Damien Symonds

Oh gosh. The Dust & Scratches filter will get rid of the worst of the speckling, but that's as much as I can offer, I'm afraid.

It's obvious to us because we're staring at it. But I think it would be absolutely fine.

Gee ... I wonder if you really should flip the new belly button upside down? Would anyone notice? Because in the main photo the shadow is below the button, but in the donor photo it's above it?

Oh, sorry, may I see it as a 100% crop also?

Correct. Follow the shape of the people, but don't go too close to them.

Mixed information is exactly right. The truth is, it might be in the print or it might not. There are three possibilities: The file has no banding, but your screen isn't very good, so it shows banding. The printer also isn't very good, and it prints banding. The file has no banding, but your screen isn't very good, so it shows banding. The printer, however, is very good, and it doesn't print banding. The file does have banding, and your screen is good, and shows it. The printer also prints it. As long as you did the background exactly like this, I guarantee there's no banding in the file.

Where are you seeing the banding? On your screen, or in print, or both?

Yes, the polygonal lasso tool is what I used.

May I see the nice belly button separately? In its original photo, I mean?

Colour space correct. Well done.

I can help you, but I need to know what you want. What do you envisage for this photo?

You were meant to put the glamour subject in the basket? Seriously, you cannot remove this basket.

Um .. what did you have in mind?

But as Sam said, it looks awfully dull. Can you post the actual photo now?

This one is sRGB. It's correct.

Did you start by drawing a text box with the Text Tool? That's vital. If you simply clicked then started typing, it won't work.

Well, Bridge might have something in its Preferences about the interface size.

It's really annoying, isn't it?

Print size is completely irrelevant. All that's relevant is what you see on screen. And when pixels are so incredibly tiny that you can't even see them, it makes it darned hard to manipulate them.

This is so true. It's so nice to see somebody else saying it. Did you send Imagenomic the same two screenshots you've posted here?

Oh, this is really really really really really bad. Your image has your monitor's profile. Oh, phew, I see you've fixed it.

Yes ... somewhat ...

I really don't think you have anything to worry about. Your focus fell on the glitter beautifully, so when you sharpen for output (print or web) the glitter will jump out fantastically. Remember, never sharpen during editing. Only for output. May I have some links to other glitter photos you admire?

Please forgive my late reply. I took a rare day off to go to a concert yesterday.

Oh gee, you've got a much bigger problem than stretch marks. Please follow this link to fix it.