Is there a tool that will let me delete selected pieces from a jigsaw puzzle?

[swanseamale47]

As Bishop says side lighting might help show the joins, but a really well made jigsaw has pretty fine "cuts?" so they may be hard to see. I'm wondering if the jigsaw is placed on glass and lit from below if that would help? Not a jigsaw person so I cant test it.
Black or brightly coloured paper under it would show the shape when a piece is removed.

 

[Garry Edwards]

I think she wants to remove most of the pieces - just leaving the special ones in place - but you are right about the lighting: lighting from the side will create some shadows revealing that it isn't just a flat picture, and if the camera is overhead, there will be no direct reflection into the lens.

Agreed. I did ask the OP how much space she has available, but there was no reply so I gave up. Space is needed because the (single) light needed needs to travel a long way because of the effect of the Inverse Square Law.

Maybe take one photo of each item with a piece removed, to show the thickness of the wood? the thickness doesn't show otherwise.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

Can you ‘just to indulge’ describe what a silhouette is? Because my reading of the image above shows no silhouettes.

And the details that you’ve provided with the people aren’t visible in the v low res version of the full image.

"Silhouette" is Stave's term for any of the special pieces they cut into their puzzles.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

can you just actually remove the non "silhouette" pieces and take another picture? If you put a spot of glue under each "silhouette" piece when you assemble the jigsaw, it should be fairly easy to remove the other pieces and leave those behind.

I would not want to use glue on any of these puzzle pieces.

Photoshop is about $120 per year btw - for a 2-machine license, for both Photoshop and Lightroom (but I'm sure Affinity will also have some auto selection features)

I really want to try and do this digitally. I'll look into these options. If Photoshop is the only way to go (or the best), maybe I'll buy a one or two month license, get what I need done, then cancel.

Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

Just for a ‘one off’. A short term trial of photoshop is free.

Thanks

 

[Phil V]

"Silhouette" is Stave's term for any of the special pieces they cut into their puzzles.

Thanks.
It makes no sense to me as silhouette is a French word we’ve used for hundreds of years for something completely different.

But at least we now know what you meant

 

[Cynthia Moore]

What I would do is the following:

I would place the completed jigsaw puzzle on a sheet of white paper and then remove the “silhouettes” from the puzzle. I would then trace round the inside of the holes where the silhouettes were with a pencil. I would then remove the jigsaw puzzle from the sheet of paper and place the silhouettes in their appropriate place on the sheet of paper.

I don't think I could make that work. I am really looking for a digital solution. Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

You could use a small piece of blu-tack (or other, non-branded equivalent!) rather than glue, if you are concerned that glue might damage the special pieces.
You could buy a large sheet of coloured paper from an art suppliers if you wanted a non-white background.

I appreciate all the suggestions, but anything that involves physically removing pieces is not going to do what I want. I have actually played witqh doing that. One problem is that the other pieces move. Another is that if I find that I missed a piece, which is each to do in a puzzle with 1500 pieces, then I've to do it all over again. If I have a digital solution, all I have to do is update the copy with the tracings.

Thanks

 

[woof woof]

It doesn't look like there are too many pieces so the solution I have although time consuming wont take all week

Photograph the picture and open the image in a processing package.

These usually have some sort of selection tool with which you can either automatically or manually select a subject or shape. Select a non special piece (either automatically or manually) and fill it with black paint (or any colour of your choice.) Again this can be done either automatically or manually with a paint brush.

Move on to the next non special piece and repeat and eventually you'll be left with just the special pieces in place.

Good luck with finding a quicker/better method if you can but if not the above could be an answer.

 

[Faldrax]

I would not want to use glue on any of these puzzle pieces.


I really want to try and do this digitally. I'll look into these options. If Photoshop is the only way to go (or the best), maybe I'll buy a one or two month license, get what I need done, then cancel.

Thanks

Unfortunately, once you move from the 30 day free trial, you are on to an annual subscription - it's billed monthly, but you are expected to pay 12 months worth even if you try and cancel before that (and it then renews for a further 12 months once the first 12 months is up, and so on).
You may well be able to do what you need with Photoshop Express, which is a free, cut down version

https://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-express.html

 

[woof woof]

Unfortunately, once you move from the 30 day free trial, you are on to an annual subscription - it's billed monthly, but you are expected to pay 12 months worth even if you try and cancel before that (and it then renews for a further 12 months once the first 12 months is up, and so on).
You may well be able to do what you need with Photoshop Express, which is a free, cut down version

https://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-express.html

I used to have an old Elements or something CD that came with a camera. I've just checked and they're on ebay from £5 but I can't remember what tools it has or if it'll run on a modern pc. I assume it will.

