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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-23 09:24:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Fri, 23 May 2014 00:18:51 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 06:15:22 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 04:31:01 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 19:51:08 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 02:11:36 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:02:00 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2014.05.20, 23:46 , Eric Stevens wrote: Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza I like the basic scene. I do not see any problem with the amount of dreary sky. To be sure, a sky full of white is not usually appealing, but there is subtle shading and blues that makes it work. If anything I have issues with the thick green plants in the extreme foreground (images 1 - 3). And of course the purple/green fringing on the branch is simply not acceptable (Camera raw can be helpful with that). Damn! I missed that. I thought I had got rid of all fringes. If you shot NEFs it is a pretty simple correction in the latest version of ACR, or in LR5. Just zoom in to 100% at an obviously affected area. Go to Lens Correction-Color(check *Remove Chromatic Aberration*)- adjust sliders to neutralize. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_707.jpg The high aspect ratio shot ("cropped") that hh posted works the best overall, IMO - except for the purple fringe issue. Even at full magnification in ACR the fringes are barely visible. The very prononounced fringes in the files in Dropbox are due to my efforts to enlarge the image size and to sharpen the result. I first worked separately upon the greenery by cutting it out with a layer mask which included the various flax stalks, branches and twigs protruding into the sea and the hills behind. The original image size was 3008 x 2000. After cropping I increased the size to 8419 x 5953. After allowing for the cropping I estimate that was about a 16 times increase in the number of pixels (4 times increase on each side). Smart sharpen was then not working for me and I sharpened the image with multiple passes of unsharp mask at 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 pixel. That last pixel produced fringing all over the place so I reversed it with ctrl+z. I suspect I should have undone the 2 pixel sharpen also. The purple colour can be explained in part by the fact that the flax stalks are deep purple. You can find the original NEF file at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF I will play with that. OK! Without second guessing your intentions and actual adjustments I took a quick look at it and did the following: Opened in ACR, set camera profile to camera standard, set the 18-70mm lens profile, and activated the CA correction moving the purple slider slightly to the right. In the Basic panel I set the black & white points, opened up the shadows, checked highlights, & added some clarity. In the Details panel I set the sharpening to 124% with a 1.4 radius, & applied a mask to take the overcast out of the sharpening equation. I then checked for spots, and guess what you have a bunch of dustspots up in the broad expanse of the overcast. I fixed those. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Opened into PS CC, in ProPhoto RGB 3008x2000 @ 360 ppi: I went to *Image Size* and set to your 8419x5953 @360 ppi. Selected crop tool, and set that to 8419x5953 @360 ppi, then did what I could to come closest to your #2 crop. For a different crop version I selected a 16:9 ratio which comes out at 8419x4736 @360. I did no other molestation. So here are those two crop versions with the CA taken care of: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project Interesting. You brought up the greenery in the foreground from out of the depths of darkness but you did likewise with the hills in the background. It was that very problem that caused me to separate the foreground from the background with a layer mask. The two regions require quite different treatment. As I said, I was doing a quick down and dirty treatment looking at three things: ACR NEF processing where I dealt with basics, including CF correction, sharpening, etc. Resizing and two crops to final dimensions similar to yours. My primary concern was fixing the CF issue. I didn't consider any other treatment including your method of resizing and sharpening with either Smart Sharpen or multiple passes of USM. I thought that this was an image which could suffer from a heavy hand with sharpening. Just my opinion. What I will do a third, more deliberate version which I will add to that DB folder later today. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-23 11:29:25 +0000, Savageduck said:
On 2014-05-23 09:24:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Fri, 23 May 2014 00:18:51 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 06:15:22 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 04:31:01 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 19:51:08 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 02:11:36 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:02:00 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2014.05.20, 23:46 , Eric Stevens wrote: Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza I like the basic scene. I do not see any problem with the amount of dreary sky. To be sure, a sky full of white is not usually appealing, but there is subtle shading and blues that makes it work. If anything I have issues with the thick green plants in the extreme foreground (images 1 - 3). And of course the purple/green fringing on the branch is simply not acceptable (Camera raw can be helpful with that). Damn! I missed that. I thought I had got rid of all fringes. If you shot NEFs it is a pretty simple correction in the latest version of ACR, or in LR5. Just zoom in to 100% at an obviously affected area. Go to Lens Correction-Color(check *Remove Chromatic Aberration*)- adjust sliders to neutralize. