PS Tool Difference

M
Posted By
measekite
Jun 3, 2006
Views
378
Replies
12
Status
Closed
I am having difficulty in determining what the difference is between the healing brush and the clone stamp tool even after reading the explanations from a number of sources.

Additionally, does anyone know how and when to choose which of these tools to use when editing photographs. One of the things I need to do is remove shadows around people due to lack of bounce flash.

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

D
Dave
Jun 3, 2006
On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 19:17:28 GMT, measekite
wrote:

I am having difficulty in determining what the difference is between the healing brush and the clone stamp tool even after reading the explanations from a number of sources.

Additionally, does anyone know how and when to choose which of these tools to use when editing photographs. One of the things I need to do is remove shadows around people due to lack of bounce flash.

While waiting for someone with more experience to reply, I tend to think it (usually) comes to personal taste. When covering larger areas, like in working with the ‘Vanishing Piont’ filter, the clone stamp is a definite advantage. And when working with the healing tool right next to (or even only close to a border, it (sometimes) clones the color from the other side of
the border, which again often makes the clone
stamp tool the preferable alternative.

Dave
N
noone
Jun 3, 2006
In article <cflgg.15761$
com says…
I am having difficulty in determining what the difference is between the healing brush and the clone stamp tool even after reading the explanations from a number of sources.

Additionally, does anyone know how and when to choose which of these tools to use when editing photographs. One of the things I need to do is remove shadows around people due to lack of bounce flash.

You might want to check out this URL for the shadow removal. I *just* got it from the other PS group, and the method looks promising. The OP there found it and stated that it worked well for just what you are doing: http://www.inertia-llc.com/sandbox/tutorials/shadow-matchcol or/index.html

In rough terms, the Healing Brush/Patch Tool replaces "texture" from elsewhere, while the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels." I know that they sound really similar, but are not.

Hunt
M
measekite
Jun 4, 2006
Hunt wrote:

In article <cflgg.15761$
com says…

I am having difficulty in determining what the difference is between the healing brush and the clone stamp tool even after reading the explanations from a number of sources.

Additionally, does anyone know how and when to choose which of these tools to use when editing photographs. One of the things I need to do is remove shadows around people due to lack of bounce flash.

You might want to check out this URL for the shadow removal. I *just* got it from the other PS group, and the method looks promising. The OP there found it and stated that it worked well for just what you are doing: http://www.inertia-llc.com/sandbox/tutorials/shadow-matchcol or/index.html
In rough terms, the Healing Brush/Patch Tool replaces "texture" from elsewhere, while the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels." I know that they sound really similar, but are not.

I do not understand the difference. If the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels" that should include all of the texture as well as everything else. On the surface it appears the Healing Brush does the same but you can vary hardness, angle and spacing. the difference is still very fuzzy.

Hunt

M
Methos
Jun 4, 2006
"measekite" wrote in message
Hunt wrote:

In article <cflgg.15761$>,

com says…

I am having difficulty in determining what the difference is between the healing brush and the clone stamp tool even after reading the explanations from a number of sources.

Additionally, does anyone know how and when to choose which of these tools to use when editing photographs. One of the things I need to do is remove shadows around people due to lack of bounce flash.

You might want to check out this URL for the shadow removal. I *just* got it from the other PS group, and the method looks promising. The OP there found it and stated that it worked well for just what you are doing: http://www.inertia-llc.com/sandbox/tutorials/shadow-matchcol or/index.html
In rough terms, the Healing Brush/Patch Tool replaces "texture" from elsewhere, while the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels." I know that they sound really similar, but are not.

I do not understand the difference. If the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels" that should include all of the texture as well as everything else. On the surface it appears the Healing Brush does the same but you can vary hardness, angle and spacing. the difference is still very fuzzy.
Hunt

I work with alot of human subjects in my Photoshop projects and have worked with both the healing tool and clone tool a great deal. If you are looking for a more realistic blend/touchup then the healing tool is the better choice. It merges much better with the surrounding pixels and gives a better match on the texture. The clone tool gives more of an appearance of being "painted". I suggest you make 2 test layers on a picture and try them both out. I think you will see the difference. The key to working with skin is don’t try to do it in 1 single swipe. I set the opacity of the tools low, 10-15%, and gradually build on a layer copy of the area I want to fix. That way you have the gradual building from the tool and the flexibility of opacity in the actual cover layer.

