How to remove white lines around edges in a not so good photo?

[Rgrethe]

I´m struggling with a photo that I took years ago with a compact digital camera. I did give it a makeover in Photoshop, but now that I want to print it out in a bigger size, it´s ruined by white lines around the edges.
I started to remove these by using the clone stamp tool, the healing brush tool and the spot healing brush tool, but this will take forever as it´s a tree with hundreds of branches.. But when I do this I do it in 500% view, first the clone stamp and then the healing brush tool (and spot healing). Problem with the healing brush tool is that when I go near the edge of the branch, it picks up the colour from it and gives a darker "dot" instead.

Is there any other and easier way to get rid of the white lines?
I´m using CS6, and not so experienced so please explain step by step if you have an alternative solution for this..
Here´s a view of the problem (crop 200%):

As you can see I have started to remove the white line, but this will take forever.. Also I see that when I view it in 100% som areas close to the branch appears a bit "darker & dotted", and it´s almost impossible to get rid of using the tools that I use..

So any help is highly appreciated!
Thanks!

 

[IamSam]

Try this...

Go to LAYER > MATTING > DEFRINGE, set to 2 or 3

also try.....

Go to LAYER > MATTING > REMOVE WHITE MATTE

 

[Tom Mann]

I don't know of any camera ever made that over-sharpens the image so much and so crudely that it comes out of the camera looking like the image you posted. So, my strong suspicion is that this image has already been manipulated and is not the original from the camera. This means that there is a chance that a version without these artifacts (ie, the original) might be available.

There are some semi-automated methods to remove/reduce the white halo (see attached), but the results are *never* as good as working with a version of the image that doesn't have this problem, ie, the original. I urge you to look for the original before you pursue a "fix".

FYI, I generated the attached image by making a copy of it on a new layer (in PS CS6), and then processing that layer with the "Dust and Scratches" filter set for a moderate radius and low threshold. I then set the blending mode of that layer to "darken". I then processed the result using Topaz "Clean".

HTH,

Tom M

 

[Rgrethe]

Try this...

Go to LAYER > MATTING > DEFRINGE, set to 2 or 3

also try.....

Go to LAYER > MATTING > REMOVE WHITE MATTE

Thanks, I tried this now but nothing happens, even if I set it to 30, absolutely nothing happens..
Is there something I could do wrong?
I also tried Layer Style > Inner glow .. (but not so sure what to set here so I just tried around) but absolutely nothing happens here either..
Is there anything else I have to do first to make it able to activate these settings?

 

[Rgrethe]

I don't know of any camera ever made that over-sharpens the image so much and so crudely that it comes out of the camera looking like the image you posted. So, my strong suspicion is that this image has already been manipulated and is not the original from the camera. This means that there is a chance that a version without these artifacts (ie, the original) might be available.

There are some semi-automated methods to remove/reduce the white halo (see attached), but the results are *never* as good as working with a version of the image that doesn't have this problem, ie, the original. I urge you to look for the original before you pursue a "fix".

FYI, I generated the attached image by making a copy of it on a new layer (in PS CS6), and then processing that layer with the "Dust and Scratches" filter set for a moderate radius and low threshold. I then set the blending mode of that layer to "darken". I then processed the result using Topaz "Clean".

HTH,

Tom M

I don't know of any camera ever made that over-sharpens the image so much and so crudely that it comes out of the camera looking like the image you posted. So, my strong suspicion is that this image has already been manipulated and is not the original from the camera. This means that there is a chance that a version without these artifacts (ie, the original) might be available.

There are some semi-automated methods to remove/reduce the white halo (see attached), but the results are *never* as good as working with a version of the image that doesn't have this problem, ie, the original. I urge you to look for the original before you pursue a "fix".

FYI, I generated the attached image by making a copy of it on a new layer (in PS CS6), and then processing that layer with the "Dust and Scratches" filter set for a moderate radius and low threshold. I then set the blending mode of that layer to "darken". I then processed the result using Topaz "Clean".