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_707.jpg The high aspect ratio shot ("cropped") that hh posted works the best overall, IMO - except for the purple fringe issue. Even at full magnification in ACR the fringes are barely visible. The very prononounced fringes in the files in Dropbox are due to my efforts to enlarge the image size and to sharpen the result. I first worked separately upon the greenery by cutting it out with a layer mask which included the various flax stalks, branches and twigs protruding into the sea and the hills behind. The original image size was 3008 x 2000. After cropping I increased the size to 8419 x 5953. After allowing for the cropping I estimate that was about a 16 times increase in the number of pixels (4 times increase on each side). Smart sharpen was then not working for me and I sharpened the image with multiple passes of unsharp mask at 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 pixel. That last pixel produced fringing all over the place so I reversed it with ctrl+z. I suspect I should have undone the 2 pixel sharpen also. The purple colour can be explained in part by the fact that the flax stalks are deep purple. You can find the original NEF file at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF I will play with that. OK! Without second guessing your intentions and actual adjustments I took a quick look at it and did the following: Opened in ACR, set camera profile to camera standard, set the 18-70mm lens profile, and activated the CA correction moving the purple slider slightly to the right. In the Basic panel I set the black & white points, opened up the shadows, checked highlights, & added some clarity. In the Details panel I set the sharpening to 124% with a 1.4 radius, & applied a mask to take the overcast out of the sharpening equation. I then checked for spots, and guess what you have a bunch of dustspots up in the broad expanse of the overcast. I fixed those. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Opened into PS CC, in ProPhoto RGB 3008x2000 @ 360 ppi: I went to *Image Size* and set to your 8419x5953 @360 ppi. Selected crop tool, and set that to 8419x5953 @360 ppi, then did what I could to come closest to your #2 crop. For a different crop version I selected a 16:9 ratio which comes out at 8419x4736 @360. I did no other molestation. So here are those two crop versions with the CA taken care of: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project Interesting. You brought up the greenery in the foreground from out of the depths of darkness but you did likewise with the hills in the background. It was that very problem that caused me to separate the foreground from the background with a layer mask. The two regions require quite different treatment. As I said, I was doing a quick down and dirty treatment looking at three things: ACR NEF processing where I dealt with basics, including CF correction, sharpening, etc. Resizing and two crops to final dimensions similar to yours. My primary concern was fixing the CF issue. I didn't consider any other treatment including your method of resizing and sharpening with either Smart Sharpen or multiple passes of USM. I thought that this was an image which could suffer from a heavy hand with sharpening. Just my opinion. What I will do a third, more deliberate version which I will add to that DB folder later today. OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project -- Regards, Savageduck |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-23 12:42:13 +0000, Savageduck said:
On 2014-05-23 11:29:25 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 09:24:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Fri, 23 May 2014 00:18:51 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 06:15:22 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 04:31:01 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 19:51:08 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 02:11:36 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:02:00 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2014.05.20, 23:46 , Eric Stevens wrote: Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza I like the basic scene. I do not see any problem with the amount of dreary sky. To be sure, a sky full of white is not usually appealing, but there is subtle shading and blues that makes it work. If anything I have issues with the thick green plants in the extreme foreground (images 1 - 3). And of course the purple/green fringing on the branch is simply not acceptable (Camera raw can be helpful with that). Damn! I missed that. I thought I had got rid of all fringes. If you shot NEFs it is a pretty simple correction in the latest version of ACR, or in LR5. Just zoom in to 100% at an obviously affected area. Go to Lens Correction-Color(check *Remove Chromatic Aberration*)- adjust sliders to neutralize. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_707.jpg The high aspect ratio shot ("cropped") that hh posted works the best overall, IMO - except for the purple fringe issue. Even at full magnification in ACR the fringes are barely visible. The very prononounced fringes in the files in Dropbox are due to my efforts to enlarge the image size and to sharpen the result. I first worked separately upon the greenery by cutting it out with a layer mask which included the various flax stalks, branches and twigs protruding into the sea and the hills behind. The original image size was 3008 x 2000. After cropping I increased the size to 8419 x 5953. After allowing for the cropping I estimate that was about a 16 times increase in the number of pixels (4 times increase on each side). Smart sharpen was then not working for me and I sharpened the image with multiple passes of unsharp mask at 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 pixel. That last pixel produced fringing all over the place so I reversed it with ctrl+z. I suspect I should have undone the 2 pixel sharpen also. The purple colour can be explained in part by the fact that the flax stalks are deep purple. You can find the original NEF file at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF I will play with that. OK! Without second guessing your intentions and actual adjustments I took a quick look at it and did the following: Opened in ACR, set camera profile to camera standard, set the 18-70mm lens profile, and activated the CA correction moving the purple slider slightly to the right. In the Basic panel I set the black & white points, opened up the shadows, checked highlights, & added some clarity. In the Details panel I set the sharpening to 124% with a 1.4 radius, & applied a mask to take the overcast out of the sharpening equation. I then checked for spots, and guess what you have a bunch of dustspots up in the broad expanse of the overcast. I fixed those. