It sounds like you want to remove some of the *content* of the image, which
> is
> something else entirely; cropping won't do what you want.

The usual 'term of art' for cutting out an arbitrary shape is "close
cropping". The OP's confusion is quite understandable IMHO.

A nice, non-destructive way to close-crop is via masking: once the
desired area is marqueed, Add Layer Mask > Reveal Selection. Once you
have a mask, you can paint on it in black or white to change what's
hidden or revealed, at any time, because the entire image, visible or
not, remains in the file. You can also apply filters to the mask; for
example a Gaussian Blur will create a vignette effect.

--
Odysseus

jjs

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

"Odysseus" <odysseus1479-at@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote in message
news:odysseus1479-at-6EB393.18131801102004@news.telus.net...
> In article <20041001190131.10984.00001186@mb-m14.aol.com>,
> tacitr@aol.com (Tacit) wrote:
>
>
> The usual 'term of art' for cutting out an arbitrary shape is "close
> cropping". The OP's confusion is quite understandable IMHO.

You can't redefine "crop" to please yourself but you are just plain wrong.
PS was built around the photographic paradigm where CROP is well known, and
it was derrived from earlier conventions that mean the same thing. Revise
history at your own risk. Get it?

Hunt

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

In article <Hgl7d.8860$JQ4.619338@news.xtra.co.nz>, mrsbeeblebrock@extra.com.
nz says...[color=darkred]
>
>Thank you for your helpful reply. You may like to read this definition
>of crop which gives no reference to rectangles:
>v. cropped, crop·ping, crops
>v. tr.
>
> 1.
> 1. To cut or bite off the tops or ends of: crop a hedge; sheep
>cropping grass.
> 2. To cut (hair, for example) very short.
> 3. To clip (an animal's ears, for example).
> 4. To trim (a photograph or picture, for example).
> 2.
> 1. To harvest: crop salmon.
> 2. To cause to grow or yield a crop.
>
>I don't think there is anything wrong with my understanding of the word
>and I will therefore assume you simply forgot to place the ;) emoticon
>in your message.
>
>jjs wrote:
>
that[color=darkred]
because[color=darkred]

Unfortunately, any dictionary is going to come up a bit short on the
dennotations of the word "crop," in the context of image editing. As
Tacit points out, within the Photoshop world, and all of imaging, you WILL get
a square or rectangle. His, and John McWilliams' idea of making the Selection
from your irregular image and placing it on a separate Layer and then creating
a new image from those Layers should yield the result that you wish. The
choices that you have from that point are basically two: Do you want a square,
or rectangular print with the irregular image within it? If so, what
background color will you choose? OR Do you want to cut the irregular image
out of, say the 8.5 x 11 image onto which it is printed? Then the background
color isn't at all important, except prehaps to tell you where to cut.

Hunt

jjs

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

"Hunt" <noone@hunt.com> wrote in message
news:cjkqou158n@news3.newsguy.com...[color=darkred]
> In article <Hgl7d.8860$JQ4.619338@news.xtra.co.nz>,
> mrsbeeblebrock@extra.com.
> nz says...

What silliness. Look, you are in the photographic paradigm. You are not
exempt from understanding the terms of the software or enterprise. Take
comfort in your dictionary if you like, but you are so dead wrong silly it's
laughable.

jjs

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

"jjs" <jjs@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10lrug8k0k66hd3@news.supernews.com...[color=darkred]
> "Hunt" <noone@hunt.com> wrote in message
> news:cjkqou158n@news3.newsguy.com...

Sorry for screwing up the attributes.

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Hi Odysseus, thanks for your reply. I guess I should have said "close
cropping" and I appreciate your response.

Best wishes,
Jo

Odysseus wrote:
> In article <20041001190131.10984.00001186@mb-m14.aol.com>,
> tacitr@aol.com (Tacit) wrote:
>
>
>
>
> The usual 'term of art' for cutting out an arbitrary shape is "close
> cropping". The OP's confusion is quite understandable IMHO.
>
> A nice, non-destructive way to close-crop is via masking: once the
> desired area is marqueed, Add Layer Mask > Reveal Selection. Once you
> have a mask, you can paint on it in black or white to change what's
> hidden or revealed, at any time, because the entire image, visible or
> not, remains in the file. You can also apply filters to the mask; for
> example a Gaussian Blur will create a vignette effect.
>

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Thanks for replying John. Yes I've found the script for what you
describe useful.
Cheers,
Jo

John McWilliams wrote:

> Mrs Beeble Brock wrote:
>
>
> << Snipped bits out >>
>
>
>
> However, you may like to learn that in Photoshop, cropping- or
> specifically, using the Crop Tool- does mean perforce: rectangles.
>
> Morehowevereven, I think you can achieve what you want by making a
> selection, hitting Cmd-J (Alt -J on 'Doze?), creating a new layer with
> that selection. Repeat until all objects are in their own layer, and
> then creating separate files from there if you wish.
>

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-02, 12:14 pm

Thanks for replying Hunt, yes the automated script does a nice job on
this and the background is no problem - I'm just using the paper
background that surrounds each image.

Cheers,
Jo

Hunt wrote:

>
> Unfortunately, any dictionary is going to come up a bit short on the
> dennotations of the word "crop," in the context of image editing. As
> Tacit points out, within the Photoshop world, and all of imaging, you WILL get
> a square or rectangle. His, and John McWilliams' idea of making the Selection
> from your irregular image and placing it on a separate Layer and then creating
> a new image from those Layers should yield the result that you wish. The
> choices that you have from that point are basically two: Do you want a square,
> or rectangular print with the irregular image within it? If so, what
> background color will you choose? OR Do you want to cut the irregular image
> out of, say the 8.5 x 11 image onto which it is printed? Then the background
> color isn't at all important, except prehaps to tell you where to cut.
>
> Hunt
>

Odysseus

2004-10-02, 7:14 pm

In article <10lrsv6lq7sq7ae@news.supernews.com>, "jjs" <jjs@nospam.com>
wrote:

> "Odysseus" <odysseus1479-at@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote in message
> news:odysseus1479-at-6EB393.18131801102004@news.telus.net...

[snip]
>
> You can't redefine "crop" to please yourself but you are just plain wrong.
> PS was built around the photographic paradigm where CROP is well known, and
> it was derrived from earlier conventions that mean the same thing. Revise
> history at your own risk. Get it?

Where did I imply I wanted to revise history? I was just pointing out
that to someone unfamiliar with the terminology, the distinction between
"cropping" (framing in a rectangle) and "close cropping" might not be
very obvious.

--
Odysseus

Mrs Beeble Brock

2004-10-03, 7:14 pm

Odysseus

2004-10-05, 4:14 am