Using Photoshop’s Content Aware Fill as an Invisibility Cloak in Car Commercials

Photoshop’s Content Aware Fill can do some pretty strange things to photographs when it doesn’t generate the desired result, but have you ever seen the bizarre things it can do when applied to video? The video above is one example.

It’s the work of artist Zach Nader, who applied Content Aware Fill to the frames of car commercials. Rather than carefully use the tool to mask out portions of the frames, he simply did quick deletions over cars, text, and people in the commercials to see what the Photoshop tool would produce.


(via John Nack)

  • Brian Fulda

    But seriously, why

  • Jim Macias

    It seems like stuff like this is mostly what I see on petapixel. People doing stuff because they can. Sure it looks kinda neat. But really forgettable.

  • bgrady413

    Wish I had this kind of time to waste, seriously, why?

  • incendiary

    Well it did just get Zach’s name out there and on a photo news/blog site and different gets you noticed I guess.

    I just poked through his website and pretty much all of his work is similar to this “why would you do that?” style. I really don’t get it either the more I think about it. It’s like when you’re walking through the art gallery and you get to some film piece being project in a dark room that makes no sense so you watch for a while hoping to get some sort of meaning, but you eventually leave frustrated and annoyed.

  • Eugene Chok

    um if i make a predator parody or homage i think this will be useful, something along those lines

  • doug

    OH MY GOD!!! This is sensational. First CC, then hack stealing out CC details, now THIS?? This is outrageous! I say we boycott Photoshop and start using… ummmmm…. something else!!

  • amokio

    Waste of time

  • dodude

    hope it was a chebby ad

  • gl√łg

    It’s called creativity. Seems to be a unique concept for most posters on this site.

  • Adam Cross

    But seriously, why not? I bet you do things in your spare time that could be considered pointless, too.

  • Hans B

    Actually, it’s a nice experimentation. And I’m pretty sure it’s what the artist wanted to do, try something. You don’t have to get a finish product everytime you do something! This is neat, and it gives ideas to people who see it! That’s the main goal, to me.

  • Oneb

    Totally agree!!

  • markz

    oh bags on this to be able to use it to show to people who wonder why it takes so long to clone out major objects. and particularly to those smart arses who say something like “you know they have autofill now”
    a number of my traditional festival shoots have images that I’ve had to take as much as 30 hours (each image) and being a non full time photog that means an easy week’s worth of work to get a convincing print/web ready image.

  • pared jolin

    something is terribly wrong if that much cloning is regularly required for concert web pics. there is no money in that kind of work for a reason. the bar is insanely low, and anyone can get those shots. either learn how to shoot to avoid these issues or take a workshop. you are wasting way too much time for the “tee-ball” of photography genres.

  • John Lanford

    why not. who know what you might move on to next..what you might Ok Ok,,stick with what you know. MTV changed editing forever. remember that.

  • John Lanford


  • Jeramy Murray

    a real invisibility cloak has a higher refresh rate.

  • NancyP

    I like the dancing buildings.