removebgpictureStart
Two white camellias on a pale grey studio backdrop, before the background is removedBeforeAfter · PNG

Remove background around hair and fur

Keep every strand of hair.

Starts with soft edges, so hair and fur come out looking natural instead of cut with scissors.

or drop it here · paste with CtrlV

FreeFull sizeNo sign-up

Your browser does the cutting. There's no server on the other end.

No photo handy? · several photos at once open the batch queue

What this page does, in detail

The same studio, started at a wider band and a softer ramp — because the difference between a good cutout and a sticker is what happens in the two dozen pixels either side of the edge. Several at once open a ledger that starts on soft edges for the whole set and can measure them one by one instead.

The first cutout fits colour models to your own picture, with nothing downloaded, so it is at its best when subject and ground differ in colour or brightness. Fine hair against a busy background, glass, netting and motion blur come back rough — the brushes are the honest fix.

If the subject is a person, the Cut panel offers a network trained on people instead — 5.9 MB the first time you ask for it, kept in this browser afterwards, about 90 ms a picture (estimate, not yet timed on a named device for this site).

One picture opens the cutout studio; up to 25 at once open the ledger. JPG, PNG, WebP, GIF, BMP, ICO and AVIF read straight away (TIFF in Safari only); an iPhone HEIC pulls a decoder the first time one turns up.

Why a soft edge needs a wider question

Set edge detail to one and this page behaves like every other background remover: it makes a yes-or-no decision about every pixel and draws the line. On a handbag that is exactly right. On a person it produces a helmet — a head-shaped outline where the hair has been rounded either up to solid or down to gone, and the result has the flat, stuck-on quality that gives a cutout away in a fifth of a second.

This page starts at thirteen pixels and sixty percent feather. Thirteen pixels of band means the boundary is not a line but a strip, and inside that strip the guided filter re-reads the photograph at full resolution and lets its real edges decide how much of each pixel is hair. Sixty percent feather means the values it finds are left roughly as found rather than pushed toward nought or one. Both are starting positions and both are on the same two sliders as everywhere else on this site.

Working a portrait, in the order that works

Leave the band alone on the first pass and look at the silhouette. If the shape of the person is wrong — a hand missing, someone else included — that is a job for the keep and take-away brushes on the Refine panel, and no amount of edge work will fix it. Get the shape right first; the band only ever refines a boundary that is already roughly in the right place.

Then widen the band until strands appear and stop at the point where the background starts appearing with them. That point is different for every photograph, and it is usually a lot lower against a bookshelf than against a wall. Last, put the cutout on the near-black backing swatch and look at the crown: a pale halo there is the surest sign the band is wider than the photograph can support.

  • Similar tones beat this. The whole method rests on the subject and the ground being distinguishable by colour and contrast. Dark hair against a dark doorway gives it nothing to work with, and the honest result is a cutout that follows the head and loses everything loose around it.
  • Colour picked up from behind stays. A semi-transparent hair pixel is part background by definition. Fringe clean-up subtracts most of it, but against a busy background the estimate of “what was behind” is itself a guess, so a faint rim can survive, and the brush is the last resort.

What people ask about soft edges

Why does widening edge detail sometimes make it worse?

Because a wider band is a bigger question, not a better answer. Every pixel inside the strip is re-decided from the photograph's own contrast, so on a portrait against a plain wall a wide band finds real strands and keeps them. Against a patterned curtain, the same width hands the filter a strip full of edges that have nothing to do with the person, and it dutifully makes some of them semi-transparent. Wide bands want simple backgrounds.

What is feather doing that edge detail is not?

Edge detail decides how many pixels are allowed to be uncertain. Feather decides how that uncertainty is resolved — whether the values in the band get pushed toward a decision or left as the filter found them. At nought the ramp is steep and the cutout has a definite outline; at a hundred the ramp is left long and gentle, which reads as soft rather than as sharp-but-wrong. On hair you usually want both up.

There is a green tinge along the edge of the hair.

That is the background, still physically present in those pixels. A strand that covers a third of a pixel means two thirds of that pixel's colour came from whatever was behind it, and lifting it onto transparency carries that colour along. Estimating and subtracting it is what the fringe clean-up control on the Edge panel does: it takes the nearby fully-gone pixels as the background and solves each part-way pixel for the colour in front of it. Start around half and judge it on the near-black backing; the take-away brush is still there for what it cannot reach.

Does a bigger photo give better hair?

Up to a point, yes, and it is worth knowing why. The band is solved against the picture at its real resolution, so more pixels across a strand means more pixels that can be partly there. A subject under about three hundred pixels on its long edge has strands thinner than one pixel, and there is nothing for the band to resolve — it is a coarse mask with soft edges, which is not the same thing.

Nearby