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Opened into PS CC, in ProPhoto RGB 3008x2000 @ 360 ppi: I went to *Image Size* and set to your 8419x5953 @360 ppi. Selected crop tool, and set that to 8419x5953 @360 ppi, then did what I could to come closest to your #2 crop. For a different crop version I selected a 16:9 ratio which comes out at 8419x4736 @360. I did no other molestation. So here are those two crop versions with the CA taken care of: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project Interesting. You brought up the greenery in the foreground from out of the depths of darkness but you did likewise with the hills in the background. It was that very problem that caused me to separate the foreground from the background with a layer mask. The two regions require quite different treatment. As I said, I was doing a quick down and dirty treatment looking at three things: ACR NEF processing where I dealt with basics, including CF correction, sharpening, etc. Resizing and two crops to final dimensions similar to yours. My primary concern was fixing the CF issue. I didn't consider any other treatment including your method of resizing and sharpening with either Smart Sharpen or multiple passes of USM. I thought that this was an image which could suffer from a heavy hand with sharpening. Just my opinion. What I will do a third, more deliberate version which I will add to that DB folder later today. OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project BTW: Here was my crop POV. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_714.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 5/23/14 PDT, 5:54 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-23 12:42:13 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 11:29:25 +0000, Savageduck said: Snipped bits out OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project BTW: Here was my crop POV. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_714.jpg For my taste, foreground is too crunchy, diverts attention. As to cropping, I'd like to see more open space- a gap in the flora- on the left side, showing a bit of open ocean. I also like the B+W better. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-23 15:23:22 +0000, John McWilliams said:
On 5/23/14 PDT, 5:54 AM, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 12:42:13 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 11:29:25 +0000, Savageduck said: Snipped bits out OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project BTW: Here was my crop POV. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_714.jpg For my taste, foreground is too crunchy, diverts attention. That is fixable. As to cropping, I'd like to see more open space- a gap in the flora- on the left side, showing a bit of open ocean. That is easier said than done. If you take a look at mt crop POV in screenshot 714 above, you will see that the flora pretty much take up the foreground all the way to the left. I also like the B+W better. Yup! I threw that in there because I felt a B&W rendition would work. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-23 15:23:22 +0000, John McWilliams said:
I also like the B+W better. Yup! B&W can do a nice job when it comes to landscapes, Adams convinced me of that. Here is a little something from Sequoia NP. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...dit-Edit-1.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
In article , Eric Stevens
says... Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza I prefer #1, probably because of the open space & sky. Not #3 because of the disturbing grass in the foreground. #2 is unbalanced in my opinion - too much emphasis on the foreground, no clear message being delivered. -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 5/23/14 PDT, 8:52 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-23 15:23:22 +0000, John McWilliams said: I also like the B+W better. Yup! B&W can do a nice job when it comes to landscapes, Adams convinced me of that. Here is a little something from Sequoia NP. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...dit-Edit-1.jpg Nice! Did you consider 'burning in' the top of the foreground tree? I know you know that term, and many others can 'figger it out'..... |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Fri, 23 May 2014 05:42:13 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On 2014-05-23 11:29:25 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 09:24:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Fri, 23 May 2014 00:18:51 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 06:15:22 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 04:31:01 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 19:51:08 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 02:11:36 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:02:00 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2014.05.20, 23:46 , Eric Stevens wrote: Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza I like the basic scene. I do not see any problem with the amount of dreary sky. To be sure, a sky full of white is not usually appealing, but there is subtle shading and blues that makes it work. If anything I have issues with the thick green plants in the extreme foreground (images 1 - 3). And of course the purple/green fringing on the branch is simply not acceptable (Camera raw can be helpful with that). Damn! I missed that. I thought I had got rid of all fringes. If you shot NEFs it is a pretty simple correction in the latest version of ACR, or in LR5. Just zoom in to 100% at an obviously affected area. Go to Lens Correction-Color(check *Remove Chromatic Aberration*)- adjust sliders to neutralize. