I have definately been convinced of the need for a better tool. I was trying to save for a second body (it is very inconvinient when Pentax keeps your only body for three weeks), but I might have to buy lightroom instead. We will see.
Russ On 4/4/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes. You need better tools. Adjustment layers and masking is the way > to go on this sort of image processing problem. > > G > > On Apr 4, 2007, at 4:54 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > > > The land is still muddy. You need to treat the midtones independently > > of the highlights. You can do that with the shadow/highlight tool or > > with curves if you're working in PhotoShop. > > Paul > > On Apr 4, 2007, at 12:51 AM, Russell Kerstetter wrote: > > > >> Here is a new, brighter version. It is still a little dark, but much > >> more than this and the clouds are just a white mess. > >> > >> http://www.avocadohead.com/piclinks/spare.html > >> > >> Thanks again to those who commented. > >> > >> Russ > >> > >> On 4/2/07, Russell Kerstetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Shel and Godders- > >>> > >>> Thanks for taking the time to show me some alternative solutions. I > >>> like both of your different takes, I also like that you were able to > >>> brighten the whole thing up without losing the cloud detail. I > >>> fiddled around for a while this evening, but was not able to > >>> duplicate > >>> our results. I can brighten it up some, but by the time I start to > >>> lose cloud detail the water in the lake is still too dark. But that > >>> may be the price I have to pay for using free software :) So I will > >>> have to mess around with this some more again tomorrow evening and > >>> see > >>> what I can come up with. Thanks again. > >>> > >>> Russ > >>> > >>> On 4/2/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> Your original was rendered extremely dark, Russell. It's a simple > >>>> landscape scene ... rendered up with a bit bit of balancing between > >>>> water and sky, you get this rather nice, rather serene feel out of > >>>> it. I took the liberty of doing a couple of edits to give you an > >>>> idea > >>>> where I'd go with it... It includes your original so you can see > >>>> the > >>>> differences easily. > >>>> > >>>> http://homepage.mac.com/godders/rk2882/ > >>>> > >>>> This is a case where if I was using Lightroom I could likely do > >>>> most > >>>> of what I did with its tools, and presuming I had the RAW file to > >>>> work with, but with just an 8bit image file to work with Photoshop > >>>> allows the kind of gentle, selective editing required to bring > >>>> this up. > >>>> > >>>> 1- Don't underexpose. Determine where the brightest elements are > >>>> that > >>>> you want to retain detail in and expose correctly for that ... > >>>> Placing exposure properly like that takes a little time to figure > >>>> out > >>>> and if you're not sure you should bracket exposure around it. The > >>>> histogram shows you an approximation based on values in the JPEG > >>>> preview that is rendered for every file, but if you're capturing in > >>>> RAW you can work with what looks like a little bit of highlight > >>>> overexposures on the histogram. It's not rigorously calibrated, you > >>>> have to work with it to understand what you're seeing. > >>>> > >>>> 2- Yes, this is a problem. Your screen looks overly bright compared > >>>> to the ambient light and that's tricking your eye. Better to > >>>> calibrate and profile the screen in modest, normal room light and > >>>> work that way so that your eyes and the screen are at proper > >>>> luminance values. I calibrate my screen for 140 lumens, gamma 1.8 > >>>> and > >>>> 5500K white point in normal, indirect room illumination. Move any > >>>> light that glares on the screen to a different position so that's > >>>> not > >>>> a problem. This will make a huge difference in how your photos > >>>> come out. > >>>> > >>>> Godfrey > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Apr 2, 2007, at 12:04 PM, Russell Kerstetter wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Thanks Bruce, PJ, Paul, Markus Shel and Brian for being honest. > >>>>> When > >>>>> I look at it objectively, I agree that it is mostly an > >>>>> uninteresting > >>>>> picture. Maybe next time I will try the 'Auto Compose' function > >>>>> on my > >>>>> DL. > >>>>> > >>>>> I have been told several times, that my pictures are too dark. > >>>>> To be > >>>>> clear, we are talking a few stops dark, but not black or > >>>>> anything like > >>>>> that, right? > >>>>> > >>>>> I think there are two issues here (if anyone cares to comment > >>>>> further): > >>>>> > >>>>> 1) Foremost, I think I have a tendency to underexpose, > >>>>> specifically > >>>>> on shots like this. I really like detail in the clouds and am > >>>>> afraid > >>>>> of losing it even when the clouds are not the most important > >>>>> aspect of > >>>>> the picture. IIRC the histogram for this shot had the highlights > >>>>> touching the first bar from the right (which is a half-stop > >>>>> right?) > >>>>> but I think that what you are seeing on your screen is probably > >>>>> darker > >>>>> than just a half-stop. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2) I usually work in a dark room because I hate glare off the > >>>>> screen. > >>>>> I have been running my mac on gamma 1.8 instead of 2.2, but from > >>>>> what > >>>>> I am hearing I think that is a negligible part of my problem. > >>>>> > >>>>> Russ > >>>>> (here to learn) > >>>>> > >>>>> On 4/1/07, Russell Kerstetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>> This is a reservoir/lake near my mother-in-law's house. Also > >>>>>> this is > >>>>>> the first photo I have processed with iPhoto. I was using > >>>>>> Lightroom > >>>>>> beta, iPhoto definately has less features and some irritating > >>>>>> limitations, but it does have the 'touch-up' tool, which is > >>>>>> pretty > >>>>>> handy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://www.avocadohead.com/piclinks/IMGP2882.html > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Honest comments please, thanks for looking. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Legacy Air, Inc. 11900 Airport Way Broomfield Colorado 80021 (303) 404-0277 fax (303) 404-0280 www.legacy-air.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
