HOME | DD
augustc4 β Heavy Lifting Tutorial
Published: 2006-01-09 02:58:54 +0000 UTC; Views: 67512; Favourites: 1499; Downloads: 22907
Redirect to original
Description
Tutorials >>Tutorials >>
Tutorials >>
Rambi is *zambi 's original character
she was nice enough to let me draw her and use her in a tutorial
( thank you stinklady -3:I )
well, I decided to create a tutorial on lineart separation
this should help everyone having trouble with their lineart,
and help those with a desire to understand advanced setup
sorry it's so very technical, and not very fun, but it's MUCH too important to overlook!
so enjoy ^^
//* EDIT
for those of you that know the Desaturation trick and want to use it instead for Step1, feel free. But there IS a difference between desaturating an image and converting it to grayscale. Look closely at this image ( [link] ), and you'll see that the grayscaled version is lighter than the desaturated version. What difference does this make? Hell if I know
But I trust a full grayscale conversion over an RGB desaturation any day.
Related content
Comments: 497
a quicker way to do the exact same thing is to...
1. have everything in RGB mode, lines cleaned up etc as mentioned here in step 1
2. change to channels pallette
3. drag and copy the BLUE channel
4 invert this new blue copy channel (ctrl-i)
5. go back to layers, delete lineart on background layer
6. create a new layer
7. select - load selection, lots of marching ants will appear
8. fill with black
ta- dahhhh!
π: 0 β©: 0
Woot! Smexxi!
Anywaay. I Don't Have A Scanner, I Tried To take A Photo With It On Webcam. Unwizee. o.O Anyway FABBY
π: 0 β©: 0
you lost me at around the 'channel' part....i clicked ctrl+v but nothing happen...
maybe i'm just stupid....
π: 0 β©: 0
I really have to tell you, this tutorial is amazing. I saved it when you first posted it, and I have referred back to it so many times since then. It's concise, hilarious, and really easy to follow. So I just wanted to say, wow, THANK you for this awesome awesome tutorial!
π: 0 β©: 0
I have not the time to fully implement this yet, but the first few steps alone are amazingly helpful. I cannot thank you enough
π: 0 β©: 0
thanks for the tutorial.. i thought i knew most of the ps tricks.. never had a problem with coloring line art.. but using multiply and other blending modes on pencil drawings was getting on my nerves.. thanks for opening a whole new level of freedom.
π: 0 β©: 0
I applaud you~ I shall add this to my faves.... not because i want to keep this for years and years and cherish it forever but because you make the funniest damn tutorials ive ever seen. Even if i do already know how to do a lot of what you teach... i still cant help but read them and laugh. Very good tutorials. Educating and humorouse.
bravo man... bravo
π: 0 β©: 1
thanks for the kind words
π: 0 β©: 0
Hi.
I am fron the Brazil and I found its deviation very good.
Congratulations!
Please, it forgives my English, I am using a translator on-line.
---
OlΓ‘.
Sou do Brasil e achei seu trabalho muito bom.
ParabΓ©ns!
π: 0 β©: 0
you can lighten lineart using the multiply trick.. but you cant color it!!!
nice tutorial gonna have to favourite it!
π: 0 β©: 0
Wouldnt this be easier with a quick mask rather than chanels?
Select All (Cntrl+A), Copy the image (Cntrl+C), Edit In Quick Mask Mode (Q), Paste (Cntrl+V), New Layer, Edit In Standard Mode (Q), Paint Bucket (G) in Black.
Is using chanels any crisper, or in some way superior?
π: 0 β©: 1
That way would work well too. The only notable difference is that you'd have your lineart saved in a channel for future use, should you need it. I'm pretty sure the end result is exactly the same though...
π: 0 β©: 0
I've finally went through your entire gallery and was VERY impressed. I look forward to seeing more of your work!
π: 0 β©: 0
wow is that a lot of reply posts to this tutorial. over 400... So anyway. Just thought I would say nice tutorial. I personaly learned this one from [link] over 5 years ago, but most of the time i dont bother using it. If you dont plan on manipulating your lines then there isnt much point. Its faster and easier to just copy the backround layer and set it to multiply. Also if my memory serves when i was using this method it made my lines not look as nice. I work mostly in pencil and i like the texture and feel of my lines, and I seem to remember them not looking quite the way i wanted when I did this. But its been a while since i tried it. 
π: 0 β©: 1
you and me both, hopefully it doesn't make the beginners dizzy
π: 0 β©: 0
This tutorial has SAVED my life. I LOVE you. And therefore vicariously whoever you learned this from.
π: 0 β©: 0
Just so you know, both the Greyscale conversion and the Desaturated version are different balances of the R, G, and B channels (and neither of them represent equal averages). Greyscale skews heavily toward Green, to approximate the general luminosity (though it doesn't match the strict luminosity). Desaturation favors Green too, but with more presence of Red, to better reflect Luminance based on color purity. ("Pure Blue" is actually quite dark.)
