Many people think that AI-powered isolation of the foreground from the background is always better, because it is faster. It seemed logical to me too, until I started doing it myself. When I worked with various photos, from simple product photos to images with flowing hair, glassware, and distracting backgrounds, I saw that speed is not the only criterion.
In specific scenarios, one can obtain a satisfactory result almost instantaneously. For example, when shooting at product photos against a plain background, an AI rarely makes any errors. However, in complex scenes where numerous objects obscure each other, and intricate details need extraction, manual editing still rules supreme.
The right solution is always chosen due to specific criteria, such as the level of detail, quality requirements, and time investment. Within the context of the current article, we will focus on finding out when it makes sense to use AI tools, when manual work is better, and how to choose the right approach.
Understanding AI's Current Limitations
AI background removal tools are much improved compared to a couple of years ago. They can be really helpful if you need some quick results without spending hours upon hours doing the task manually. In most occasions where I used one of those programs to scan the image prior to opening it in an editor, the quality was decent enough to not require any further work.
The moment things start getting complicated is when there is some fine detail on the edge of the figure that blends with the background. It can be really challenging to isolate individual hairs on a model’s head from the mass of other hairs surrounding it. Same goes for animal fur, tree leaves, delicate patterns on clothing, and things like that. Transparencies can also be an issue, especially if you have to deal with objects such as glass or plastic. In one of the cases, the program I used unsuccessfully isolated the object from the background by trying to preserve an area of clear plastic on a transparent surface.
Lastly, there is the problem of similar colors. With a white cat and a white couch, it might prove to be difficult to distinguish one from the other without cutting out random pieces of the background or missing the edges entirely.
When Complex Edges Demand Manual Work
Not all elements are that straightforward and can be refined with just a couple of clicks. Certain areas need the expertise of an experienced eye to ensure a proper result. As we discussed earlier, hair is not the only element that needs a careful touch, although it is the most apparent one. Chains, spokes of a bicycle and its wheels, transparent packaging, netted material, and glass items can have various imperfections that demand a skilled touch.
This is where manual editing becomes valuable. Software such as Photoshop or GIMP let you examine the hard parts of the image more closely and fix problems one area at a time. It usually is worth the extra work if the image is going to be used in some advertising, or in printed catalogues or product listings.
A good rule of thumb is to consider what one is going to use the image for. If it is to be enlarged, printed, or generally used somewhere else outside of casual display, one should put in the effort to edit individual pixels.
Is Manual Editing Worth the Extra Time?
Removal of the background manually is considerably time consuming as against the use of AI. The question is whether it is worth investing that much time and effort to get a fairly similar result. In other words, whether the effort put into manual editing is truly in demand or not.
Now the answer is, it all depends on how important your image is. If you need high-quality images for your hero section on the homepage, product images for luxury labels, print ads, logos, or packaging, the answer is most probably yes. These applications imply that the image is going to be seen by thousands of people, so it’s worth investing a little extra time and effort to make sure it looks perfect. However, if you are going to post images on social media networks, make a presentation for internal meetings, have a small-scale print run, or create product catalogues for a niche audience, the time spent on manual editing might not be worth the final result, as these audiences would not scrutinize every detail of your image.
Another way that can help you determine the need for manual editing is the value of the image itself. For this criterion, if the image has a certain value (i.e., it directly impacts sales, branding, and another metric), it should be manually edited. Otherwise, if it is informational, an AI-assisted procedure will suffice.
The Hybrid Approach: Best of Both Worlds
For some users, the choice between AI or manual background erasing will be not exclusive. Let’s consider a case when an image is edited with the help of both methods.
First, we need to use the AI-powered background eraser that will instantly take over and within several seconds give us the result. Then, we proceed to manual editing to enhance the output and make sure everything is perfect.
Doing the last stage manually is essential because, in some cases, the AI can make mistakes, especially if the image has something transparent or with fur or hair or anything else that the algorithm can have difficulty with. This way, instead of spending minutes or even hours trying to fix such flaws yourself, you can simply rely on the tool to fix 90% of the problems while you spend your time and effort on the remaining 10%.
One of the examples of the described method is as follows:
- Upload the image to an online background eraser
- Remove the background automatically
- View the image to check if there are any elements that should have been extracted but were left in the background
- Fix the issues using manual editing tools.
- Save the image
The example shows how simple it is to combine the efforts of an AI and human editor to get the desired result. The method is universal, effective, and saves a lot of time, thus finding application in numerous areas: from online shopping and design to marketing and social media.
Budget Considerations: Tools vs Hiring an Editor
In most cases, cost is one of the decisive factors when it comes to choosing between AI tools and professionals for editing photos. AI tools are typically much more budget-friendly. Their pricing is designed to work especially well with high-throughput, lower-value use cases, such as social media or product imagery. Hundreds or even thousands of images can be processed for a single subscription on an ongoing basis. This effectively dramatically reduces the cost per image. However, hiring a professional editor can also be more affordable, depending on the use case.
For example, if a company has a limited demand in high-quality visuals and only needs dozens of images processed at a time, then buying individual subscriptions may be more economical than investing in an AI subscription. Moreover, human editors can be better at certain types of editing tasks. It may be cheaper to outsource image processing to professionals in such cases. The cost of each edited visual is lower when it is processed by humans than when it is done with an AI tool.
Everything depends on scale, value, and processing time. In most cases, there is an optimal balance between cost and quality. A small online store will see much more value in using a budget AI tool and occasional manual editing than in outsourcing all image processing to professionals. By contrast, a well-established company with more demanding requirements, higher standards of quality, active advertising, and a catalog of high-resolution product images may be justified in their decision to hire a professional editor.
Scaling Up: When AI Becomes Necessary
Manual editing is great as long as you have a small number of products, however, as soon as you start scaling, it becomes a real issue.
Let’s say, you run an online store and you need to add hundreds of new products per month. If you spend several minutes on editing each image, you will get overwhelmed very quickly. Same goes for marketplaces, agencies, marketing teams, or any other companies that work with media content on a large scale.
This is where AI tools come to help because they let you make thousands of edits at once instead of spending days or even weeks doing it for a single product. Instead of having your team members spend their time on editing photos you could have them do things that require human skills and leave the tedious work to AI.
As you start to scale, the way you process your images changes as well. You might start with manual editing, then move to a hybrid system, and eventually embrace AI to be able to handle larger volumes of work.
The point is, unless you operate on a very large scale, it might be difficult to justify the costs associated with AI-based image editing solutions. In other words, there is no point in using AI if you only edit a few images per month.
Conclusion
The choice between AI and manual methods for background removal is not a matter of what is best. But rather, understanding which way would be more fitting for a certain task. Some tasks require fast processing while others need a bit more precision. Even the most simple product photo can be done in a matter of time by AI while a commercial photo might require additional manual work.
Look at what kind of work you do most often. If you have to process many photos, you need automation to save time and nerves. If quality is your priority, you can do the final editing manually. To get the best of two worlds, try BG Erasers to remove backgrounds first and then edit the photos as needed. This way, you will finish faster without sacrificing any quality.