Can you help me with this image?

The sky blending was bugging me so I got to putzing with it some
more. I added some motion blur to the mix and toned down some of
that lemony goodness. I like it much better, but now I'm thinking
that airbrushing in some other colors (that orangey-gold, purple,
etc.) would be cool.
I never even thought of going and getting a sky from somewhere else! I suppose I could even borrow some sky from the same evening same place but when the colors really started coming out . . . hmmmm. . .

Thanks!

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
your shot :-)

I knew you'd get some real nice edits. The shot itself is really,
really good. Yeah, the Sun blows out part of the sky. So what?
It looked great to begin with. After these folks got through with
it, it looked even better. This shot really has to be viewed at
the original size to really appreciate all the nuances. If you've
got some that are even better than this.....please don't post
them....LOL J/K
This shot was lucky. I was actually shooting 2 birds silhouetted on top of the rock, and just as I was about to click the wave hit and all of a sudden 2 birds flew up from the front and I had 4 birds and some water spray! I clicked really fast to take advantage of my good luck. ;0
As I mentioned in my earlier post, the lack of noise is really
dramatic. Wayyyyyyyyyyy less noise than I would see on an ISO100
shot.
If I get a chance (uploading is painful for me) I'll post another ISO 800 shot that is pretty much noise free. Compared to that one I thought this one was noisy. The other is a closeup of a hand and a roasted marshmallow in combined firelight and sunset light vs. this lowlight wide tonal range shot. I guess the difference in light accounts for the difference in noise. This is the only shot from the trip that I would consider 'noisy' and it just happened to be one I really like the captured moment on! I didn't take very many ISO 800 shots though. Just when I was handheld and losing the light.
I really had a ball foolin with it :-) I'm having even more fun,
looking at it, over and over...lol
A big thank you for sharing it,
Steve
Thank you for your kind words (and help) Steve! Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
I took a stab at it, but its not an easy correction. If you were
shooting in matrix metering mode this photo you should have been
shooting at maybe -1ev and braketing. These are really tough shots
to take, so its alway good to rip off as many as you can. Look at
the histogram. Its got a spike on the dark end and a spike on the
light end. Very difficult.
Yeah, I know. I actually was at -1 ev. I've tried to get in the habit of bracketing too, of course layering a shot with moving objects won't work . . .
The lightest part of the sky is totally blown out which makes it
difficult to correct. Blowouts are the hardest for me to correct. I
assume that the blown out part of the sky was blue sky, but in any
case I decided to treat it as clouds.
It was a thin layer of clouds with the sun directly behind it
Also I did this with psp8.

To do this you make a duplicate layer.
You can change the opacity of the top layer as you wish. You could
use mild colors and you 90-100% opacity or use very strong colors
on the top layer and use maybe 50% opacity.

Remember all of your work is on the top layer and the original
underneath is untouched.

Select the lower section with the majic wand, its easy because it
such a high contrast shot. Delete the lower dark section. Invert
the selection so the top half is selected. Now you can just work on
the sky.
So you just deleted the rock? Did you include the birds or water?
It helps to turn off the lower layer so you can see only the top
sky layer.

This is almost all psp8 airbrush work. I tried several other
methods, but for me this would be the fastest.
Since the light area is totally blown out, you need some sort of
color in the blown out white areas.

Huge brush, Yellow, opacity +-3, hardness 30-40, until you get it
where you want it.
OK, I've never airbrushed anything before, so this will be a good exercise.
Then touch up the rest of the clouds using yellow, orange, red,
purple. Skys this late in the day are usually purplish close to the
horizon. The bottoms of clouds are also purplish. I think the sky
blowout caused a loss in color in this photo. Was the sky more
purplish orange ?
I thought that too until I reviewed my pics and started remembering that the really colorful sunset didn't happen until a little later. At this time it all had sort of a golden cast to it.
That got me close on the sky. But the water was also a part of this
selection and lost some contrast, so I used the burn tool with the
limit set on shadow to give the waves more contrast. I also did a
bit of that to the sky. At this point go back and forth and view
both layers together. At the end you can leave it layered or merge
it into a single layer jpeg.