 

[Garry Edwards]

"Silhouette" is Stave's term for any of the special pieces they cut into their puzzles.

Thanks.
It makes no sense to me as silhouette is a French word we’ve used for hundreds of years for something completely different.

But at least we now know what you meant

Yes, that's a weird mis-use of an established word, which basically means a cheap way of making a likeness, named after an 18th-century finance minister - but at least we've learned something

I don't think I could make that work. I am really looking for a digital solution. Thanks

Good luck with that, there will be software work needed, but your starting point is decent lighting. Any DSLR will be fine and you can probably borrow one. Your compact is a poor alternative and your phone is even worse.

If you really don't want to spend anything on software then either use GIMP or pay someone else to do the work for you, but you do need to start with a well-lit, well-composed image with minimal distortion and good resolution.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

I could be wrong, but I think that where Cynthia is struggling, is that when she takes a photo of the puzzle, you cannot tell that it is a jigsaw with a few pieces removed - so I think she needs help with the lighting to help define the shapes and show the lines of the puzzle, and where the gaps are when she has removed some pieces.

Here's an example of what I want to do. The image on the left is a simple example of the source puzzle. There are hundreds of regular pieces and a few silhouette pieces. In this example, the silhouettes are blue. What I want to do I create an image of the puzzle with all of the regular pieces removed, leaving just the silhouettes exactly as they are in the puzzle. In real puzzles, the silhouettes are letters, numbers, and characters.

Is that clearer? And I really want to do this digitally.

Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

I think she wants to remove most of the pieces - just leaving the special ones in place - but you are right about the lighting: lighting from the side will create some shadows revealing that it isn't just a flat picture, and if the camera is overhead, there will be no direct reflection into the lens.

Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

As Bishop says side lighting might help show the joins, but a really well made jigsaw has pretty fine "cuts?" so they may be hard to see. I'm wondering if the jigsaw is placed on glass and lit from below if that would help? Not a jigsaw person so I cant test it.
Black or brightly coloured paper under it would show the shape when a piece is removed.

Now that's an interesting idea. I'll have to try that. The cuts are very fine and the pieces are 0.25" thick, so light may not get through.

Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

Agreed. I did ask the OP how much space she has available, but there was no reply so I gave up. Space is needed because the (single) light needed needs to travel a long way because of the effect of the Inverse Square Law.

Maybe take one photo of each item with a piece removed, to show the thickness of the wood? the thickness doesn't show otherwise.

I didn't understand the question about space. Still not sure I do. Maybe if you said how muich space is needed? I have a house with normal size rooms. I also have outdoors. Is that enough space?

The pieces are hardwood and 0.25" thick.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

Thanks.
It makes no sense to me as silhouette is a French word we’ve used for hundreds of years for something completely different.

But at least we now know what you meant

Hmmm... Maybe in your world. In mine, it means an outline in a general sense.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

I used to have an old Elements or something CD that came with a camera. I've just checked and they're on ebay from £5 but I can't remember what tools it has or if it'll run on a modern pc. I assume it will.

I'll check that out. Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

It doesn't look like there are too many pieces so the solution I have although time consuming wont take all week

Photograph the picture and open the image in a processing package.

These usually have some sort of selection tool with which you can either automatically or manually select a subject or shape. Select a non special piece (either automatically or manually) and fill it with black paint (or any colour of your choice.) Again this can be done either automatically or manually with a paint brush.

Move on to the next non special piece and repeat and eventually you'll be left with just the special pieces in place.

Good luck with finding a quicker/better method if you can but if not the above could be an answer.

Thanks

 

[Cynthia Moore]

Unfortunately, once you move from the 30 day free trial, you are on to an annual subscription - it's billed monthly, but you are expected to pay 12 months worth even if you try and cancel before that (and it then renews for a further 12 months once the first 12 months is up, and so on).
You may well be able to do what you need with Photoshop Express, which is a free, cut down version

https://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-express.html

I'll check that out, thanks

 

[Phil V]

With fairly minimal risk of damage, I’d suggest double sided tape on the ‘silhouette’ pieces, that’ll hold them in place when you remove the pieces around them.

However I’m not sure photographing them in this isolation will give enough of a ‘clue’ that they’re a small part of a greater image. In your 2nd image it’s not obvious the pieces came from the first without seeing image 1 as well.

I’d photograph the whole jigsaw (lit so that it’s obviously a jigsaw) and then either photograph the silhouette pieces and merge the images lowering the opacity of the non-silhouette pieces, or just do the same thing in photoshop (or other editing software).

