Using Photoshop to improve piccies

What do you think?

Latest Posts | New Discussions | Hot Threads | Forum Topics
Help | Settings | Followed Threads
reply
21 to 40 of 79 messages
Page:
Ninja Marmot
21/02/2007 at 18:23
So... the puzzle is... which is the 'correct' colour?

Aye, that's what the 'daytime mode' et al do...
OR
The white balance for fluorescent lights is different to the one for tungsten lights for example. PS allows you to correct that while a point-and-shoot simply will have the one artificial light mode usually.

Yeah have seen the satire and think its wonderful, but am reacting to some folk saying that using white balance etc makes boring ,poor photos and that it is better to use Photoshop.
When we first got the DSLR, our results were poorer than when we used an auto Coolpix digicam as the auto modes knew how to set themselves up for each circumstance and we didn't have the same expertise to begin with to do all the settings the same way. Automatic cameras can produce really excellent results...It's not the camera or the scene that makes the shot, it's the person composing the shot, knowing when to capture the light onto the film or memory card.

It's also dead easy when using any processing software to snap away and then crop to get the best aspect or composition. Is that also cheating? It was possible in the 'good old days' to do it relatively easily by producing a selective enlargement in the darkroom. After a couple of months of cropping I resolved to get it right the first time in future as I was being very lazy and I haven't cropped since. Makes you think much harder about what you're doing!
21/02/2007 at 20:55
The Pussy Cat makes some very good points there.

I think, to some degree, ALL digital photographs need a certain amount of post-production. Ultimately (IMO) you should strive to get everything as near to perfect as possible when you press the shutter. But there are times when the conditions just aren't favourable. Below is a link to a sample photograph of Buch. Etive Mor. I was on the way to the Isle of Skye and had very little time to stop and take snaps. Conditions weren't great, and the photo straight from the camera was a bit flat and dreary. After about 15 minutes in Photoshop the shot was, IMO, much more dramatic and atmospheric. The techniques applied to the photo in Photoshop could have been applied in a traditional darkroom.

Of course, there will be some people that don't like the 'treatment' I've given to the original, but it was just an example to show what can be achieved very quickly in Photoshop, that could also have been achieved 50 years ago in a darkroom (but taking about 15 times as long).

Anyway, here are the samples:

A bit of 'shopping
BigDug
21/02/2007 at 21:05
I have to say Michael, and I've been thinking this for some time now...

That new avatar of yours doesn't half make you look like the singer out of the Stereophonics!

You're not leading a double life, are you?

;o)
Ninja Marmot
21/02/2007 at 21:06
...and an auto mode in an average camera would have done that work for you Michael.

So who is the more "skilful"?
;o)
Ninja Marmot
21/02/2007 at 21:07
I have to say Michael, and I've been thinking this for some time now...
That new avatar of yours doesn't half make you look like the singer out of the Stereophonics!

Aye, but his old one made him look like Convict 99
;oP
21/02/2007 at 21:32
...and an auto mode in an average camera would have done that work for you Michael.

No chance - it required selective dodging and burning, selective sharpening, cloning dust specks, etc. ;-)

That new avatar of yours doesn't half make you look like the singer out of the Stereophonics!

LOL! Blimey, no, I'm not him! But I did got to Uni with a guy who was from the same town as the 'Phonics, and he went out with a girl who's gay brother threw himself in front of a train - the subject of the song 'Local Boy in a Photograph' (apparently!).

Actually, the avatar photo was because I contributed to a photography magazine this month, and they wanted a mugshot to accompany my bit. I wasn't too keen on the idea, so I took the version you see, heavily in shadow! And as NPC says, it's slightly better than my previous 'HAVE YOU SEEN THIS MAN?' type photo!
BigDug
21/02/2007 at 21:42
... the subject of the song 'Local Boy in a Photograph' (apparently!).

Interesting, I didn't know that!

It's okay, your secret double life is safe with us... Kelly Jones! lol

;)
Paddy Dillon
21/02/2007 at 21:48
Michael - as far as I'm concerned, the photoshopped picture looks far more 'natural' than the original, and I guess that whenever anyone is tempted to enhance a picture, it should be done in a way that highlights the spirit of the place.

Now... waterfall pictures...

Should it be a short exposure with a view to 'freezing' every drop of water, or should it be a long exposure for that 'silky smooth sheen'. Which one is 'cheating', or are they both?
21/02/2007 at 22:11
the $64,000 question Paddy!