Now that I look at it again I think it needs more purple in it. You
could work on these kind of images forever.

I am not sure if you could do this with ps elements. If not get
hold of an old copy of ps or psp, or a trial version and try it out.
I think we can do everything you've mentioned in elements.
I reduced the image to 1040x_ to make it easier to work on.

Try it out on the full size file.
It also helps to have a Wacom pen tablet.
I've never tried one but hear they are really cool.
Thanks! awesome work Troy! Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Wow MAC that looks like a postcard. Really eye catching! I wouldn't have thought of doing something like that but you really pulled it off nicely. I'll email you back on the details. Thanks, Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
threw everything but the kitchen sink at it...
so don't even ask what i did... ;-)
not that you'd want to know anyway after seeing it...
way too much sharpening... lol
me thinks this one will be a tough one to fix up perfectly...
lol. OK cUrVe, I want details man - what do you remember exactly . . . start at the beginning and don't leave anything out! lol. It looks great. I'll get with you later and try to pry those techniques out. Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Cindy,
I'm sure this isn't what you're looking for, but I did have fun
with it :-) It is a really fine image to work with and a splendid
capture. I really like those frozen globules of water.
Thanks Steve! I love moving water with this 10d. The swim meet photos I've been taken continue to blow me away with the texture of the water coming off the swimmers.
Say what you will about my editing job. But it do have "POP"...lol
http://www3.pbase.com/image/19904610
Yes it does pop much better than the original. I like the way the bird on the right now stands out in front of the water better too!

Thanks Steve! Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Cindy, not an expert, but you might try darkening it a bit. The sky
is washed out it looks like. The birds would stay ok I think. Just
a thought.
Hi Mel, that was my firt thought too. I tried using levels and also adjusting back lighting. Both methods improved the sky for sure. But unfortunately I lost the lightness and detail in the water too. I couldn't seem to select it differently than the sky and just got frustrated. Thanks, Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Hi Cindy,
The track I took was to create a new layer, set the blending to
"color" and then create an orange to yellow gradient on the new
layer. That made the sky look more vibrant and still roughly the
same color that it really was.
I've played with layers a little but never tried setting the blending to color or doing a gradient map. I just gave it a quick shot and that works pretty slick! Thanks Shay!

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
I am new at PS, but here was my result of playing with the Hue/saturations quite a bit...(I dont know how to post the original size)


I loved this in the lcd but was dissappointed once I got it home.
Here is an unedited version.



It just lacks pop and being at ISO 800 has some noise. I want the
colors more vibrant but I would love to keep the detail in the
water spray. If the seagulls and rock are silhouetted that's ok.
I've messed with it but can't seem to make it work. Can anybody
teach me how to improve/salvage this image? I use PS elements. I
also have neat image but have never been very good with it. Thanks
in advance! Cindy
full res original image can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/19903620/original

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must
be wrong...
 
Cindy,

Thanks for the explanation. That's a bummer for Sarah. Tell her to hurry up and turn 18 so we can enjoy her photography again!

In the meatime...
I worked on your photograph this afternoon, it's really a great
shot...it just needs a little spice. I did a lot of really little
adjustments: tinkered the levels, used the lasso to select
everything above the water
Did you actually select along the water? I sort of tried that but
got frustrated pretty quickly.
I used the lasso and dragged it along the edge of the water and rocks (but not the birds, I liked how the light shines through their wings) and then around the edges of the picture. Under "selection" you can feather your selection. I did mine by approx 50 pixels. This creates a gradual effect rather than a hard effect.
and increased red and yellow saturation
(+15 - 20) and lowered the brightness and raised the contrast,
used the gradiant to add ND (and a little yellow) above the rocks (on
separate layers of about 5 - 15% opacity), and the airbrush for a
little sky work.
Here is where you lose me ND?
Neutral Density. It's just like putting a graduated ND filter on your camera. Create a second layer. Using the gradiant tool (make sure you select fades to transparancy) fade from black (on the top) to nothing near the red in the center. I clicked about halfway up in the yellow and dragged straight down to about halfway through the red. You can adjust the opacity of the layer to create the desired amount of darkening. For the black layer, I used about 5-7%. I did the same thing again, but this time with a really bright and heavy yellow (the strongest yellow I could find in the picture). The only variation is that I used about 15-20% opacity on this layer.

