|
joelcamefalling posted:Half a second in lightroom I don't use Lightroom so i don't have a Clarity slider, Grad ND filters, or film grain built in. quote:Clarity+contrast sliders, sharpness panel, desat. One thing to note, and this holds true for SilverEfx and HDREfx too, is that what you see is only a starting point and shouldn't be your end product. It's never going to look perfect in the preview. You start with the preview then start tweaking the settings and applying the filter selectively throughout the frame. Either way, I do think ColorEfx is not their strongest product. It's nice to have and can be useful, but it's not a must have. Haggins fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Jul 5, 2011 |
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 07:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
XTimmy posted:I'm trying to blend this joelcamefalling posted: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. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 10:53 on Jul 5, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 10:51
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I don't use Lightroom so i don't have a Clarity slider, Grad ND filters, or film grain built in. I tried both colorfine and silverfx with lightroom open, trying to do similar effects in both. The Nik software allowed me to take certain effects further than in lightroom, but it was past the point I thought was visually appealing. My conclusion was that lightroom gives me all the control I needed, and I uninstalled the Nik software. Not saying it isn't useful, those without strong post ideas probably gain a lot from the presets giving you starting points, but for someone already happy with lightroom, hopefully my viewpoint is helpful in figuring out that it's not really adding anything you're missing currently.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 11:14
|
|
|
I actually use CS5 and not Lightroom, so the Efex stuff might make more sense in my case
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 12:54
|
|
|
The poster for the new movie "Captain America" has me intrigued. What did they do to get this look ? I have tried adding a B/W sharpened high pass filtered version of a portrait on top of itself with layer mode set to hard light. It's getting there but not quite. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2011 22:19
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:The poster for the new movie "Captain America" has me intrigued. What did they do to get this look ? Copy the (CTRL-click) luminosity over in channels, bring it back to layers, paste onto a blank layer, crush it with sharpening.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2011 22:55
|
|
|
Does anyone have a good way of batch color correcting photos of the same subject, shot under different lighting conditions (either in ACR or PS)? I'm thinking something like: 1). I have a master image (of a marble statue) that has correct color balance, I place color samplers on a highlight, midtone, and shadow 2). I repeat the process for all the other images in the set 3). The color curves of the other images are adjusted so that the values at their markers are the same as on the master image. Photoshop seems to be able to do this by itself in it's photomerge function, based on the values of overlapping parts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2011 03:51
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:The poster for the new movie "Captain America" has me intrigued. What did they do to get this look ? I can't stand this super-sharp look; all of the promo pictures of the dwarves from The Hobbit are like this, too. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2011 11:29
|
|
|
Has anyone used the Jeff Ascough's actions for BW conversion? A couple of people I know are asking about them. Also: Has anyone got a suggestion for an up to date version of the book in the OP, something that covers both Lightroom and Photoshop? delicious beef fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Jul 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2011 12:33
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:The poster for the new movie "Captain America" has me intrigued. What did they do to get this look ?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
Oh, Lightroom   One exposure. No brush tool. Just fill light, little bit of exposure boost, and sliders to the LEFT (left is the new right) on blue/purple (saturation and luminance both greatly reduced). Yellow had luminance increased and saturation decreased. Oh, Lightroom. Oh, RAW. anabatica fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Jul 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 16:28
|
|
|
anabatica posted:Oh, Lightroom Looks great, but where did the lower left and right part of the image come from on the edited version? Or is it some kind of a cropped view we are looking at? (I have never used Lightroom).
