|
The detail is lost in this particular JPEG. You can make her darker, but instead of a bright white blob she'll be a dull gray blob. Do you have the original RAW file? There might be some hope if that's the case, but even then I wouldn't expect any sort of miracle.
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2011 23:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:48 |
|
|
Yea of course I have the original raw file. I was thinking copying it, dropping the exposure/brightness and maybe adjusting the highlights then exposure merging just for her.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2011 23:11
|
|
|
Auditore posted:Yea of course I have the original raw file. I was thinking copying it, dropping the exposure/brightness and maybe adjusting the highlights then exposure merging just for her. Ignore the rest of the photo and try to pull detail back in her. If you can then great something can be done, if you can't, well then you are SOL.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2011 05:32
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I am never happy with BW conversions. I just use desaturation in LR3 and adjust contrast and black levels. Auditore posted:Yea of course I have the original raw file. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jun 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2011 13:25
|
|
|
I feel like a total dumbass for not knowing about this before. Behold, the clone source panel: http://www.petapixel.com/2011/06/21/using-the-photoshop-clone-source-panel/
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2011 15:56
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I feel like a total dumbass for not knowing about this before. I loving love you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 01:09
|
|
|
Very cool, the ability to flip your clone on the fly is a great time saver.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 01:54
|
|
|
Please, someone else who is a photoshop expert tell me they also were unaware of this panel? I feel like I need to turn in my card or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 11:41
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I feel like a total dumbass for not knowing about this before. This is totally sweet 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 13:50
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Please, someone else who is a photoshop expert tell me they also were unaware of this panel? I feel like I need to turn in my card or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 16:03
|
|
|
I knew about it, but only because I went into the Window menu and decided to check out every tab that I didn't immediately recognize just to see what they did a while ago. But its not like I had it in my bag of tricks for years though. I'm also don't consider myself any sort of expert compared to everyone here, I'm just naturally curious 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 17:17
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Please, someone else who is a photoshop expert tell me they also were unaware of this panel? I feel like I need to turn in my card or something. That panel (and other clone stamp updates) was pretty much the reason to buy CS4  . Every time I have to work with <CS4 I go crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
I have a watermark question. I never watermark my photos but I shot a roller derby bout on the weekend and the league asked that I watermark each photo with the league's website address and my name. The type of watermark I want to add is a thin black box along the bottom of the image with the website address inside that black box. I would prefer to add this box to the image dimensions rather than paste it over top the image. There are about 100 photos, so I'm wondering if this is something that can be done as a batch, or if I'm going to have to do each image individually. I have Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS4 (I think it's CS4, I don't use Photoshop much. It's a newer version anyway).
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 18:30
|
|
|
I think mogrify will do exactly what you want, but it's been a while since I fired it up so hopefully I'm not way off base. It's a lightroom export filter so you should be able to run all the photos through there at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 18:34
|
|
|
You could probably do a photoshop action? The only thing is that it'll be exactly in the same spot and you would have to separate portrait/landscape shots depending on the location of the watermark. I think you could also turn your watermark into a brush and just do that too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:I'm not an expert, but I think I've spent more time using the clone tool than I have holding my camera and I never knew about it. Yeah, I didn't know about it and I've been using photoshop since around 2003 (though back then it was for web design/signatures for forums, but I still did use the clone tool.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 00:58
|
|
|
If I have like 30 portrait shots on a plain white background, and the model is wearing a white t-shirt ( ), what is my simplest (least time consuming) method of cleanly changing the background colour to something else on all of them?I feel like there must be a simpler way to do this than my ghetto techniques.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 13:47
|
|
|
Do a clipping path. Or send it to India and pay some guy a few cents to do a clipping path.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 15:32
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I think mogrify will do exactly what you want, but it's been a while since I fired it up so hopefully I'm not way off base. It's a lightroom export filter so you should be able to run all the photos through there at the same time. This actually worked out pretty well. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 20:12