I even made another layer and used the airbrush with several different shades of of yellows in the picture (stronger ones) and then faded it to about 10% to create a little more texture in the blown out area.

All of these layers added nothing below the middle of the picture. They were all to deal with the sky.

Other things I did with the picture:

Unsharp Mask: just play with it until you get the desired texture and sharpness.

Black airbrush over the rocks to get rid of some noise.

The first thing I did with the picture was to lighten the entire thing enough so that I could have definition in the water and the fourth bird down below. Otherwise the water would have been to dark and you never would have even known he was there. One of my goals, however, was to really get a good sillouette (I like that effect in sunrises/sets). So later I had alot more playing room.
Yes, if you don't mind I would love to learn more. This is really
impressive. The water looks light and detailed. The noise is
gone. It is a little yellow for my taste but the work is great.
Would love to know more details so I can give it a shot myself.
Thanks!
The first pic I made I liked really well...then I looked at the water. It took another couple of attempts to get it right. In the end, I'm happy with it. Yes, I struggle with the too much vs. too little color...I find this is the most difficult thing to do (you add some and it looks good, but when you take it back away the picture just looks sour), especially with other peoples photos (read: I wasn't there...how do I know what it looked like?). The most challenging thing about the picture, and the one part that I'm not 100% satisfied with yet, is the sky. It's a very difficult sky to work with. I like to stay as true to reality as possible when doing photoshop work. Given that it wasn't my photo, I took the saturation a little further than I normally do, but I've also taken sunsets many times only to see that they looked much more vivid in person...so I put a bit more in there just in case :-)

If you have anymore questions...please don't hesitiate to ask. I'm not a professional by any means...just another person trying to help out where I can. Have fun playing with PS!

-NewSushi
 
Hi cindy, I haven't looked at the responses, so someone has probably done something like this... This is how I imagined it to be....


I loved this in the lcd but was dissappointed once I got it home.
Here is an unedited version.



It just lacks pop and being at ISO 800 has some noise. I want the
colors more vibrant but I would love to keep the detail in the
water spray. If the seagulls and rock are silhouetted that's ok.
I've messed with it but can't seem to make it work. Can anybody
teach me how to improve/salvage this image? I use PS elements. I
also have neat image but have never been very good with it. Thanks
in advance! Cindy
full res original image can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/19903620/original

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must
be wrong...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
I think blending one of your other sky shots with this one is a good solution, because it will give you the colors and feeling of what you remember about that evening.

Does PE allow you to do layers? If so, what I did was to just drag a sky pic over to your seagull photo. It ended up as it's own layer, which I moved on top of the seagulls layer. I temporarily made the sky pic a bit transparent so I could see the seagull layer, then moved the sky around until I got it where I wanted it.

After that, I added a mask to the sky layer, made sure the foreground color was black and the background color was set to white. Then I used a large soft brush to start blending the two layers. At first I had the opacity set to a high number to knock out the bottom half of the sky-- no real blending was needed here-- just needed to get rid of it so the rock would show. When that was done, I set the opacity number of the brush to about 20 and started my blending. After a bit of time at that number, I lightened the opacity up a bit more, to about 10 to finesse bits and pieces here & there.

The black color used on the mask will erase the top layer pixels. If I tap the "X" key, my background and foreground colors will switch places. White will now be the foreground color, which is useful to add parts of the top layer (the sky layer in this case) back if you've gone too far.

I think the biggest thing to remember is to work off of a duplicate of your original photo rather than the original. The next biggest thing (to me) when working with masks is to make sure that you have the mask selected, not the actual image. If you accidently manage to start doing these brush stroke on the image, that's all she wrote if you don't have a backup copy. }:->

Be sure to let us see your final result when you find the time to mess with it. It's a beautiful photo.