A few years ago I was firmly in the 'silky smooth sheen' camp, whatever. These days, however, I prefer the 'freezing' look. BUT, I must say it depends to some degree on the nature of the waterfall. If it's a 'gentle' waterfall then I think it's better portrayed as a smooth, milky flow. If the waterfall is a high-impact 'force' then I prefer to see the 'energy' frozen to show the drama of the place.

In some ways I think that that approach reflects how they are 'seen'. Smooth, gentle waterfalls 'flow', whereas high-impact 'forces' splash and explode.

That's the approach I take anyway. But it's a tricky concept!
21/02/2007 at 22:16
as far as I'm concerned, the photoshopped picture looks far more 'natural' than the original, and I guess that whenever anyone is tempted to enhance a picture, it should be done in a way that highlights the spirit of the place

Couldn't agree more. In actual fact, the 'photoshopped' version of Buch Etive Mor is much more like the scene I recall seeing with my eyes at the time. The original photo, in order to expose the foreground correctly, overexposed the sky (even though I was using ND grad filters). As such, it looked a bit weak and dreary. Playing in photoshop, I was able to recreate my memory of the time.

And, ultimately, even if it isn't strictly accurate (although I think it is), it shows the spirit of the place that I certainly felt at the time.
Paddy Dillon
21/02/2007 at 22:29
Well - after 'attacking' Hardraw Force photographically last September, I've had my fill of waterfalls. It was raining and gloomy and I had no tripod, so it was all hand-held and rock-wedged photography, and when I went behind the fall, the wind gusted into the valley and blew all the spray onto me! For the record, I came away with 'frozen' and 'silky' pics, dabbing the water from every crack and crevice on the camera. I still don't know which is the 'right' sort of picture!
21/02/2007 at 22:30
LOL!!!

So I guess we should just take one of each type, where possible!
Marcus Crompton
21/02/2007 at 22:42
I see that no-one's answered Paddy's question which was "which is the correct colour".

Obviously, brown, if wearing light grey or a lighter blue. On the other hand it should be black if wearing a dark grey, black, or navy suit.

Socks should always match the colour of the shoes, unless wearing sandals, in which case you shouldn't be wearing trousers.

Socks should also be new, scented, lasciviously textured, alluringly displayed to the erstwhile wearer oh oh OH OH OH
Marcus Crompton
21/02/2007 at 22:43
See what happens when you reach 40? You go off topic without even realising it.
Ninja Marmot
21/02/2007 at 22:44
And don't forget the maxim "Never brown in town".

Refers to a gentleman's shoe colour of course.
LotC
21/02/2007 at 22:46
I still don't know which is the 'right' sort of picture!

There isn't a "right" sort, Paddy. Unfortunately, "frozen" won't win you any socks and "silky" is predictably "artistic".


Ninja Marmot
21/02/2007 at 22:56
And never, never match the colour of your top to your skin or hair tone.
RaR
21/02/2007 at 23:36
Technically 'cheating' is a form of deception with intent on gain, so it is only cheating if you 'doctor' the picture and hide the fact that the picture is 'doctored' in order to gain something. An example could be socks.

In the digital world, which includes scans as well as pics taken on a digital camera, a certain amount of correction must be applied to the image to make it true to the circumstances it was taken in.

This is also true on film (have you ever got a set of prints back where the sky is greenish but the photo's taken indoors have a true'ish colour representation)? In Pro labs this does not happen as each neg is analysed, but take it to asda and the machine decides on an average for the whole film.

I think the point is , and i'm not quite sure, is that a pic taken on film is colour corrected in the lab, where as a digi pic has to be corrected on your pc.

Either way, people have been playing with and manipulating images since the dawn of photography either in camera by selective composition/exposure/filters/lens etc or in the darkroom - dodging and burning and today, on the computer.

It is only cheating if there is an intention to decieve for personal gain.
jonno
22/02/2007 at 00:12
Used to live in weavers cottages ,where they made cloth upstairs and lived in the one room downstairs, then came them new fangled looms and now look no weavers and no factories either , burn em ,burn em all.

Soon all countryside will be banned and video links to all computers will be enforced and every time you blink with one eyebrow raised it,ll automatically take a still, if you raise both eyebrows it,ll give you a sunset.
For godsake dont fart.
LotC
22/02/2007 at 00:13
In Pro labs this does not happen as each neg is analysed, but take it to asda and the machine decides on an average for the whole film.

The d&p devices in Asda and Prolabs are exactly the same. The difference in output quality lies mainly in the ability of the operator.
21 to 40 of 79 messages
Page:
Forum Jump  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Shopping

Most popular

Competitions

View all competitions
Sign up to our twitter feed

Promotions

View all promotions