Unfortunately for Cynthia, this involves two tricky processes, lighting the image correctly to show the form, and the post processing to give prominence to the correct pieces.

I would say though, that even after that’s done, the image of the special pieces might not show well enough the detail required, which look like they need photographing at near macro magnification to give up their secret.

 

[Garry Edwards]

OK, you need a single light source, pointing straight at the puzzle from one side, very low down so that it skims across the surface. A diffused light source is essential and a softbox is your best choice. The softbox should be no smaller than the long side of the puzzle. This will produce the best effect, showing the joints as well as they can be shown, but will also emphasise any faults.

The light source (which fits inside the softbox) should ideally be flash, but a photographic LED will do the job - a non-photographic one will produce distorted colours. All this requires enough space to set it up.

Then you need to consider the Inverse Square Law - the intensity of light falls off over distance, at a high rate when the distance is close. Because of this the light source (softbox) needs to be a long way away from the nearest part of the subject because the furthest part will be even further away and so will receive less light. You haven't told us the size of the puzzles so we can't do the simple calculations for you, but as an example, if the puzzle is 1m x1m and the light source is just 1 m away, then the light has to travel 1 m to the nearest part and 2m to the furthest point, which will reduce the light on the furthest part to just 1/4 of the light on the closest part. Obviously, that won't be good enough. Move the light twice as far away and the light falloff will be reduced to half, which would still be far more than most people would find acceptable - so, can you increase the light distance to say 4m or 8m? That's why I asked you about space.

If you don't have enough indoor space then you could shoot it outside, in complete darkness of course, but there may be practical challenges.

It seems to me that as the jigsaws have the benefit of being made of thick wood then you need to show this benefit. That's why I suggested that you include a shot with a piece removed, to show that, or alternatively you could just put a piece from another puzzle on top, which would do the same job but with more drama.

Once you have done this you can use your software solutions, but getting a decent photo as a starting point isn't optional.

Hope this helps.

 

[Phil V]

Hmmm... Maybe in your world. In mine, it means an outline in a general sense.

silhouette

1. a dark shape seen against a light surface: 2. a dark shape seen against a…

dictionary.cambridge.org

In the English speaking world (though it’s a French word obviously) it definitely doesn’t describe what you’ve shown.

Less the ‘outline’ and more the solid black infill.

 

[Phil V]

Photoshop will definitely enable the cutting out of the pieces. (I’d guess most image editors similarly)

Select the pieces using smart select copy them, and paste onto a new layer, then you can make the Background layer (the whole jigsaw) invisible.

However; as per my previous post, I’d actually try reducing the opacity of the background as it’ll give context.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

OK, you need a single light source, pointing straight at the puzzle from one side, very low down so that it skims across the surface. A diffused light source is essential and a softbox is your best choice. The softbox should be no smaller than the long side of the puzzle. This will produce the best effect, showing the joints as well as they can be shown, but will also emphasise any faults.

The light source (which fits inside the softbox) should ideally be flash, but a photographic LED will do the job - a non-photographic one will produce distorted colours. All this requires enough space to set it up.

Then you need to consider the Inverse Square Law - the intensity of light falls off over distance, at a high rate when the distance is close. Because of this the light source (softbox) needs to be a long way away from the nearest part of the subject because the furthest part will be even further away and so will receive less light. You haven't told us the size of the puzzles so we can't do the simple calculations for you, but as an example, if the puzzle is 1m x1m and the light source is just 1 m away, then the light has to travel 1 m to the nearest part and 2m to the furthest point, which will reduce the light on the furthest part to just 1/4 of the light on the closest part. Obviously, that won't be good enough. Move the light twice as far away and the light falloff will be reduced to half, which would still be far more than most people would find acceptable - so, can you increase the light distance to say 4m or 8m? That's why I asked you about space.

If you don't have enough indoor space then you could shoot it outside, in complete darkness of course, but there may be practical challenges.

It seems to me that as the jigsaws have the benefit of being made of thick wood then you need to show this benefit. That's why I suggested that you include a shot with a piece removed, to show that, or alternatively you could just put a piece from another puzzle on top, which would do the same job but with more drama.

Once you have done this you can use your software solutions, but getting a decent photo as a starting point isn't optional.

Hope this helps.

Wow. I am more than a little intimidated by all that. I don't doubt that you are correct, but I fear that even if I went out and bought all that gear, I wouldn't be able to use it correctly. However, I agree that getting a good photograph is the first step. Is there a second (or third) best option available?

We just completed one of the larger puzzles. It's 33" wide and 22" tall.