|
|
|
Anybody have any idea what sort of PP is involved in these shots? I really like this style. All I can seem to point out is that there's some split-toning going on with plenty of contrast and sharpness. http://www.flickr.com/photos/marenk/5590545496 http://www.flickr.com/photos/marenk/5787120846
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
Shoot things with back light and move sliders to right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 23:16
|
|
|
Sometimes when I'm in Lightroom and I have a stack of a few photos, say a raw file and a jpeg of the same image, it doesn't expand the stack automatically, or even when I tell it to. I want to select the jpeg, but it's hidden under the raw file and I can't get at it! Usually they're displayed side by side so I can choose either. This happens randomly and I want to know if it's something I'm doing wrong or just LR screwing up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Shoot things with back light and move sliders to right. Which sliders, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 15:36
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Sometimes when I'm in Lightroom and I have a stack of a few photos, say a raw file and a jpeg of the same image, it doesn't expand the stack automatically, or even when I tell it to. I want to select the jpeg, but it's hidden under the raw file and I can't get at it! Usually they're displayed side by side so I can choose either. How are you telling it? Should be a simple click of the "1 of X" badge in the top left.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 15:37
|
|
|
teamgod posted:Which sliders, exactly? Fill light. Though I prefer using the curves, darks up, shadows down a bit, to maintain contrast, but you can use curves and fill light in conjunction.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
There also appears to be a texture applied to the first image, though it just makes the trees look noisy as gently caress as if from excessive fill, not to mention what it does to the sky. Dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
teamgod posted:Which sliders, exactly? It looks like almost all of them. Fill light, saturation, contrast, clarity, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 18:30
|
|
|
scottch posted:How are you telling it? Should be a simple click of the "1 of X" badge in the top left. Yeah, I tried that, but didn't work. It appears to only happen when I have just imported photos, or use "previous import" in the library. If I go to the actual full folder, everything works fine. I assume because the duplicate photos are not actually located in the previous import catalog.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
I'm trying to blend this with this  In order to get rid of that horrendous blank background which was unavoidable on the day. Unfortunately blending using Blend if isn't really working because of the horrendous and apparently unremoveable aberration around the branches top left. Even in the low Q jpegs I've put up they're pretty obvious and I'm having real trouble getting the background to sit in nicely around them. Is there an easy solution or am I going to have to mask it out manually? I know I need to adjust the exposure of the sky layer a bit and I've tried masking it out via color but nothing looks natural. There's always hot lines around the branches. EDIT: Defringe in lightroom seemed to help a little with the edges, the mask is still pretty rough though. XTimmy fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Jul 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2011 13:13
|
|
|
What about ditching the branches entirely, and the white thing on the right side? I did a quick test and it looked nice, though I was too lazy to properly mask the woman.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2011 13:24
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:What about ditching the branches entirely, and the white thing on the right side? I did a quick test and it looked nice, though I was too lazy to properly mask the woman. Tempted but alot of the other photos in the set revolve around her being inside this little area looking out. I've got it up to an acceptable standard through some careful masking now so I'm relatively happy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:I'm trying to blend this Try putting the sky image on the bottom, and the woman on the top, in a multiply layer. Works well. Then you just need to do some quick masking of the horizon, and her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 12:17
|
|
|
I ran into this guy on flickr, and it looks like he's living the dream of taking pictures of cute scene girls. I was wondering, how do you get that vintage processing look that he uses for a lot of these photos? It looks like he's shooting directly into the light to blow out the image on purpose, but is there any split toning or action that I'm not seeing that he's using? his flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/willteeyang/
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 15:50
|
|
|
Chim posted:I ran into this guy on flickr, and it looks like he's living the dream of taking pictures of cute scene girls. I was wondering, how do you get that vintage processing look that he uses for a lot of these photos? It looks like he's shooting directly into the light to blow out the image on purpose, but is there any split toning or action that I'm not seeing that he's using? Looks like some of the filters in ColorEfx Pro. Maybe Cross Processing or Bi-Color Filters. It's possible to do in Photoshop but ColorEfx is the easier/better way. Here is a preview of the effects: http://www.niksoftware.com/colorefexpro/usa/entry.php?view=intro/cep3_filters.shtml The effects are highly customizable so it may not look exactly like what that guy did until you do some tweaking.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 18:14
