A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Steeples - Cooper's Comments



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 13th 13, 05:23 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Tim Conway[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 438
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.



  #2  
Old February 13th 13, 06:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.


Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #3  
Old February 13th 13, 07:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Tim Conway[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 438
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013021310052035001-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.


Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg

--

Yep. Looks good. That's what I would've attempted had I had photoshop.


  #4  
Old February 14th 13, 01:47 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 236
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.


Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.
  #5  
Old February 14th 13, 05:34 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On 2013-02-13 17:47:33 -0800, Rob said:

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.


Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.


Naah! It was just a quick fix to get rid of the utility lines.

....but since you wanted sky + clouds, the quick fix is to add a
background sky layer beneath the layer with the building. Add a layer
mask to the building layer, and just paint in the new sky with black on
the layer mask. Much quicker and easier than making a selection. So
utility lines gone and new sky painted in.
....and here is that quick fix sky, not perfect, but good enough for
this exercise.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-2.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #6  
Old February 14th 13, 07:48 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:34:48 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-02-13 17:47:33 -0800, Rob said:

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.

Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.


Naah! It was just a quick fix to get rid of the utility lines.

...but since you wanted sky + clouds, the quick fix is to add a
background sky layer beneath the layer with the building. Add a layer
mask to the building layer, and just paint in the new sky with black on
the layer mask. Much quicker and easier than making a selection. So
utility lines gone and new sky painted in.
...and here is that quick fix sky, not perfect, but good enough for
this exercise.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-2.jpg


Nope. I can see the masking. :-(
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #7  
Old February 14th 13, 08:23 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Tim Conway[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 438
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013021321344871490-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-02-13 17:47:33 -0800, Rob said:

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway"
said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted
to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.

Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.


Naah! It was just a quick fix to get rid of the utility lines.

...but since you wanted sky + clouds, the quick fix is to add a background
sky layer beneath the layer with the building. Add a layer mask to the
building layer, and just paint in the new sky with black on the layer
mask. Much quicker and easier than making a selection. So utility lines
gone and new sky painted in.
...and here is that quick fix sky, not perfect, but good enough for this
exercise.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-2.jpg


Nice. I wish I had my photoshop back - I'm using a loaner computer that has
such few RAM it is impossible at the moment, but I hope to have it again
before long.
Thanks for playing with this and your comments.
Tim


  #8  
Old February 14th 13, 08:25 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On 2013-02-13 23:48:13 -0800, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:34:48 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-02-13 17:47:33 -0800, Rob said:

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.

Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.


Naah! It was just a quick fix to get rid of the utility lines.

...but since you wanted sky + clouds, the quick fix is to add a
background sky layer beneath the layer with the building. Add a layer
mask to the building layer, and just paint in the new sky with black on
the layer mask. Much quicker and easier than making a selection. So
utility lines gone and new sky painted in.
...and here is that quick fix sky, not perfect, but good enough for
this exercise.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-2.jpg


Nope. I can see the masking. :-(


What do you mean nope?
Where did I say that was perfect?
It was just a down & dirty sloppy job. If I was serious I would
probably have taken much more care. I had no reason to.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #9  
Old February 14th 13, 08:32 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On 2013-02-14 00:23:24 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013021321344871490-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-02-13 17:47:33 -0800, Rob said:

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway"
said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted
to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.

Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.


Naah! It was just a quick fix to get rid of the utility lines.

...but since you wanted sky + clouds, the quick fix is to add a background
sky layer beneath the layer with the building. Add a layer mask to the
building layer, and just paint in the new sky with black on the layer
mask. Much quicker and easier than making a selection. So utility lines
gone and new sky painted in.
...and here is that quick fix sky, not perfect, but good enough for this
exercise.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-2.jpg


Nice. I wish I had my photoshop back - I'm using a loaner computer that has
such few RAM it is impossible at the moment, but I hope to have it again
before long.
Thanks for playing with this and your comments.
Tim


I hope you get your digital darkroom back together soon. It is just fun
to play with the tools we have available now. Thanks for that
opportunity.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #10  
Old February 14th 13, 09:16 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Steeples - Cooper's Comments

On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 00:25:52 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-02-13 23:48:13 -0800, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:34:48 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-02-13 17:47:33 -0800, Rob said:

On 14/02/2013 5:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-02-13 09:23:57 -0800, "Tim Conway" said:


Tim Conway's views are all almost ruined by distracting elements
of the wires and the television antenna.

You're right. I'm photoshopless at the moment or I would've attempted to
clone a lot of that stuff out.

As always, thanks everyone for your comments - you're appreciated.

Well here is a quick fix. ;-)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-1.jpg



You could have selected the sky and rendered clouds.

Naah! It was just a quick fix to get rid of the utility lines.

...but since you wanted sky + clouds, the quick fix is to add a
background sky layer beneath the layer with the building. Add a layer
mask to the building layer, and just paint in the new sky with black on
the layer mask. Much quicker and easier than making a selection. So
utility lines gone and new sky painted in.
...and here is that quick fix sky, not perfect, but good enough for
this exercise.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Tim-QF-2.jpg


Nope. I can see the masking. :-(


What do you mean nope?
Where did I say that was perfect?
It was just a down & dirty sloppy job. If I was serious I would
probably have taken much more care. I had no reason to.


Maybe I misunderstood you. When you wrote "good enough for the
exercise" I thought you meant [SI] but now I see that you meant
something slightly different. I agrre, it was good enough to
illustrate the point.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[SI] Pairs, etc - Cooper's Comments on in-house shots PeterN Digital Photography 3 July 23rd 12 11:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.