I have a tripod and I can probably borrow a decent camera or talk a neighbor into coming over to take the photographs. I think I'd like to try that first. If that works well enough, great. If not, I can decide what to do next.

My first question is about the camera distance and angle. The camera mount on my tripod (a Velbon mini-F) will tilt the camera to almost straight down, but not perfectly straight down. And it is only 2' tall. I don't think that is far enough. I suppose I could put the tripod on a table and the puzzle on the ground. The puzzle is currently on a puzzle board, so it can be easily moved.

If the camera cannot be pointed straight down, should I compensate by raising the back of the puzzle board a bit so that the camera is pointing straight at it?

I do have some soft floodlights. What if I try using them for the lighting? Or maybe do it outside in daylight, but in the shade.

PS: I just discovered that I have another tripod that is 4' tall and that camera mount will point perfectly down.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Wow. I am more than a little intimidated by all that. I don't doubt that you are correct, but I fear that even if I went out and bought all that gear, I wouldn't be able to use it correctly. However, I agree that getting a good photograph is the first step. Is there a second (or third) best option available?

Don't feel intimidated, it's a learning process but not a difficult one.
There isn't really any alternative to starting off with a decent shot.

We just completed one of the larger puzzles. It's 33" wide and 22" tall.

So, we now know that the ideal size of softbox is somewhere around 33"

My first question is about the camera distance and angle. The camera mount on my tripod (a Velbon mini-F) will tilt the camera to almost straight down, but not perfectly straight down. And it is only 2' tall. I don't think that is far enough. I suppose I could put the tripod on a table and the puzzle on the ground. The puzzle is currently on a puzzle board, so it can be easily moved.

If the camera cannot be pointed straight down, should I compensate by raising the back of the puzzle board a bit so that the camera is pointing straight at it?

The camera will need to be dead square to the puzzle. Your 4' tripod should be OK.

I do have some soft floodlights. What if I try using them for the lighting?

Yes, that will do, or at least should do a reasonable job, although the colour reproduction is very unlikely to be correct - worth trying at least

Or maybe do it outside in daylight, but in the shade.

The shade is the opposite of what you need, as I pointed out earlier. The light MUST skim across the puzzle, to reveal the cuts. The shade has the opposite effect.
.

 

[andrewc]

I really want to try and do this digitally. I'll look into these options. If Photoshop is the only way to go (or the best), maybe I'll buy a one or two month license, get what I need done, then cancel.

That will come back to bite you.

Adobe doesn't sell monthly licences. When you buy photoshop you enter a contract to purchase a yearly license. You can pay it up front, or to spread the cost they will stagger payments over 12 months. If you cancel after 2 months, Adobe, can and has asked for payment for the other 10 months you agreed to when you bought the software.

There is a 7 day free trial available.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

That will come back to bite you.

Adobe doesn't sell monthly licences. When you buy photoshop you enter a contract to purchase a yearly license. You can pay it up front, or to spread the cost they will stagger payments over 12 months. If you cancel after 2 months, Adobe, can and has asked for payment for the other 10 months you agreed to when you bought the software.

There is a 7 day free trial available.

Thanks for the heads up. If I can't find another product that can do the job and doesn't cost an arm and a leg, I might buy a one-year licxense and try to get all of the puzzles done in that year.

 

[Deleted member 95743]

I can’t help thinking that you are over thinking this. All you need to do to photograph the jigsaw puzzle is to place it next to a window and use natural light to illuminate it.

The hardest thing to do is to draw a selection around the individual pieces using the pen tool. And if you have never used the pen tool before then learning how to use it on a jigsaw puzzle will be very hard and frustrating work.

To reiterate what I said in post #37, I would place the completed jigsaw puzzle on a sheet of white paper and then remove the “silhouettes” from the puzzle. I would then trace round the inside of the holes where the silhouettes were with a pencil. I would then remove the jigsaw puzzle from the sheet of paper and place the silhouettes in their appropriate place on the sheet of paper.

 

[Garry Edwards]

I can’t help thinking that you are over thinking this. All you need to do to photograph the jigsaw puzzle is to place it next to a window and use natural light to illuminate it.

Not so, the light needs to be directional. Natural light CAN be directional but very rarely is, and it needs to be controlled, which is why we use artificial light for this type of shot.

The hardest thing to do is to draw a selection around the individual pieces using the pen tool. And if you have never used the pen tool before then learning how to use it on a jigsaw puzzle will be very hard and frustrating work.

That's actually the easiest bit. There's a learning curve of course, and it will take time and practice, but the process is straightforward.

 

[Deleted member 95743]

Not so, the light needs to be directional. Natural light CAN be directional but very rarely is, and it needs to be controlled, which is why we use artificial light for this type of shot.