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Looks like some of the filters in ColorEfx Pro. Maybe Cross Processing or Bi-Color Filters. It's possible to do in Photoshop but ColorEfx is the easier/better way. these look great. looks like a sale for the complete edition at 99 bucks, worth the money?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
Your other option is their complete collection for $300, assuming you have Lightroom or Aperture. (You can also try searching online for coupons.) Dfine is an excellent de-noising tool that allows you to be more selective rather than just processing the entire image. I find it generally works better than what's built into Lightroom 3 anyway. Viveza allows you to make Lightroom-like corrections/adjustments by region rather than affecting the entire image. A lot of people swear by Silver Efex for their B&W conversions. HDR Efex is useful if you want to do HDR and don't already have a method to do so. I don't have any experience with Sharpener Pro yet. Search this stuff on YouTube and Google though to see what people are doing with it, and how quickly they work. edit: Dfine before & afters:   HDR Efex:  I should probably give Color Efex another go. teethgrinder fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Jul 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 20:15
|
|
|
Chim posted:these look great. looks like a sale for the complete edition at 99 bucks, worth the money? I'd agree with teethgrinder in that it's best just to get the complete collection and like he said you can google around for a 20-25% coupon. Just to add a couple things Silver Efex is the absolute best way to do digital black and white and I think HDR Efx is the best HDR tool out there. Sharpener is cool too because it takes out the guess work of sharpening for viewing distance and allows you to selectively sharpen. Check out their website, they have a lot of great webinars that show you how to use them all and what you can do with them. Also, each plugin has a 30 day trial.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 22:26
|
|
|
Silver Efex + Color Efex for $179, but expires tomorrow. Damnit, I don't want to decide yet  I've still got 2 weeks to get Silver Efex for $99 as a student, Color is probably worth it, but I'm moving and just bought a Hasselblad and a new lens for my NEX. Maybe I'll just put it on the plastic. Procrastinating until tomorrow in hopes someone chimes in telling me Color Efex is the best thing ever and I'd be as dumb as a Pollack not to buy it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
Some of the filters in ColorEfx can be gimmicky if you over use them, but there are some that are very useful and not at all gimmicky. Some of the more useful ones are: 1. Darken/Lighten Center. It's kind of like a vignette (which I use in Aperture to some degree on almost every photo) but a lot stronger. Great to use when you want a lot of focus on a certain area of the photo. Doesn't have to be the actual center, you can place center anywhere. You could do the same thing in photoshop, but I heard it takes a long time. 2. Pro Contrast. You really have to play with this to see, but basically it's great for making textures pop. It does a lot more than the contrast slider in LR/PS. 3. Film Grain. This is one of those subtle effects that make a big difference. Sometimes digital is just too "clean" and you don't get that feeling you get with old film photos. With this you can add it back in. It's kinda like a vignette in that it's subtle but makes a big impact. 4. Graduated ND. Made to replicate the filter except more useful because you have more control. 5. Monday Morning/Classic Soft Focus/High Key - each a bit different but great for portraits when you want an "airy" "dreamy" look. Lowkey and Midnight are also there if you want to do the opposite. 6. Film Effects. I'm not the film expert but from my understanding, these are pretty accurate. These weren't made by a bunch of interns eyeballing photos and trying to match up the features. The were made by a team of engineers in Germany that processed hundreds, maybe thousands of rolls to develop the software (same goes for SilverEfx). Other than that, I still wouldn't go as far to say that the others are gimmicky and useless. The more I use ColorEfx, the more I understand what filters work with what photos. It's just a matter of learning how to use them correctly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 04:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:48 |
|
|
Haggins posted:1. Darken/Lighten Center. It's kind of like a vignette Haggins posted:4. Graduated ND. Haggins posted:3. Film Grain. Half a second in lightroom Haggins posted:2. Pro Contrast. You really have to play with this to see, but basically it's great for making textures pop. It does a lot more than the contrast slider in LR/PS. Clarity slider. Haggins posted:5. Monday Morning/Classic Soft Focus/High Key - each a bit different but great for portraits when you want an "airy" "dreamy" look. Lowkey and Midnight are also there if you want to do the opposite. Clarity+contrast sliders, sharpness panel, desat. (Personally, I think these filters look pretty terrible on their own, and I'd much rather spend the time with some selective sharpening/dodging/burning if that's a look I want.) Haggins posted:6. Film Effects. I'm not the film expert but from my understanding, these are pretty accurate. These weren't made by a bunch of interns eyeballing photos and trying to match up the features. The were made by a team of engineers in Germany that processed hundreds, maybe thousands of rolls to develop the software (same goes for SilverEfx). For this kind of thing, I can definitely see the value in third party filters. Sure, you could duplicate in with a PS action or whatever, but that seems like a bunch of work for not much gain. The results some of the guys in here have gotten with the Nik presets are stunning.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 05:34
|
|
