|
Thanks for the advice. I'm very new to Lightroom (3.5) and CS5 - is there a easy way to segregate the saturation on items in a photo (eg. only select the elephant and increase saturation) ?
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 14:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:44 |
|
|
scottch posted:Just desaturate the yellows a little. And after that, clone out the wire and post at the bottom of the image. Edit: If you are using CS, you can use masks to select what you want and work on it that way. Sevn fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Nov 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 15:04
|
|
|
wizard sticks posted:Thanks for the advice. I'm very new to Lightroom (3.5) and CS5 - is there a easy way to segregate the saturation on items in a photo (eg. only select the elephant and increase saturation) ? 1. Create adjustment brush 2. Fiddle with saturation level for the brush 3. Draw where you want that saturation level to take effect The fun part of Lightroom is that you can do parts 2 & 3 in whatever order you want.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 16:25
|
|
|
I've got a Mac. Should I be thinking Aperture 3 for $180 or Lightroom 3 for $80?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
Isn't the pricing the other way around? (Not a Mac guy)
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:I've got a Mac. Should I be thinking Aperture 3 for $180 or Lightroom 3 for $80? There's no one answer because it's a personal preference kind of thing. Both have 30 day trials, download both and pick whichever you like more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 21:20
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:Isn't the pricing the other way around? (Not a Mac guy) Actually, I just figured out I can get Aperture for $80 as well. (my school has a discounted site license for lightroom)
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
I thought Aperture was like $80 on the Mac App Store anyway, for a full license.Martytoof posted:There's no one answer because it's a personal preference kind of thing. Both have 30 day trials, download both and pick whichever you like more. I've never used Aperture myself, but Lightroom is less "the Adobe way" than all their other products for what it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 22:06
|
|
|
 The yellow streaks of grass above the dog are way too prevalent in this photo. What's the approach to reduce this effect? Color curves? Saturation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 00:47
|
|
|
I'd probably try to go into Photoshop and do a yellow desaturation with a gradient mask that ends just above the dog so you don't desaturate the dog.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 00:54
|
|
|
Probably easier to just put the grass on a new layer in Photoshop and then play with its yellow hue/saturation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 06:59
|
|
|
What's the best way to subtlety blend different shades of backgrounds? It makes more sense if i show you.  I want them all to basically look like they were all on the same background, seamless. Should I just be dodge/burning to a point where i'm happy? Should there be layer blending going on?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 09:27
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:What's the best way to subtlety blend different shades of backgrounds?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
quazi posted:Lightroom: It's much easier than this; 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
IsaacNewton posted:It's much easier than this; Check out using that little circle doodad in the saturation section. That's how I do it for specific areas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 21:47
|
|
|
IsaacNewton posted:It's much easier than this; Masking can be a pain though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 23:33
|
|
|
I guess this isn't a particularly interesting photo, but think this processing is okay? Flickr page:  Still life by markosaar, on Flickr The flowers look great to me on some monitors but just a giant yellow blob on others 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
It's a bit of a blob on my monitor, can't see the borders between some of the petals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2011 00:34
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:The flowers look great to me on some monitors but just a giant yellow blob on others The thumbnail is just a blob, the top right one has discernable petals. Try lowering the contrast for just the flowers, then compensate with increased saturation. ETA: Something like this (overlay high pass sharpening helps too) 
Cross_ fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Nov 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
Still blown away by what you can in under 60 seconds in Lightroom 50mm @ 1/100 f/1.4 ISO 3200
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2011 13:42
|
|
|
You're like a reverse terrible photographer who slapped on a weird purple filter onto a good photograph.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2011 14:43
|
|
|
A few neat tutorials. http://night-fate.deviantart.com/gallery/176415 I'm not a huge fan of the "composite elements to make a new picture", but some of the colour adjustment tutorials are right up my alley.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2011 23:25
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:http://night-fate.deviantart.com/gallery/176415 How do you learn to do these kinds of weird color adjustments without feeling guilty? Whenever I try dropping colored gradients or split toning I feel like the photography police is going to show up any minute for ruining a perfectly fine source image. Also while the end results of the tutorials look fine the in-between steps don't. For example how does one come up with the idea of putting a purple layer in exclusion mode over a picture ? By itself that looks pretty horrible and only several layers later does it get tempered into something attractive. Just to clarify- there is absolutely no difference between Fill & Opacity sliders unless Layer Styles are involved. Correct ?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 12:14
|
|
|
Well in my case, most of the time the source image isn't "perfectly fine", it's "flat and boring" Can't really answer the rest since I'm still learning myself. I guess it's just a matter of experience. Once you're familiar enough with blending styles you can probably predict what each will look like, and even if you can't, there's something to be said for just experimenting. I guess that's why even if some of those tutorials are lame effects that I'll never use, it's a nice exercise in getting me to think outside the box 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 13:34
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Well in my case, most of the time the source image isn't "perfectly fine", it's "flat and boring" Yeah, I ran through one and ended up going on a tangent and really improving the image I was testing out. That's the thing that a lot of actions/tutorials gloss over is knowing what works for what kind of image. I wish there was more "oh hey, this image has a lot of yellows and a good way to take advantage of that is to push the colour balance this way etc." rather than just reeling off a bunch of numbers to copy
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:16
