If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
John McWilliams wrote:
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: Alfred Molon wrote: Just curious if anybody knows techniques to substantially enhance images taken under bad lighting or weather conditions. Seriously, Alfred, there are dozens of ways with Photoshop to move toward what I think you are getting at. Start with copying the bg layer, and run a few layer mask adjustments onto the copy and see what you come up with. Play with different opacity levels for those adjustments. Just for starters. Geez guys, don't make it so hard. I -almost routinely- jazz up dull-day images. When you visit Old Aunt Em in Ohio, perhaps for the last time, and the sun never shines all weekend, you do what pleases your audience. Stretch the bright up till the highlights almost blow out, drag the low end down to black, then play with the mid tones till it looks best. Perhaps add a little saturation to the color. Warm up the white balance. Presto! cloudy bright, altogether more cheerful. Result is not art, but a throw-away snapshot is quite possibly transformed into a treasured keepsake. What is the OP looking for? Maybe, just exactly this..... Ol' Bab |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
Ol' Bab wrote:
John McWilliams wrote: Alfred Molon wrote: Just curious if anybody knows techniques to substantially enhance images taken under bad lighting or weather conditions. Seriously, Alfred, there are dozens of ways with Photoshop to move toward what I think you are getting at. Start with copying the bg layer, and run a few layer mask adjustments onto the copy and see what you come up with. Play with different opacity levels for those adjustments. Just for starters. Geez guys, don't make it so hard. I -almost routinely- jazz up dull-day images. When you visit Old Aunt Em in Ohio, perhaps for the last time, and the sun never shines all weekend, you do what pleases your audience. Stretch the bright up till the highlights almost blow out, drag the low end down to black, then play with the mid tones till it looks best. Perhaps add a little saturation to the color. Warm up the white balance. Presto! cloudy bright, altogether more cheerful. Result is not art, but a throw-away snapshot is quite possibly transformed into a treasured keepsake. What is the OP looking for? Maybe, just exactly this..... Ol' Bab The OP included changing skies from cloudy to blue, implying extreme changes to an image. Changing from really bad light to something great is possible but could take literally dozens if not hundreds of hours (at least it would me). Making lighting changes is very difficult and it is easy to spot fakes. In my opinion, it is better to spend one's time taking more pictures than faking the lighting on a bad shot. Changing contrast, color balance and impact of a scene is simple in comparison to what the OP asked for. That's why I suggested the CSI plugin with a wink ;-). Roger |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
Making lighting changes is very difficult and it is easy to spot fakes. Indeed. If you're going to replace a burnt out sky for example, it's far more believable to use a correctly exposed sky from another shot taken at the same time (and a similar angle) rather than one from a different day. In my opinion, it is better to spend one's time taking more pictures than faking the lighting on a bad shot. Absolutely. Or better still, spend more time over each photo to make sure you get it right in the first place. Sometimes I've been guilty of sloppy shooting, thinking that I could easily fix it later, but it didn't take me long to realise that spending a few extra minutes in the field can save a lot of time later. Post processing is far more time intensive than simply getting it right when you take the shot, and it's actually much easier, not to mention that you get a better quality result. Of course, if time is critical or you're shooting action, you may not have that luxury, in which case post processing can be a life saver. In such cases I generally cover my options by blasting off a number of different exposures to be on the safe side, figuring that I can sort out the mess later. At least digital shots cost nothing. But if time's not an issue, I think it's better to take fewer shots and spend more time over each one. Quality rather than quantity. But it doesn't hurt to take a few extra extra exposures if there's any doubt. Paul -- http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
Paul Saunders wrote:
But if time's not an issue, I think it's better to take fewer shots and spend more time over each one. Quality rather than quantity. But it doesn't hurt to take a few extra extra exposures if there's any doubt. Paul http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk Paul, I agree. Spectacular photos on your site. It really opened my eyes to some amazing places to visit next time I get to the UK. Roger http://www.clarkvision.com |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
In article , Roger N. Clark (change username
to rnclark) says... spot fakes. In my opinion, it is better to spend one's time taking more pictures than faking the lighting on a bad shot. Sure, but what do you do when the weather conditions are bad? Chongqing is permanently covered by a thick layer of smog. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330, E400 and E500 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ Olympus E330 resource - http://myolympus.org/E330/ |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
"Alfred Molon" wrote: Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) says... spot fakes. In my opinion, it is better to spend one's time taking more pictures than faking the lighting on a bad shot. Sure, but what do you do when the weather conditions are bad? Chongqing is permanently covered by a thick layer of smog. Look for images in which the smog is a feature, not a problem. Look for images that show man destroying his environment, or socialist realist stuff in which the factories belching their smoke sing of a workers' paradise. If you like Chongqing, show us why. As it is, warts and smog and all. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote: Sure, but what do you do when the weather conditions are bad? Chongqing is permanently covered by a thick layer of smog. In this part of the country (Pacific NW), heavy overcast is often the only choice of the day. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) says... spot fakes. In my opinion, it is better to spend one's time taking more pictures than faking the lighting on a bad shot. Sure, but what do you do when the weather conditions are bad? Chongqing is permanently covered by a thick layer of smog. Like David said, adapt to the conditions. If smog/haze is a problem, don't do scenics. Get closer in where the distances from camera to subject is small enough that haze is not a factor. That may mean street level shots, or close-ups. In a park take pictures of a walkway, or a macro of a flower. There are many possibilities beyond a grand scenic. It's all about lighting. A hazy/overcast day can be great for flowers. A very foggy/rainy day can be great for a local scenic (e.g. a bridge, or a tree), but probably not a grand scenic of a whole city. In cities like Los Angeles, the grand scenic post card shots are done only on very rare clear days. Such days may occur only a couple of times a year. Roger |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"Advanced" image processing
Alfred Molon wrote:
Sure, but what do you do when the weather conditions are bad? Chongqing is permanently covered by a thick layer of smog. Isn't it less smoggy early in the morning? What about sunset? Smog and haze increase the redness of the sun at sunset. Why not try some dramatic silhouttes with the red sun behind? Paul -- http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MACRO SHOTS QUESTION | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 46 | July 10th 06 02:44 PM |
8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivelant | Matt | Digital Photography | 1144 | December 17th 04 10:48 PM |
8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivelant | Matt | 35mm Photo Equipment | 932 | December 17th 04 10:48 PM |
Thumbnail Software? | Dave | Digital Photography | 40 | September 23rd 04 06:28 AM |
Who's left in the E6 biz? | [email protected] | In The Darkroom | 49 | September 22nd 04 07:23 AM |