Enhancing shadow detail in Photoshop

[jwinberg1]

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s) after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction. I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[Don Schultz43010]

Hi Jack:
Try this:
1 Open photo in Photoshop
2 Duplicate layer
3 Lighten new layer to reveal what you want in Shadow
4 Add layer mask and select hide all
5 Select paint brush tool to the correct size
6 Foreground should be white
7 Brush the only the area you want to lighten
8 Flatten image.

You may have to play around to get the effect you want but that's the general workflow.
Don.

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[dimage]

1. Duplicate Layer
2. Filter-> Other-> High Pass set radius very large (say 40 pixels)
3. Set Layer options to "Lighten"

4. Adjust layer opacity to blend (say about 25%, but this depends a lot on what you are starting with).

The high pass filter digs out any detail in the shadows. Using the layer option of "Lighten" makes is affect mostly the dark areas.

You can then do things like Layer Masks to make sure you only affect the areas you want affecting but this may not be necessary.

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[Nill Toulme]

See http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/shadow-control.shtml .

Nill
~~
http://www.toulme.net

 

[dimage]

First, the photo below is nothing great to look at and the original was taken at ISO1600 (this was a deliberately bad picture being taken for a project I was working on). But it demonstrates how the technique brings out detail in what seems to be a near black background.

Before:
http://www.fototime.com/ {68356D08-8C5D-47A1-AE1C-849A07FE1B0A} picture.JPG

After:

http://www.fototime.com/ {4283B983-F695-4CD4-9402-33CE90F07AC0} picture.JPG

The high pass filter digs out any detail in the shadows. Using the
layer option of "Lighten" makes is affect mostly the dark areas.

You can then do things like Layer Masks to make sure you only
affect the areas you want affecting but this may not be necessary.

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[dimage]

The example below is probably a bit better and shows that the techique works with color in the shadows. This shows the classical problem one has with flash. Even though I use a Stofen Omibounce and bounce the flash the illumination was very uneven in this deep room.

Notice how you can now see detail in the back of the room that was originally very dark.

Before:
http://www.fototime.com/ {D1444F39-6EB4-46E3-88CE-DDD3E522F916} picture.JPG

After (Duplicate Layer, High Pass Radius 40 Pixels, Layer Option = Lighten, and Opacity = 40%):

http://www.fototime.com/ {1EE22038-5174-4CE3-9CB8-E3092EF8737F} picture.JPG

The high pass filter digs out any detail in the shadows. Using the
layer option of "Lighten" makes is affect mostly the dark areas.

You can then do things like Layer Masks to make sure you only
affect the areas you want affecting but this may not be necessary.

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[VG]

Jack,
Check this out:
http://www.vizualgroove.com/digitalimaging/shadowdetail1.htm

The images are processed with two of my VG super actions. If I get enough response, I may put up a tutorial on how to do this.

Also, I borrowed one of the images posted here. If the owner doesn't want it posted as such, please inform me.

If you compare the results to any of the other 'Shadow controllers', you will see it blows them out the door.
Regards,
VG

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[Thomas Gardner]

Hi Jack:
Try this:
1 Open photo in Photoshop
2 Duplicate layer
3 Lighten new layer to reveal what you want in Shadow
4 Add layer mask and select hide all
5 Select paint brush tool to the correct size
6 Foreground should be white
7 Brush the only the area you want to lighten
8 Flatten image.
You may have to play around to get the effect you want but that's
the general workflow.
Don.

Any suggestion, why when using your above, the history brush wouldn't work. I tried your method and it works find but, when you go back to clean up your overly agressive brushing, it comes back that the history brush doesn't have it's own layer assigned. What's up with that???

Thanks in advance!!!!!

 

[Don Schultz43010]

Hi Thomas:

I only have Photoshop 6.01 so I don't have any knowledge of the history brush but if you switch the foreground to black you can go back and correct wherever you were too aggressive. You can also fade the opacity to vary the effect.
Don.

Hi Jack:
Try this:
1 Open photo in Photoshop
2 Duplicate layer
3 Lighten new layer to reveal what you want in Shadow
4 Add layer mask and select hide all
5 Select paint brush tool to the correct size
6 Foreground should be white
7 Brush the only the area you want to lighten
8 Flatten image.
You may have to play around to get the effect you want but that's
the general workflow.
Don.

Any suggestion, why when using your above, the history brush
wouldn't work. I tried your method and it works find but, when you
go back to clean up your overly agressive brushing, it comes back
that the history brush doesn't have it's own layer assigned.
What's up with that???

Thanks in advance!!!!!

 

[JohnM31499]

Jack,
Check this out:
http://www.vizualgroove.com/digitalimaging/shadowdetail1.htm
The images are processed with two of my VG super actions.

So what does your action do, or is it a secret??

-John

 

[Don Lashier]

It can help, or at least get you to a better starting point, to use a raw converter that doesn't compress shadows like RIC. Both C1, and to a slightly lesser degree the new Adobe Raw Converter, will give much better shadow detail. Also, applying a curve before conversion presumably will give less noise. For extreme situations some PS work may still be required, but it can really help to have a better starting point.