Nancy

--------------------
The sky blending was bugging me so I got to putzing with it some
more. I added some motion blur to the mix and toned down some of
that lemony goodness. I like it much better, but now I'm thinking
that airbrushing in some other colors (that orangey-gold, purple,
etc.) would be cool.
I never even thought of going and getting a sky from somewhere
else! I suppose I could even borrow some sky from the same evening
same place but when the colors really started coming out . . .
hmmmm. . .

Thanks!

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must
be wrong...
 
Hi Cindy,

Created a duplicate layer, cranked the saturation way up so it looked a little over saturated without getting blotchy.

Ran a median noise filter set to 10
Ran Guassian blur set to 3.0
Changed the layer mode to color

Flattened image

USM at 200, raduis 0.4, Threshold 8 (use something like 0.8 or .9 for your original sized image)

this is the end result

http://bradm.instantlogic.com/images//Photos/ {78C14944-DD46-4EFC-91C6-BEE34DBAC937} {0BE534DE-1282-448C-86EB-8CABA4B9EFCE}lg.jpg
I loved this in the lcd but was dissappointed once I got it home.
Here is an unedited version.



It just lacks pop and being at ISO 800 has some noise. I want the
colors more vibrant but I would love to keep the detail in the
water spray. If the seagulls and rock are silhouetted that's ok.
I've messed with it but can't seem to make it work. Can anybody
teach me how to improve/salvage this image? I use PS elements. I
also have neat image but have never been very good with it. Thanks
in advance! Cindy
full res original image can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/19903620/original

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must
be wrong...
--

DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 , http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628
 
I took a stab at it, but its not an easy correction. If you were
shooting in matrix metering mode this photo you should have been
shooting at maybe -1ev and braketing. These are really tough shots
to take, so its alway good to rip off as many as you can. Look at
the histogram. Its got a spike on the dark end and a spike on the
light end. Very difficult.
Yeah, I know. I actually was at -1 ev. I've tried to get in the
habit of bracketing too, of course layering a shot with moving
objects won't work . . .
That explains part of the problem. My 10D blows out also and I am not very happy about it. I keep my camera on -.5 ev all of the time. Were you shooting in average meter mode.
The lightest part of the sky is totally blown out which makes it
difficult to correct. Blowouts are the hardest for me to correct. I
assume that the blown out part of the sky was blue sky, but in any
case I decided to treat it as clouds.
It was a thin layer of clouds with the sun directly behind it
Thats a tough shot. Into the sun, hidden behind clouds. I have a similar photo taken with a S2 I just cant give up on. I was on average meter and -.5 ev. I should have spot metered the sky and bracketed. It caused almost exactly the same sky problem.
Also I did this with psp8.

To do this you make a duplicate layer.
You can change the opacity of the top layer as you wish. You could
use mild colors and you 90-100% opacity or use very strong colors
on the top layer and use maybe 50% opacity.

Remember all of your work is on the top layer and the original
underneath is untouched.

Select the lower section with the majic wand, its easy because it
such a high contrast shot. Delete the lower dark section. Invert
the selection so the top half is selected. Now you can just work on
the sky.
So you just deleted the rock? Did you include the birds or water?
Here is the top layer I started with.


It helps to turn off the lower layer so you can see only the top
sky layer.

This is almost all psp8 airbrush work. I tried several other
methods, but for me this would be the fastest.
Since the light area is totally blown out, you need some sort of
color in the blown out white areas.

Huge brush, Yellow, opacity +-3, hardness 30-40, until you get it
where you want it.
OK, I've never airbrushed anything before, so this will be a good
exercise.
I too thought it would be a challenge. I have been getting into photo manips and digital art so I have been working with a lot of layers and brushes etc. Here is one of my manips I did for an online contest. Mind you it is a bit on the edge.