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 17:54
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:The poster for the new movie "Captain America" has me intrigued. What did they do to get this look ? It's mostly lighting, but it also looks to me like a decent amount of dodge and burn for contrast and obviously his skin, hair, etc. has been cleaned up a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 18:21
|
|
|
anabatica posted:Oh, Lightroom
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 19:48
|
|
|
Ringo R posted:Looks great, but where did the lower left and right part of the image come from on the edited version? Or is it some kind of a cropped view we are looking at? (I have never used Lightroom). Yea it's cropped and the before/after in Lightroom shows the before shot cropped, not uncropped. But since I did perspective correction, they don't contain all of the same pixels.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 21:48
|
|
|
Did not see a hardware thread here, so figured I would ask in this one. Considering purchasing a 27" iMac to replace my aging setup (E6600 with 4 gig ram, Win7, 20" and 21" monitors, one IPS) and get a little more processing speed in Lightroom 3. There are two versions I am looking at and that is the 2.8GHz i5 with Radeon 6770M gfx, and the other (around 2500 SEK more) is the 3.1GHz i5 with the 6970M card. I am aware these are not very exciting cards, so was wondering if the more expensive one is worth the extra dough; would like to do some light weight gaming (mostly play games a few years old so no need to run BF3 in full res at 100fps or anything), but mostly image editing and general browsing. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
You'll get a better answer if you ask in the SHSC Mac Hardware thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2011 23:43
|
|
|
So I spent several hours this afternoon editing a batch of photos in lightroom. Then as I was doing a final pass scrapping a few sub-par shots before exporting, I went to scrap one shot but accidentally sent the entire folder to the recycle bin.  I can restore them to the original folder but of course all the work I'd done is gone. Is there any way of recovering or will I have to start over?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 09:59
|
|
|
How did you bin the folder?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 10:20
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:So I spent several hours this afternoon editing a batch of photos in lightroom. Then as I was doing a final pass scrapping a few sub-par shots before exporting, I went to scrap one shot but accidentally sent the entire folder to the recycle bin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 10:20
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:How did you bin the folder? I'd selected them all ready to export. I thought I was just deleting the one I had on-screen but as it turns out I deleted the whole selection. Ric posted:Edit > Undo? Undo was greyed out. Pretty sure I'm boned. So many hours work gone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 10:51
|
|
|
I've just started doing a bit of post-processing in Photoshop CS4. This quote is from the Snapshot a Day thread and got me thinking (it's not addressed to me): nonanone posted:These really hurt my eyes. Like cause pain. And I don't even mind heavy handed processing when it's handled right (I like your other photos). I'd suggest not looking at these for a week and then coming back to them. Sometimes it's too easy to push it a little too far when you're all excited about the photos. The monitor I'm viewing these photos, and editing them, on is a 24" Samsung 2693HM. It's big and bright. Since I stare at it all day, I have the brightness at 15, much lower than my home monitor. I went back and looked at some of the photos I worked on with the brightness turned up (used auto and it's at 47). Problem is, I can't tell because the monitor itself is so bright it hurts my eyes. Other than cropping and rotating images, I've been using adjustment layers>levels (auto) & photo filter (either cool or warm) as well as either filter>unsharpen mask or high pass. This is all based off of a basic tutorial I found. Here are a couple of the images:   *   *   Am I making my images too "harsh" when I post-process them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2011 19:01
|
|
|
Pope Mobile posted:I've just started doing a bit of post-processing in Photoshop CS4. I wouldn't say so. It looks like pretty conservative post-processing if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2011 22:53
|
|
|
Has anyone here used DxO on both a Mac and PC? If so, was the Mac version noticeably slower when loading corrections and displaying images? My old computer is a 2-3 year old Dell - paid $1000 at the time, nothing special. When I scrolled from image to image, it displayed the corrected image almost immediately. I recently upgraded to a 27" iMac - the $2000 standard model, plus an extra 8 gigs of ram. When I scroll from image to image, there is a delay of 3-5 seconds while DxO renders the corrected image. I assume the problem is that DxO is better optimized for Windows, but I'm new to this whole Mac thing and openly admit I could be missing something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2011 03:24
|
|
|
I'm trying to process some pictures I took on my camping holiday with my family, and I'd like some feedback before I continue with the whole batch. I'm trying to go for a softer, warmer look, and I'm pretty happy with what I've got so far, but I'd like some objective opinions on the processing before I continue. Does this style work? IMG_0035 by bernsai, on Flickr  IMG_0033-2 by bernsai, on Flickr  IMG_0028-3 by bernsai, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2011 04:17
|
|
|
I really love that type of look. The first one looks great, the second kind of gives me an "incorrect white balance out of camera" feel for some reason though. The third one also kind of leans in that direction. I'm trying to narrow it down and pinpoint what it is about it, and I think it's got something to do with the amount of red in your subjects' skin. That probably sounds really dumb, but I think that's what is throwing me. I could be completely wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2011 06:44
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I really love that type of look. The first one looks great, the second kind of gives me an "incorrect white balance out of camera" feel for some reason though. The third one also kind of leans in that direction. I see what you mean about the second and third. They seem almost too magenta to me now, but the white balance settings are the same as the first one, so I'm not sure why that is. I did some split toning with a purple/magenta cast to the shadows, so maybe those pictures have more shadow areas and that's why it seems off? The guys in the off-looking ones also have way more of a tan than the girl in the first one, so it could be that they do have more red in their skin. I'll fiddle with them a bit more. Thanks for taking a look at them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2011 21:07
|
|
|
Everything feels kinda flat, which I find happens in most raw images straight out of the camera. I'd pull up the exposure up a tad and add a little bit more saturation. You could also desaturate if that's your thing, I just don't like where it is right now. Also, I think your photos could benefit from a vignette to smooth out the corners and define the frame a little bit more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2011 05:24
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Everything feels kinda flat, which I find happens in most raw images straight out of the camera. I'd pull up the exposure up a tad and add a little bit more saturation. You could also desaturate if that's your thing, I just don't like where it is right now. Also, I think your photos could benefit from a vignette to smooth out the corners and define the frame a little bit more. Thanks for the feedback. I actually prefer them with a bit more exposure, but I wasn't sure if I was going too far, so I'll up that a bit. I'll see what happens when I saturate them a bit more, and try them with a bit of vignetting as well. Thanks guys!