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_707.jpg The high aspect ratio shot ("cropped") that hh posted works the best overall, IMO - except for the purple fringe issue. Even at full magnification in ACR the fringes are barely visible. The very prononounced fringes in the files in Dropbox are due to my efforts to enlarge the image size and to sharpen the result. I first worked separately upon the greenery by cutting it out with a layer mask which included the various flax stalks, branches and twigs protruding into the sea and the hills behind. The original image size was 3008 x 2000. After cropping I increased the size to 8419 x 5953. After allowing for the cropping I estimate that was about a 16 times increase in the number of pixels (4 times increase on each side). Smart sharpen was then not working for me and I sharpened the image with multiple passes of unsharp mask at 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 pixel. That last pixel produced fringing all over the place so I reversed it with ctrl+z. I suspect I should have undone the 2 pixel sharpen also. The purple colour can be explained in part by the fact that the flax stalks are deep purple. You can find the original NEF file at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF I will play with that. OK! Without second guessing your intentions and actual adjustments I took a quick look at it and did the following: Opened in ACR, set camera profile to camera standard, set the 18-70mm lens profile, and activated the CA correction moving the purple slider slightly to the right. In the Basic panel I set the black & white points, opened up the shadows, checked highlights, & added some clarity. In the Details panel I set the sharpening to 124% with a 1.4 radius, & applied a mask to take the overcast out of the sharpening equation. I then checked for spots, and guess what you have a bunch of dustspots up in the broad expanse of the overcast. I fixed those. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Opened into PS CC, in ProPhoto RGB 3008x2000 @ 360 ppi: I went to *Image Size* and set to your 8419x5953 @360 ppi. Selected crop tool, and set that to 8419x5953 @360 ppi, then did what I could to come closest to your #2 crop. For a different crop version I selected a 16:9 ratio which comes out at 8419x4736 @360. I did no other molestation. So here are those two crop versions with the CA taken care of: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project Interesting. You brought up the greenery in the foreground from out of the depths of darkness but you did likewise with the hills in the background. It was that very problem that caused me to separate the foreground from the background with a layer mask. The two regions require quite different treatment. As I said, I was doing a quick down and dirty treatment looking at three things: ACR NEF processing where I dealt with basics, including CF correction, sharpening, etc. Resizing and two crops to final dimensions similar to yours. My primary concern was fixing the CF issue. I didn't consider any other treatment including your method of resizing and sharpening with either Smart Sharpen or multiple passes of USM. I thought that this was an image which could suffer from a heavy hand with sharpening. Just my opinion. What I will do a third, more deliberate version which I will add to that DB folder later today. OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg 'Spots'? Those wuz seegulls! Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. I did the sharpening after resizing. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project The hills are good but the greenery should not be as light as in image 3. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Fri, 23 May 2014 05:54:51 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: --- snip --- You can find the original NEF file at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF I will play with that. OK! Without second guessing your intentions and actual adjustments I took a quick look at it and did the following: Opened in ACR, set camera profile to camera standard, set the 18-70mm lens profile, and activated the CA correction moving the purple slider slightly to the right. In the Basic panel I set the black & white points, opened up the shadows, checked highlights, & added some clarity. In the Details panel I set the sharpening to 124% with a 1.4 radius, & applied a mask to take the overcast out of the sharpening equation. I then checked for spots, and guess what you have a bunch of dustspots up in the broad expanse of the overcast. I fixed those. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Opened into PS CC, in ProPhoto RGB 3008x2000 @ 360 ppi: I went to *Image Size* and set to your 8419x5953 @360 ppi. Selected crop tool, and set that to 8419x5953 @360 ppi, then did what I could to come closest to your #2 crop. For a different crop version I selected a 16:9 ratio which comes out at 8419x4736 @360. I did no other molestation. So here are those two crop versions with the CA taken care of: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project Interesting. You brought up the greenery in the foreground from out of the depths of darkness but you did likewise with the hills in the background. It was that very problem that caused me to separate the foreground from the background with a layer mask. The two regions require quite different treatment. As I said, I was doing a quick down and dirty treatment looking at three things: ACR NEF processing where I dealt with basics, including CF correction, sharpening, etc. Resizing and two crops to final dimensions similar to yours. My primary concern was fixing the CF issue. I didn't consider any other treatment including your method of resizing and sharpening with either Smart Sharpen or multiple passes of USM. I thought that this was an image which could suffer from a heavy hand with sharpening. Just my opinion. What I will do a third, more deliberate version which I will add to that DB folder later today. OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project BTW: Here was my crop POV. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_714.jpg Interesting. Just a little more than I used and I don't think it suffers for it. Did you have the eventual size of print in mind when you did it? Having gone back to mine while looking at yours I think I prefer my treatment of the hills: they are darker and more clear cut. That's what I was aiming at when I took the picture. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Upgrade to CS3 - Opinions Wanted | Steven Wandy | Digital Photography | 15 | August 13th 07 07:16 AM |
Upgrade to CS3? Opinions Wanted | Steven Wandy | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | August 10th 07 12:20 AM |
Opinions Wanted | remove | Digital Photography | 5 | October 7th 06 06:46 PM |
Opinions wanted, red sensitivity issue perhaps? | Cheesehead | Digital Photography | 2 | April 17th 06 12:06 AM |
Opinions wanted on Minolta Z6 | crazygolfer | Digital Photography | 1 | November 27th 05 03:21 PM |