Nope. Looks like painting or glorifying the poor bird. You need to carefully select the bird (manually, takes time but best results) with the lasso tool, with tight vertices. Then "select inverse", and copy the background to a new document. Apply the gaussian blur there (the background of this doucument should be empty, at least do not flatten the image before applying the gaussian blur since the point is that there is a hole in the background, for the bird, that is. Then copy this blurred background and paste it "back" into the original document. This way you do not get disturbance of the birds white color, the only negative side efect of the blurring will be that it gets slightly sharper the closer the bird you get. That can also fixed but you might now know how to do it, wouldn´t you...
I'd prefer people don't do that. Just put a correct title on the post.
It has the look of neing significantly manipulated, so for me it doesn't work. I like nature photography to look like... nature. -Greg-
Kuin myös! Eli jos haluat että reunaan asti toimii se gaussian blurri niin sille kakkos dokulle johon pastetat sen taustan voit cloonaustyökalulla kopsata sitä taustaa siten, että aukkoa menee ympeen n. 50% gaussian-asetuksen halkaisijasta tai enemmän. Sitten vaan pitää siirtää blurrattu tausta takaisin alkuperäisiin tiedostoon siten, että siihen edelleen valittuna olevaan tausta-alueeseen pastetat Ctrl+Shift+V:llä niin se osa joka on mennyt linnun aukon päälle ei haittaa. Vaivalloista mutta tuolla saa minkä tahansa taustan blurrattua siten ettei sitä pysty näkemään että sitä on lainkaan blurrattu. Alunperin rajatessa kannattaa tökkiä niitä rajauspisteitä mielummin pikselin verran sinne taustan puolelle, jotta rajaa ei tule näkyviin. Feather pitää olla nolla, antialiasing toki päällä. Että näin, paljon nopeampaa kirjoittaa kotokielellä ja ei tule aivan kaikkien tietoon aivan kaikki jipot;-)
--
This forum used to be more relaxed. But you wouldn't know, would you?(see your posting history).
Actually some did, and one very friendly person (aka not like you) took his time to actually exactly describe how to do it better. That's how this forum used to be: friendly, helpful and with a good sense of humour. I haven't been around for awhile, things seems to have changed.
As with the others, I sincerely apologize for having abused your precious internet time. It won't happen again...
Thanks. That was the comment I expected most, and you are kinda right.
--
Looks like the cover art for the book "Johnathan Livingston
Seagull"!
There's nothing wrong with doctoring a photo for esthetics. I do it
all the time.
But you ended up with a perfectly unbelievable glow around the bird
that looks like a religious icon, not an esthetic bird shot.
To avoid the halo, I've got a really easy method of dropping in
backgrounds.
In photoshop:
1) open a copy of the bird picture.
2) drop a copy of the new sky as a new layer on top of the bird
layer. If you're going to blur an existing version of the bird's
sky, you must first use the clone tool to bring the sky into a good
chunk of the edge of the bird, so that when blurred, the bird
doesn't bleed in - it's all just sky. ( I think that was your major
"error", if you don't mind my calling it that).
3) Change transparency so you can see through the top layer to the
bird.
4) Using the eraser tool, erase out the bird from the top layer.
The eraser tool has great control over the hardness (shrarpness of
edge) and opacity. Vary the opacity, size and sharpness until you
can get a very precise erasure of the bird. It's not hard to do, I
do it all the time.
5) Merge the two pictures.
If you erased subtly enough (opacity), no one will be able to tell
that you dropped the bird onto a blurred sky.
That capture is just too good to mess with badly in post-processing.
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of the H-Series White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/h1whitepaper