Strangely enough, if you float the color composite over a grey background (or any colorless background, actually), and set it to Luminosity, you get a third version. That is the strict luminosity, with no skew at all, reflecting equal portions of R, G, B. (Larger influence of Blue, especially, compared to the others.)
None of this is meant to sound arrogant, by the way, just assuming you'd like to know. But in terms of "which one to trust or not," after having written off the Desaturated verson for years myself, I've come around to "trust whichever one looks best for any given source / context," and give them all a look. All three represent different kinds of "truth."
π: 0 β©: 0
you can get a similar effect by reducing the range of a layer, and merging it into an empty layer.
not as elegant a solution, but faster.
π: 0 β©: 1
where can I find the range command?
π: 0 β©: 1
it's not really a command. and range might be the wrong name, but double click the layer, and you see the 2 gradient bars in the layer options? pull one back away from the white side. all pixels at that level of darkness, or lighter, will disappear. they will still be there, but hidden.
merge into an empty layer, and they will go away for good. leaving only the darkest pxels. still, there'll be a pxelly edge to it though. not a bad trick if it's already a clean image.
π: 0 β©: 0
Cool agian guys....you gonna make me a "photo" artist yet....TX guys!
π: 0 β©: 0
Cool method.I'll have to give it a try,thanks for sharing
π: 0 β©: 0
I used to use the old "Select>Color Range" trick to select the lines and then fill them with black on a new layer. I'll have to see how much improved this new fangled way is XD
π: 0 β©: 2
as in "halo" bits? No. But I am sure the quality is probably lower, anyhow. Unless I don't get your meaning. It takes 10 seconds, so you can try it and tell me if so XP
π: 0 β©: 0
I think that way leaves you with whites in your blacks, instead of transparency in your blacks...
π: 0 β©: 0
I am so happy i found this, this helps out so much, thank you very much!
π: 0 β©: 0
hehe I love channels. I have a different method 
π: 0 β©: 1
it's always interesting to see how other people tackle the same problem
π: 0 β©: 1
This tutorial is super clear and super useful!
You are a life saver
π: 0 β©: 0
omg this tutorial is the ultimate livesaver!!!!!!!!!! awesome!!! thanks!!!!
π: 0 β©: 0
This tutorial is amazing. I just tried it and it's awsome. I've still got some practice to get in, but hell, my stuff looks a ton better now that I've done this. Thankyou augustc4, that's some good tutorial. Next up your coloring tutorial.
π: 0 β©: 1
glad it's useful to you! great to know there were immediate improvements as a result ^_^
π: 0 β©: 0
Great Tutorial ^^ My way is a little faster, maybe. Will have to try your steps once I get home. I invert the blue channel, I forget why, but blue works the best how I do it... *thinks* Yeah, I am pretty sure if you invert a different color my way, you get different results ^^
Funny thing is, a friend tought me how to do this LONG ago too
π: 0 β©: 1
does the blue channel works because it's the closest to black in value? I bet the lines aren't nearly as solid as they could be (speculation), but any functional technique is a good one!
π: 0 β©: 1
That might be it, but no, the values are the same when transphered over, I'll give you a step by step once I remember that I am at home, and have Adobe
Also, since it is just a mask(right word for it?), you can go over it with a black brush to make it darker or lighter anytime the mask is on.
π: 0 β©: 1
remember though that masks inherit opacity settings. So if you're going over an area of a mask with a 100% black brush and the opacity of the mask in that area is 40%, your black will still look gray.
π: 0 β©: 1
So you would think, but how I do it, if you go over the same spot twice with the same color black, it will get darker. It will keep getting darker untill the entire mask is at 100% black. Which looks like total crap, because the sides around the middle of the black line are at a different opacity then the middle of the line. It will take those up to 100% if you keep piling on the black. Also, if you use a different color, like Pink, it'll shade it in pink, using the opacity settings of the mask (which is really odd looking to me).
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm interested to see why that works, because it doesn't make any technical sense.
for example, ctrl+delete is a 100% fill, and no matter how many times I press it the mask doesn't darken (since it already filled at 100% at each unique mask opacity)
anyhow, I'd be interested to understand why it works that way for you.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, here's the deal. Where we differ is you use the 'fill' command. I use the brush. Thats the only differnce. I you use the brush, instead of the Fill option, you can modify your lines how you like them. Make them whatever color, strength, size, anything (while still keeping the mask options intact).
The only other differnce is instead of making a new channel, I invert the blue, then duplicate it. That does the eact same thing as creating the new channel, but *shrug* Just style preferance I guess.
π: 0 β©: 0
i have ps elements, and it doesnt have the channels option (or i cant find it)
so i cant use this tutorial? (sorry if the question is lame)
π: 0 β©: 1
sorry, but I really don't know what elements is capable of
π: 0 β©: 1
that's alright, i got photoshop 6
π: 0 β©: 0
Awesome, thanks for making this tutorial. Now I have something for reference when I do lineart next time.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>