“Wait, that’s not a moon. It’s a space station!”
Crappy composite for @puppymeat (specifically his retweet here).
“Wait, that’s not a moon. It’s a space station!”
Crappy composite for @puppymeat (specifically his retweet here).
Mentioned in this post, an image of the lunar eclipse in its relation to other celestial bodies. Now that I’ve had some time to look over the images, I think that this is my favorite of the evening. But it took some work.
One interesting thing: the street lights are all effectively done with tungsten lighting – they give everything a solid color cast. But the moon & the stars – they’re reflecting what is effectively normal sunlight. Completely different cast.
If you color balance for daylight (I usually have it at 5600K), then the street lights are orange, but the moon is proper. Balance for tungsten and the moon is drab.
The solution: smart objects in Photoshop. One for the main area, one for the sky. Each one with a different color balance. The original was created in RAW, so this didn’t damage the image. Minor masking & everything displays as it should.
Does Orion look too bright? It should, and it’s deliberate. Several curve layers spiking the intensity there, just to bring ‘em out. It’s almost overpowering on a large view, but when you look at a smaller view the stars disappear. This preserves those stars in thumbnails.
Other post-processing: two-pass sharpening on the trees, and a mild blur/ghosting to the tree/snow areas. That was to bring out the calm/softness of the snow, while retaining sharp edges.
Oh, and this is cropped. I was shivering so much when setting this up on the tripod that it came out crooked.
Or seconds, as the case may be. You may remember this post from a few days ago. It was also posted to my photostream on Flickr, where one of the comments expressed surprise that the selective coloring took no more than a few minutes relative to the rest of the image (total time was two hours).
The trick to getting the selective color so quickly was twofold:
To explain: if I were to do this quickly, without the editing out of distracting objects and fine-tuned sharpening, the steps to create this would boil down to:
Looking at it like this, you would think that I hand-painted each bit of color. This should take a lot of time, no? Well, doing it that way would take a lot of time.
I did it a better way. Remember that this is essentially a monochrome image. Mostly green, with some blue and some orange. That means we can almost safely use the Color Select tool in Photoshop to select the individual elements. The sign, for example:
Repeat for the blues.
The transition from CS4 to CS5 seems to be going pretty well – there are a few changes, but nothing that’s really thrown me for a loop. A couple things are extremely (potentially) cool, in the sense that it takes very little time to issue certain fixes. Take the image below, for example:
This is a crop from the original, but it has the important part (I’ll post the non-cropped version in a day or two). Take a close look at the palm trees: looks like a great silhouette of a lone palm, right? Well, the reality wasn’t so: there were two bunches of palms, one just to the left of the ones you see here. I didn’t like these extra palms – I felt it distracted from the overall feeling of individual oneness: one set of palms, one Molokini, One Kaho’olawe, one ocean… so the extra palms needed to go.
Following up on the thoughts on this post, witness the image to right. Now, I’m not claiming it’s the best image, nor am I trying to even state that I’m done with post-processing. I am, but only because I’ve decided I’m not happy with the composition.
But I am happy with the results of my tests. In this case, I now know: when doing handheld bracketed shots, Photoshop CS5′s “Merge to HDR Pro” function is incredibly more useful than Photomatix 3.2. It’s not just the ghosting, although that sure cleaned up a lot.
No, it’s how easily CS5 finds like components and merges them together. Seriously, it’s just incredible: this is a three-frame HDR, in JPG. Compare the sharpness (not the contrast) and the merging to this: Click to continue »
Just a test shot that I thought I’d post. I may be putting up a couple more over this evening. Testing CS5′s “Merge to HDR Pro” function, comparing it to Photomatix Pro. This one is an excercise in rescuing a screwed up frame: I had the color balance set to tungsten when I took this, so everything was hyper-blue. Arguably still is, but that’s the HDR saturation effect. Click to continue »
Continuing on from yesterday’s thoughts: some crops of the reflectins and thoughts on why they would have made a better photo. Click to continue »
Permit me, if you will, the opportunity to share a failure with you. The image (to the right) is to what I refer to: abuilding reflected on a koi pond.
This was taken at sunset on our recent trip to Hawaii. The sun had just passed behind a building and the reflections were strikingly strong. There is no amplification of the effect here. A quick shot and on I went, chasing a tired 5-year old.
Looking at it later, I noticed that something was… missing. But what? Click to continue »
It’s not your camera. It’s not your lens. It’s not the paper, or the printer, or the print lab.
It’s your post processing. Click to continue »
Disclaimer: anything I put into this entry is purely based on my own experience. All content is my personal opinion.
Continuing with online printers: this is the last company that I’ll review, and my favorite. You’ll see why:
Color shifting: Want to avoid it altogether? Download their color profiles (one per paper/print type). Output your images with that color profile, and what you’ll see, you’ll get. Take that back: one time their printers were out of calibration. They re-printed free of charge. Thumbs up, obviously.
Crops: for smaller pics, maybe a pixel. Larger pics (up to 16×20, in my experience): maybe three pixels. As good as it gets.
Paper quality: all quality papers (Kodak, usually), and you get your choice of finish. Includes metallics, glossy, others… More thumbs up.
Sharpness: I’ve generally had it hit or miss with them until the most recent print job. I finally found that they’re considered a “contone print shop”, and you do “contone sharpening”. More about that another day, though.
Overall: AdoramaPix has pretty much earned my loyalty. Some prices might be higher than with competitors, but the quality is there and they cater to the more advanced amateur & pro alike.