That's actually the easiest bit. There's a learning curve of course, and it will take time and practice, but the process is straightforward.

You do seem to be over complicating a very simple task. The OP only needs to illuminate the actual pieces the she wants to draw a selection around, and not the entire puzzle. She could do that with a torch. Directional lighting will not highlight the edges of the pieces that run in the same direction as the directional lighting.

And non of us have any idea as to how tightly the pieces fit together, which will also have an effect on the photograph regardless of how it is lit.

 

[Garry Edwards]

You do seem to be over complicating a very simple task. The OP only needs to illuminate the actual pieces the she wants to draw a selection around, and not the entire puzzle. She could do that with a torch. Directional lighting will not highlight the edges of the pieces that run in the same direction as the directional lighting.

And non of us have any idea as to how tightly the pieces fit together, which will also have an effect on the photograph regardless of how it is lit.

We do have an idea of how tightly the pieces fit together from the photos on the manufacturers' website.

You're entitled to your opinions but, with respect, there is nothing in your posting history to indicate any experience in this area.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

To get a general idea of the detail, I took a few test photos of a smaller puzzle (9" x 7") using my Coolpix S8200 camera and my 4' tripod in ambient daylight lighting. The photos are almost 6 MB. I tried to upload one here, but was told it is too big.

I can use Irfanview to resize it. What's the maximum size allowed in posts?

I can also upload it to a OneDrive folder in the cloud and share the link here.

What's the best way to proceed?

 

[Bebop]

To get a general idea of the detail, I took a few test photos of a smaller puzzle (9" x 7") using my Coolpix S8200 camera and my 4' tripod in ambient daylight lighting. The photos are almost 6 MB. I tried to upload one here, but was told it is too big.

I can use Irfanview to resize it. What's the maximum size allowed in posts?

I can also upload it to a OneDrive folder in the cloud and share the link here.

What's the best way to proceed?

It needs to be 500KB or less, and 1000pixels or less on the longest side.
Then you can click on attach files (below your post) to upload it. Then you select the uploaded image and choose whether you want to insert a large image into your post, or a thumbnail, which viewers can then click on to enlarge it.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

OK. I'll try to post a low res version of one of the photos here. The folder also has a PDF document explaining how each photo was taken.

OneDrive folder with sample photos

Here's a low res version of the one I think is the best. The cut lines are quite clear, especially when zoomed in, which I would need to do to trace the outlines.

You can see some of the silhouettes. There is a baseball bat on the upper left.

 

[Garry Edwards]

I think you've done well with this, better resolution of the cut lines than I expected.
The "Dark closet" shot doesn't really work because the light was too close, resulting in very uneven lighting due to the effect of the Inverse Square Law. But, because of the fairly low angle of the light, the cut lines are better - you just need more distance and a light source that reproduces the colours accurately.
Phone shots don't really work because the tiny sensor means that the detail isn't captured, and is artificially 'improved' by software.

Having the right type of light in the right position will produce much higher quality, and given the very high cost of these puzzles I think that it's a no-brainer to get it right, but different people have different needs.

To summarise previous posts about the software you need, Photoshop is probably the gold standard, and well worth the cost for people who need it but AFAIK any software that can work in layers will do what you need it to do.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

I think you've done well with this, better resolution of the cut lines than I expected.

Me, too!

Having the right type of light in the right position will produce much higher quality, and given the very high cost of these puzzles I think that it's a no-brainer to get it right, but different people have different needs.

I do intend to "get it right" -- at least within my time and ability. I feel confident that shooting in full sunlight, but in the shade, and with a better camera will get the results I want.

To summarise previous posts about the software you need, Photoshop is probably the gold standard, and well worth the cost for people who need it but AFAIK any software that can work in layers will do what you need it to do.

That's my next project.

In gratitude for all the help and "encouragement" I received here, I will post my results, especially if I find a tool that is cheaper than Photoshop.

Thanks

 

[Nod]

There is a cut down version of PhotoShop - PhotoShop Elements. Under £100 and a one off purchase rather than a subscription.

 

[FruitFlakes]

There is a cut down version of PhotoShop - PhotoShop Elements. Under £100 and a one off purchase rather than a subscription.

Elements doesn't have a pen tool though.

I just checked and Affinity Photo does and it looks to work just the same as the Photoshop version. £68 for a license and there's also a 30 day trial.

 

[Cynthia Moore]

Elements doesn't have a pen tool though.

I just checked and Affinity Photo does and it looks to work just the same as the Photoshop version. £68 for a license and there's also a 30 day trial.

Thanks. I'll check that out.