• DL

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[Mishkin]

You don't need to duplicate the layer, it's a waste of memory. Simply add an Adjustment Layer with mask.

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

 

[Thomas Gardner]

1. Duplicate Layer
2. Filter-> Other-> High Pass set radius very large (say 40 pixels)
3. Set Layer options to "Lighten"
4. Adjust layer opacity to blend (say about 25%, but this depends a
lot on what you are starting with).

The high pass filter digs out any detail in the shadows. Using the
layer option of "Lighten" makes is affect mostly the dark areas.

Tried doing your above and couldn't make it work on version 7. So I went a simple route.

1. Filter> High Pass

2. Edit> Fade High Pass (Fade box comes up) Set opacity to taste, 25% as you suggested.

You can also make sure preview box is checked. Place slider on zero and move to the right as your taste desires.

I prefer making duplicate layers, adjusting levels accordingly, using the brush to reveal the area you want changed and then mash, I mean "flatten" the two images together

 

[Mishkin]

Layer mask allows to easily change the boundary of light/dark areas at any time. History brush is not that flexible.

Hi Jack:
Try this:
1 Open photo in Photoshop
2 Duplicate layer
3 Lighten new layer to reveal what you want in Shadow
4 Add layer mask and select hide all
5 Select paint brush tool to the correct size
6 Foreground should be white
7 Brush the only the area you want to lighten
8 Flatten image.
You may have to play around to get the effect you want but that's
the general workflow.
Don.

Any suggestion, why when using your above, the history brush
wouldn't work. I tried your method and it works find but, when you
go back to clean up your overly agressive brushing, it comes back
that the history brush doesn't have it's own layer assigned.
What's up with that???

Thanks in advance!!!!!

 

[Dan Brown]

Fred Miranda's shadow recovery action works great, pretty cheap as well.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/SR/index.html

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

--
Dan Brown
http://www.pbase.com/wheatenman

'If nothing changes, nothing changes'

 

[dimage]

Thomas,

I don't know if there is a problem in my directions, but I am running Photoshop 7.0 with the the 7.0.1 update. At what step did it not work?

What you suggest would mostly work other than the "lighten" option. As you say, working in layers lets you tweak things.

1. Duplicate Layer
2. Filter-> Other-> High Pass set radius very large (say 40 pixels)
3. Set Layer options to "Lighten"
4. Adjust layer opacity to blend (say about 25%, but this depends a
lot on what you are starting with).

The high pass filter digs out any detail in the shadows. Using the
layer option of "Lighten" makes is affect mostly the dark areas.

Tried doing your above and couldn't make it work on version 7. So
I went a simple route.

1. Filter> High Pass
2. Edit> Fade High Pass (Fade box comes up) Set opacity to taste,
25% as you suggested.

You can also make sure preview box is checked. Place slider on
zero and move to the right as your taste desires.

I prefer making duplicate layers, adjusting levels accordingly,
using the brush to reveal the area you want changed and then mash,
I mean "flatten" the two images together

 

[SCsnapper]

Both C1,

and to a slightly lesser degree the new Adobe Raw Converter, will
give much better shadow detail.

Don, How do I invoke the C1 shadow detail you mention above? Is it automatic, or do I have to click something for it? If the later, I can't find it.

As always, thanks for your help.

 

[Don Lashier]

You control this with the film curve. Even the default "film standard" provides considerably more shadow detail than RIC. If you want even more, try "extra shadow", but I rarely find this necessary. The "linear" choice also provides even more shadow detail, but also more highlight detail, all at the expense of midrange contrast.

I've just done some TRC comparisions between C1, RIC and ARC and will be putting the results online shortly.

• DL

and to a slightly lesser degree the new Adobe Raw Converter, will
give much better shadow detail.

Don, How do I invoke the C1 shadow detail you mention above? Is it
automatic, or do I have to click something for it? If the later, I
can't find it.

As always, thanks for your help.

 

[Don Lashier]

The film curve is selected on the develop tab, and can be set separately for each image in the collection. Also note that "linear" requires a substantial whitepoint adjustment (similar to RIC linear in that regard).

• DL

I've just done some TRC comparisions between C1, RIC and ARC and
will be putting the results online shortly.

• DL

and to a slightly lesser degree the new Adobe Raw Converter, will
give much better shadow detail.

Don, How do I invoke the C1 shadow detail you mention above? Is it
automatic, or do I have to click something for it? If the later, I
can't find it.

As always, thanks for your help.

 

[jwinberg1]

THANK YOU one and all, these are exactly the approaches I was looking for! I now have an abundance of techniques to play with. This is a really HELPFUL group!

Jack Winberg

In the past, I have seen a procedure described that pulls
remarkable detail from dense, underexposed shadows. It involved
the use of layers in Photoshop, and I cannot locate the thread(s)
after many attempts.

I would be MOST grateful for any pointers in thi right direction.
I have some zoo shots of an orangutan face with hopelessly
underexposed eye areas.

Thanks in advance.................... Jack Winberg

--
Dan Brown
http://www.pbase.com/wheatenman

'If nothing changes, nothing changes'