Methos
N
nomail
Jun 4, 2006
measekite wrote:

You might want to check out this URL for the shadow removal. I *just* got it from the other PS group, and the method looks promising. The OP there found it and stated that it worked well for just what you are doing: http://www.inertia-llc.com/sandbox/tutorials/shadow-matchcol or/index.html
In rough terms, the Healing Brush/Patch Tool replaces "texture" from elsewhere, while the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels." I know that they sound really similar, but are not.
I do not understand the difference. If the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels" that should include all of the texture as well as everything else. On the surface it appears the Healing Brush does the same but you can vary hardness, angle and spacing. the difference is still very fuzzy.

The difference is easy. The clone tool replaces the pixels, period. The healing brush replaces the pixels, but then it looks at the color and brightness of the area it just replaced, and changes the new pixels to match that. That is what you really see happening. As long as you are painting and keep the mouse down, it is like you used the clone tool. But then, shortly after you’ve let go of the mouse, the cloned area changes color and brightness to match what was there.


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl
D
Dave
Jun 4, 2006
Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

but then it looks at the color and
brightness of the area it just replaced, and changes the new pixels to match that. That is what you really see happening.

shortly after you’ve let go of the mouse, the cloned area changes color and brightness to match what was there.

All this makes the clone tool seem to be (in most cases) a better option. Sometimes I start by using a selection tool and delete what’s in it, before cloning with the healing tool, because it is obvious that the original colour has an effect. And even that is sometimes not the answer.

Dave
N
nomail
Jun 4, 2006
Dave wrote:

Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

but then it looks at the color and
brightness of the area it just replaced, and changes the new pixels to match that. That is what you really see happening.

shortly after you’ve let go of the mouse, the cloned area changes color and brightness to match what was there.

All this makes the clone tool seem to be (in most cases) a better option. Sometimes I start by using a selection tool and delete what’s in it, before cloning with the healing tool, because it is obvious that the original colour has an effect. And even that is sometimes not the answer.

Pretty obvious that this isn’t the answer! What’s the use of taking the healing brush and then making it NOT work correctly because you’ve removed the underlying pixels before? In my view the healing brush is at least as powerful as the clone tool, but you do have to know how to use it, and removing pixels first is certainly not the way.


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl
D
Dave
Jun 4, 2006
On Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:32:58 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Dave wrote:

Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

but then it looks at the color and
brightness of the area it just replaced, and changes the new pixels to match that. That is what you really see happening.

shortly after you’ve let go of the mouse, the cloned area changes color and brightness to match what was there.

All this makes the clone tool seem to be (in most cases) a better option. Sometimes I start by using a selection tool and delete what’s in it, before cloning with the healing tool, because it is obvious that the original colour has an effect. And even that is sometimes not the answer.

Pretty obvious that this isn’t the answer! What’s the use of taking the healing brush and then making it NOT work correctly because you’ve removed the underlying pixels before? In my view the healing brush is at least as powerful as the clone tool, but you do have to know how to use it, and removing pixels first is certainly not the way.

what I am talking about, is when replacing existing colour with a colour completely in contrast, like for instance stretching the green grass over what have been bricks, or ground etc.
Then of course, you do not want the underlying pixels
having a effect on the *new* colour.

Dave
N
nomail
Jun 4, 2006
Dave wrote:

Pretty obvious that this isn’t the answer! What’s the use of taking the healing brush and then making it NOT work correctly because you’ve removed the underlying pixels before? In my view the healing brush is at least as powerful as the clone tool, but you do have to know how to use it, and removing pixels first is certainly not the way.

what I am talking about, is when replacing existing colour with a colour completely in contrast, like for instance stretching the green grass over what have been bricks, or ground etc.
Then of course, you do not want the underlying pixels
having a effect on the *new* colour.