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2011 05:30
|
|
|
You've got plenty of room to go before you hit 255 white on any of those highlights so you should be able to crank it up another stop or so..
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 06:42
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:You've got plenty of room to go before you hit 255 white on any of those highlights so you should be able to crank it up another stop or so.. Sweet, thanks. I made a pre-set that I applied to a bunch of photos, and even with some tweaking on individual photos, I'm not entirely happy with the outcome on a lot of them. I don't like how it works so well on some photos, but looks like poo poo on other ones. It's quite frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 06:56
|
|
|
If you're using Lightroom, hit the little button on the top right corner of the histogram to shot any blown-out highlights. They'll show up in red. The upper left corner shows black. Or you can just hover over it and it will show it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 13:15
|
|
|
And hitting "J" is a shortcut to show you both.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 14:18
|
|
|
Any good deals or coupons right now for Lightroom? Cheapest I found so far was on Amazon for $179.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 16:27
|
|
|
teamgod posted:Any good deals or coupons right now for Lightroom? Cheapest I found so far was on Amazon for $179. Are you a student, or friends with anybody who is a student?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 16:31
|
|
|
I'm not a student, however my wife will be next month when she starts classes. What sort of info do I need to get student discounts? Institute name and student ID? She probably has a student ID already, now that I think about it. Edit: looks like I'm good to go with this actually as she already has her official documents, just no valid photo student ID yet. We can simply use another photo ID and a photocopy of her document. I guess my next question is what is the difference between the full version and the student version? teamgod fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Aug 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:And hitting "J" is a shortcut to show you both. Yeah, I usually check to see if I've got any blown out/black areas, but I didn't want to rely on that. To me, some images appear to bright even without blown out areas, though the ones I posted could have used an exposure boost. My monitor is not properly calibrated though, so I guess that's a pretty poor way of evaluating things then. Do you guys typically just bump your exposure until you're right under blowing out highlights?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 16:46
|
|
|
Depends. Sometimes it just looks completely wrong. An outdoorsy daylight scene though, yes, I would probably push until I just blow-out. And sometimes if more detail is required, I blow it out anyway and then use the recovery slider a bit. I do deliberately blow specular highlights though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 17:37
|
|
|
Anyone have experience using Aperture on one of the new MacBook Airs? I'm currently on a 4 year old MBP (2.5ghz, 4gb Ram), and I'm thinking about something smaller and lighter for my next computer when this one craps out. A 13" MBP would obviously be an upgrade in performance and be a little smaller, but I'm wondering if I could get away with the 13" Air. I'm guessing it might have similar performance to what I have now? I don't do much video work or play fancy-shmancy games, so Aperture is pretty much the most demanding thing I would use it for. I'd sometimes have an external monitor hooked up if that makes a difference for performance (not sure how much Aperture is limited by RAM or the video card?)
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
teethgrinder posted:Depends. Sometimes it just looks completely wrong. An outdoorsy daylight scene though, yes, I would probably push until I just blow-out. And sometimes if more detail is required, I blow it out anyway and then use the recovery slider a bit. I see. I will continue to play around then! Thanks 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 17:55
|
|