File: IMG_2281c.jpg (3 MB, 3456x2885) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 3456x2885

Here is the background

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T3i
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:08 20:04:36
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	34.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3456
Image Height	2885
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	1E1FF8A9C5954488BFBF30C038E269D0

>>2834458
Light levels don't match, and the camera-right edge of the head is too clean. Background blur level looks fake as well.

>>2834465
thank you

Lighting and blur issues aside, you did a good job around the hair in the beard.

>>2834473
Thanks!

Any suggestions on how to get the lighting right?

>>2834465

Uhhh... the second photo is the shopped one, man. Look at it.

>>2835704
What?
They're both "shopped"

>>2835707

There are hairs visible in the OP that aren't in the "template".

Might also want to touch up the dry skin on the eyebrows, and that hand... just sayin'

>>2834465
LOL, OP took the first photo and extracted himself, then pasted on the black background.

>>2835830

I don't think he was trying to fool anyone... re-read his posts.

>I took this photo and replaced the background

>here is the background

I think people misinterpreted (reversed) the situation, gave improper critique and advice, and OP is too noob to realize.

>>2834459

Magic wand worked great on the left side of the beard, because of the high contrast with the black background. Up higher, at glasses level and above, low contrast made it harder, so you had to use eraser. It's too blurry though, and you clipped off all the stray hairs, so your have your circle too large.

With things like hair, being lazy with a large soft eraser doesn't work. You have to go small and soft and painstakingly isolate each stray hair. Really though, it only adds another 20-30 min of work but makes a huge difference.

Bottom right, the shirt: Again, too big and soft on the eraser. Also, there was no need to use the eraser at all. The magic wand would have been fine there followed by a bit of cleaning up with small eraser... you just needed to dial in the tolerance.

File: 1234.jpg (190 KB, 859x721) Image search: [Google]

190 KB, 859x721

This is just a few minutes of half-assery, so don't judge... but more like this.

Get all the detail around the perimeter. Maybe even a bit too much. Just don't throw it out by being rushed, because it doesn't look natural. Then it's a matter of paring it back with a 3px eraser at ~80% hardness and cleaning up / attaching unattached details as you see fit.

Go around each stray hair the same way, removing all but 1 or 2 pixels worth (the very center of the hair)

There will still be a bit of hardness / lack of detail in some areas of the hair. This is when you take a 1px eraser at high hardness, and drag out from the center. (Remove the hard edge to simulate gaps between hairs / create your own strays).

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3436
Image Height	2885
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:10 20:58:45
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	859
Image Height	721

>>2834459
It's not a bad cut-out, but the background is way too uniform and unreal looking.