No, of course not. So for such a task you shouldn’t use the healing brush, because that would be the wrong tool for the job. That’s what the clone tool is for. You don’t use a hammer to drive in screws either, but that doesn’t mean a hammer is not a useful tool.


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl
M
measekite
Jun 5, 2006
Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

measekite wrote:

You might want to check out this URL for the shadow removal. I *just* got it from the other PS group, and the method looks promising. The OP there found it and stated that it worked well for just what you are doing: http://www.inertia-llc.com/sandbox/tutorials/shadow-matchcol or/index.html
In rough terms, the Healing Brush/Patch Tool replaces "texture" from elsewhere, while the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels." I know that they sound really similar, but are not.
I do not understand the difference. If the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels" that should include all of the texture as well as everything else. On the surface it appears the Healing Brush does the same but you can vary hardness, angle and spacing. the difference is still very fuzzy.

The difference is easy. The clone tool replaces the pixels, period. The healing brush replaces the pixels, but then it looks at the color and brightness of the area it just replaced, and changes the new pixels to match that. That is what you really see happening. As long as you are painting and keep the mouse down, it is like you used the clone tool. But then, shortly after you’ve let go of the mouse, the cloned area changes color and brightness to match what was there.
This appears to be what is happening. And you can also adjust the spacing and hardness with the healing brush as well.
M
measekite
Jun 5, 2006
Methos wrote:

"measekite" wrote in message

Hunt wrote:

In article <cflgg.15761$>,

com says…

I am having difficulty in determining what the difference is between the healing brush and the clone stamp tool even after reading the explanations from a number of sources.

Additionally, does anyone know how and when to choose which of these tools to use when editing photographs. One of the things I need to do is remove shadows around people due to lack of bounce flash.
You might want to check out this URL for the shadow removal. I *just* got it from the other PS group, and the method looks promising. The OP there found it and stated that it worked well for just what you are doing: http://www.inertia-llc.com/sandbox/tutorials/shadow-matchcol or/index.html
In rough terms, the Healing Brush/Patch Tool replaces "texture" from elsewhere, while the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels." I know that they sound really similar, but are not.
I do not understand the difference. If the Clone Stamp replaces "pixels" that should include all of the texture as well as everything else. On the surface it appears the Healing Brush does the same but you can vary hardness, angle and spacing. the difference is still very fuzzy.

Hunt

I work with alot of human subjects in my Photoshop projects and have worked with both the healing tool and clone tool a great deal. If you are looking for a more realistic blend/touchup then the healing tool is the better choice. It merges much better with the surrounding pixels and gives a better match on the texture. The clone tool gives more of an appearance of being "painted".
I seem to notice the same thing as well.

I suggest you make 2 test layers on a picture and try
them both out. I think you will see the difference. The key to working with skin is don’t try to do it in 1 single swipe. I set the opacity of the tools low, 10-15%, and gradually build on a layer copy of the area I want to fix. That way you have the gradual building from the tool and the flexibility of opacity in the actual cover layer.
That is a good idea. I will try it.

Thanks

Methos

D
Dave
Jun 7, 2006
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 01:02:32 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Dave wrote:

Pretty obvious that this isn’t the answer! What’s the use of taking the healing brush and then making it NOT work correctly because you’ve removed the underlying pixels before? In my view the healing brush is at least as powerful as the clone tool, but you do have to know how to use it, and removing pixels first is certainly not the way.

what I am talking about, is when replacing existing colour with a colour completely in contrast, like for instance stretching the green grass over what have been bricks, or ground etc.
Then of course, you do not want the underlying pixels
having a effect on the *new* colour.

No, of course not. So for such a task you shouldn’t use the healing brush, because that would be the wrong tool for the job. That’s what the clone tool is for. You don’t use a hammer to drive in screws either, but that doesn’t mean a hammer is not a useful tool.

This is exactly what I (also) said in both my former two reactions on this thread Johan. Although, I do appreciate the healing tool as well and would not talk negatively of it because it get used quite often.

Like you pointed out here, each has it’s place. And of course it is obvious when reading my posts, that I tried to use the healing tool where I should have used the clone tool.
Thanks for your answer.

Dave

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections