Dammit
After a long winding mountain drive one day last week during our vacation, we arrived at the Breaks just in time for sunset. From some vantage points, the sun had already set. I was snapping like crazy. When all was said and done, this one looked to be The Shot™ when previewing in the camera.
One shot taken like this, and I thought I had it. Fool!
Usually I take several shots from the same vantage point to compensate for a pretty good eye but a shortage of technical skill. But, I was rushed and in awe at the same time, and I am lazy in that I don't like to carry around silly things like lenses and tripods and common sense. That would get in the way of it being fun, you see.
The Shot™ was tainted by the low light making it more susceptible to movement blur, which it did indeed fall victim to. So, I did the only thing I could. I photoshopped the heck out of in as a last-ditch effort to save it somehow.
Now it's a blend of watercolor and dry brush filters and, well, bleechiness. If I wanted a painting I'd get a painting. Really, I pretty much despise those paint effect filters. This is supposed to be a photo at the perfect sunset moment, dangit!
Bah.
Instead, here's a cat from a few days later in front of a country store. Not as time sensitive as a sunset, unless you consider that moments later it was obsessed with its genitals. This is a blend of the color and a sepia version of the photo. Now, that kind of photoshopping I can have a blast with.
Back to photo editing and such. Only a few hundred more to go!
for the NNAF
5 comments:
Well, I'm technically clueless. But I can say that when your page loaded and I saw that photo at the top, I just thought it was wonderful, and wanted to be *there*.
But I understand that frustration of having an idea and it not working out.
Google for HDR, also know as High Dynamic range. and check out the Flickr HDR group.
another solution for the sunset picture is to select only the sky (via select color range) then invert the selection to get the land. Apply levels separately and manually to sky and land.
You could do this in various layers.
The problem is that the range of light from the sky to the ground is too wide, and you need to work them separately somehow.
Hi fraud,
(Or should I call you sick?)
Haha, I already did work them separately! :P You should see the original - the sky is not as vibrant, and good luck seeing any details in the bottom half of the photo. My big beef is that the darned thing is not sharp and I only took one shot like this. The only way to make it not as blecchy ooky movement blurry was to apply some dumb paint filters, thus rendering it it merely ooky.
I'm old school Photoshop (been using it pro for as long as its been around). I rely heavily on dodging, burning, hue/sat, curves, levels, and unapologetic cropping; with selective color, history brush, and layer blending thrown in, etc. (Not that HDR done right wouldn't be a good thing to know, but yecch, that seems to be the newest thing that's taken hold of flickr and there's lots of bad stuff out there!) So, I haven't taken much interest in it. As with any technique, I'll figure it out on an as-needed basis.
For the most part, it's fun to futz around and see what I can make of something. I just wish I hadn't blown it on the camera end with this one.
Thanks for the info :)
Another angle is to take the original image, and duplicate the original image in many multiple layers
The trick hear is that each layer can be set to screen which will gradually accumulate to enhance the dynamic rage.
You can use this with multiply as well when the image is too light. Other effects are sometimes useful
Try this with one layer on a dark image, then try repeated applications.
Combinations of this with selections might do the trick
then you can flatten the image, and repeat as needed.
Of course, work using copies of the original
Post a Comment