HTH,

Tom M

Thank you so much for your effort to try to show me how this works..
You´re absolutely right, as I said in my original post I have already done some Photoshopping on this photo. So it´s been adjusted, sharpened and so on making it so oversharpened.. Problem is that I did this maybe 3 -4 years ago, and back then I had no idea what I was doing in PS but I´ve been very happy with the result.. Meaning, in a small print it works ok, but now that I have to step it up and make it available in a bigger print (because someone wants to buy it), I just can´t start all over again from the original photo. I will not be able to make it the same, and even if I did, it will take at least as long time as it will to manually remove the white edges as I´ve started on now.. All the sky in the background and the lightning is changed in PS and a few other trees are removed, so my best shot with this one is to get rid of the already oversharpened edges.. And yes, I´ve also used the Topaz, I´ve used Denoise and Focus now, ofcourse resulting in even more oversharpened edges, but leaving the background smooth and without any noise, and without making the rest too blurry.. I tried your fix, which workes great, thanks, but it leaves the tree looking too artificial. It works good on the original when I follow your fix (thanks, I´ve learned something new), the white lines are gone, but the tree itself looks a bit too artificial when viewed in 100%.. Here´s how your fix works on the original:
(only 2 px radius and 0 threshold)

So I guess maybe I just have to do it manually, as I´ve started on doing.. ?
But I probably give up before I get there.. *sigh*

But I discovered something now when I was playing around with the different settings.
After the Dust & Scratches, if you go to Edit > Fade Dust & Scratches > and instead of Normal or Darken you choose > Color Burn.
Then all the white edges shows, exactly the edges I want to get rid of, is there maybe a way to use this to be able to remove these edges? Can you think of anything?
A shot in the dark I guess, but still hoping for a quick fix

 

[ALB68]

What happened to good old fashioned methodology. I used the pen tool to mask this and did it in less than 20 minutes. No filters or automation.

 

[Tom Mann]

Hi Rgrethe -

There are indeed ways to improve the process I described above. I didn't immediately describe these because I'll often find that many people on photo discussion groups like this feel that even a simplified version of such a process is too complex for their level of interest and/or level of PS knowledge, so it would have been a waste of my time to immediately describe the full version. In addition, in some cases, the diameter of the branches may be so small compared to the entire image that it's no problem if some detail in the branches is lost.

That being said, you are absolutely right that using "dust & scratches / darken" followed by Topaz Clean really destroys the texture of the trees. The way around this is to bring back in the original texture of the trees without bringing in the white halos. There are numerous methods that one can envision to do this. Probably the easiest is to simply duplicate the original image at the top of your stack and set the blendIF controls for that layer as shown below. The result is shown immediately below that. It isn't perfect (it leaves some new gray areas in-between branches), but it's an improvement. If you want to further improve on this, you can always manually mask out any of the problematic areas.

A simple method like using "blend-IF" works if the trees are always darker than the background. If they are darker than the background in some areas, about the same in other areas, and lighter than the background in other areas, you've got to either partition the different areas for different handling, use a more sophisticated selection method (eg, "refine edges" in PS, a commercial masking plugin like FluidMask or onOne's Perfect Mask, etc.) or, as the last resort (if you not have an overwhelming amount of fine detail that has to be dealt with), use the pen tool to separate the problem areas from the good areas.

FWIW, I've been exactly in the situation that you are, ie, I have an image that I initially processed at too low resolution, and then busted my you-know-what trying to up-rez it (to retain the look of the original post processing) instead of starting over from scratch.

To be honest, I've rarely been happy with the results of attempting to up-rez such images. If it's not halos, it's lumpy skin or other artifacts that show up when you up-rez. In contrast, whenever I start over, while the look might not be exactly the same, the overall effect has always been better. This is not only because of simple resolution issues, but because I know more than when I initially processed the image.

Just my $0.02,

Tom M

 

[Tom Mann]

And here's what you can do if you use a completely different selection method:

For example, use the "color range" tool in the "add to selection" mode, and keep selecting the various areas of the tree, but not the sky. Keep the "range" and "fuzziness" parameters small.

This will allow you to cut out the tree and put it on any background of your choosing including a simple gradient, the result of the "Dust and Shadows" method, or any other background. Notice that some very narrow branches get eroded away into disjoint sections, but there is absolutely no degradation of the texture of wider branches of the tree using this method.

T