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Yeah, I ran through one and ended up going on a tangent and really improving the image I was testing out. This would be so extremely helpful. I especially love following a tutorial for an image and then yours comes out looking like complete poo because the overall colour balance/contrast/brightness etc of your original image was totally different. I guess that's where I kind of need to make my own decisions, but it's hard when I have no idea!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:This would be so extremely helpful. I especially love following a tutorial for an image and then yours comes out looking like complete poo because the overall colour balance/contrast/brightness etc of your original image was totally different. I guess that's where I kind of need to make my own decisions, but it's hard when I have no idea! The linked tutorials are sort of okay for that - just at every level where she just tells you the colour balance or curves adjustments just tweak them for yourselves too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:49
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:The linked tutorials are sort of okay for that - just at every level where she just tells you the colour balance or curves adjustments just tweak them for yourselves too. That's pretty sweet...tbh I didn't even look at them :P But I should probably get some work done today at my actual job, so I will take a look tonight!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
That's what bothers me about a lot of people who sell presets too. You can't just click a button and expect your photo to look like Kodachrome or something. There's got to be some basic level of manual tweaking because not all photos have the same tones 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 18:03
|
|
|
omg it's just like film, sooo dreamy
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:That's what bothers me about a lot of people who sell presets too. You can't just click a button and expect your photo to look like Kodachrome or something. There's got to be some basic level of manual tweaking because not all photos have the same tones It's a really frustrating business model for me personally just because they're not selling knowledge, just a magic button. People make MAD cash out of it. I use a mix of actions I've bastardised and created just to get me in a ballpark and from there it's individual tweaking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:It's a really frustrating business model for me personally just because they're not selling knowledge, just a magic button. People make MAD cash out of it. To be fair it also must be pretty frustrating for them that people like me have 5k worth of their actions and have not paid a cent
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 06:45
|
|
|
Hot Cops posted:To be fair it also must be pretty frustrating for them that people like me have 5k worth of their actions and have not paid a cent haha. It's crazy how photography distorts the value of nearly everything. I don't mind teenagers selling their action packs to flickr friends for 20 bucks or something, but the companies that industrialise it and sell 200 dollar action packs - I mean once you know what goes into them it's fairly easy to replicate them and build your own. That's why I think night elf or whoever gets a lot of credit because 99 out of 100 people would just sell their actions to the adoring masses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 11:39
|
|
|
I'm still really terrible with how much functionality I can get out of Photoshop, and I'm struggling with this: How do I get multiple layers with masks to show up properly? I find that if I make a duplicate background layer, then mask something off and make some changes to certain areas, I can't figure out how to mask off another section to make different kinds of changes. It always just fucks up the mask of the second one if I duplicate the 2nd background layer, or fucks up the first mask if I duplicate the first background layer. I end up having to merge or flatten the image and then start from scratch. herp derp.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:How do I get multiple layers with masks to show up properly? By 'gently caress up' do you mean the edges are harsher? If you have a masked object the edges are (probably) partially transparent. If you duplicate that layer then the edges add up and seem less transparent giving you a harder edge. You really shouldn't be having any masked edges that are overlapping though; Most changes can be made with masked adjustment layers and even those can be isolated to masked raster layers by clicking the overlapping circles in the adjustment layer toolbox.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:I'm still really terrible with how much functionality I can get out of Photoshop, and I'm struggling with this: How do I get multiple layers with masks to show up properly? I find that if I make a duplicate background layer, then mask something off and make some changes to certain areas, I can't figure out how to mask off another section to make different kinds of changes. It always just fucks up the mask of the second one if I duplicate the 2nd background layer, or fucks up the first mask if I duplicate the first background layer. I end up having to merge or flatten the image and then start from scratch. What sort of changes are you making? If you're doing adjustments like levels, curves, saturation, etc., use adjustment layers. Just use a soft brush to mask out the areas you do not want affected by your adjustments. All very non-destructible and easy to modify later. scottch fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Nov 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
Hover over the border between the right side of the border of the two layers and alt click when you see the clasped rings. This will piggyback the adjustment to the layer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 18:39
|
|
|
scottch posted:What sort of changes are you making? If you're doing adjustments like layers, curves, saturation, etc., use adjustment layers. Just use a soft brush to mask out the areas you do not want affected by your adjustments. All very non-destructible and easy to modify later. I work in a creative office and realized not everyone knows this. A fellow creative always destroyed images by not doing adjustment layers. Finally when it came time to work on a file she had been working on, I realized everything was flattened and I couldn't adjust anything. Luckily our production team saves original images just for moments like these.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 19:24
|
|
|
Amazon UK have Adobe Lightroom 3.0 for £119 (44% saving) in the Black Friday sales, starting in about half an hour. edit: God, they went quick. weapey fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Nov 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:44 |
|
|
scottch posted:What sort of changes are you making? If you're doing adjustments like levels, curves, saturation, etc., use adjustment layers. Just use a soft brush to mask out the areas you do not want affected by your adjustments. All very non-destructible and easy to modify later. Yeah, mostly just adjustments like that. I think I'm using adjustment layers, because they're non-destructive, but I dont think I was using them quite properly. I didn't know you could mask stuff off in the actual adjustment layer itself....duh. Seems quite obvious now! Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 17:54
|
|