Then touch up the rest of the clouds using yellow, orange, red,
purple. Skys this late in the day are usually purplish close to the
horizon. The bottoms of clouds are also purplish. I think the sky
blowout caused a loss in color in this photo. Was the sky more
purplish orange ?
I thought that too until I reviewed my pics and started remembering
that the really colorful sunset didn't happen until a little later.
At this time it all had sort of a golden cast to it.
You might want to handle it with all yellows and oranges. The nice thing about this technique, is you could have several cloud layers done differently and turn them off and on to compare.
That got me close on the sky. But the water was also a part of this
selection and lost some contrast, so I used the burn tool with the
limit set on shadow to give the waves more contrast. I also did a
bit of that to the sky. At this point go back and forth and view
both layers together. At the end you can leave it layered or merge
it into a single layer jpeg.

Now that I look at it again I think it needs more purple in it. You
could work on these kind of images forever.

I am not sure if you could do this with ps elements. If not get
hold of an old copy of ps or psp, or a trial version and try it out.
I think we can do everything you've mentioned in elements.
I forgot I have elements and I think it has all the tools you need.
I reduced the image to 1040x_ to make it easier to work on.

Try it out on the full size file.
It also helps to have a Wacom pen tablet.
I've never tried one but hear they are really cool.
I bought the $99 Wacom and it great. The pressure pen is a must for this type of work.
Thanks! awesome work Troy! Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must
be wrong...
 
Neutral Density. It's just like putting a graduated ND filter on
your camera. Create a second layer. Using the gradiant tool (make
sure you select fades to transparancy) fade from black (on the top)
to nothing near the red in the center. I clicked about halfway up
in the yellow and dragged straight down to about halfway through
the red.
I don't think I can do this in PSE. It has a gradient map that changes your whole image (or layer) at once, but I have to choose from a menu - I can't select strengths of individual tones.

Thanks for all the details! I will get to work. Cindy
--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
I am new at PS, but here was my result of playing with the
Hue/saturations quite a bit...(I dont know how to post the original
size)
I like the color banding you ended up with! If you are new to PS you are off to a good start I would say. Read through the rest of this thread and you will be impressed at the different approaches and complexities. I know I'm learning a lot here. Thanks, Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Hi cindy, I haven't looked at the responses, so someone has
probably done something like this... This is how I imagined it to
be....
Not bad Jim. You should browse through and see the different approaches. I know you use paint shop pro so it is a little different, but what was your approach here? Thanks, Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Hi Cindy,

Created a duplicate layer, cranked the saturation way up so it
looked a little over saturated without getting blotchy.

Ran a median noise filter set to 10
Ran Guassian blur set to 3.0
Changed the layer mode to color

Flattened image

USM at 200, raduis 0.4, Threshold 8 (use something like 0.8 or .9
for your original sized image)

this is the end result
Thanks Brad - what was the opacity of the new layer? I would have been afraid the blurring would effect the birds as well, but it looks fine. Thanks, Cindy
--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 
Does PE allow you to do layers? If so, what I did was to just drag
a sky pic over to your seagull photo. It ended up as it's own
layer, which I moved on top of the seagulls layer. I temporarily
made the sky pic a bit transparent so I could see the seagull
layer, then moved the sky around until I got it where I wanted it.

After that, I added a mask to the sky layer, made sure the
foreground color was black and the background color was set to
white. Then I used a large soft brush to start blending the two
layers. At first I had the opacity set to a high number to knock
out the bottom half of the sky-- no real blending was needed here--
just needed to get rid of it so the rock would show. When that was
done, I set the opacity number of the brush to about 20 and started
my blending. After a bit of time at that number, I lightened the
opacity up a bit more, to about 10 to finesse bits and pieces here
& there.

The black color used on the mask will erase the top layer pixels.
If I tap the "X" key, my background and foreground colors will
switch places. White will now be the foreground color, which is
useful to add parts of the top layer (the sky layer in this case)
back if you've gone too far.
PSE does layers but I'm not sure about the background/foreground color in the layers. I just took a look and it doesn't jump out at me anyway how to do that.

Thanks Nancy! Cindy

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top