Lost Canadian
Expedition Leader
Clark, where did you get your copy?
Post Process
- Thread starter Lost Canadian
- Start date
taco2go
Explorer
Here is my )really) quick summary of the specifics which I feel is
similar to Brad's in overall rendering.
1. I thought there was too much of a blue cast - so I removed it just by turning up the WB a smidgen (5409). I love the pewter gray of the clouds and the far seascape- reminds me of Lake Superior. So I reframed the image to leave out the clear patch of sky.
2. I left Saturation and Vibrance at 0
3. I burned the sky a little using the grad filter tool
3. I turned up the clarity (19) to bring out the disturbed water
4. Tone curve- Linear setting. I did not set any split points- this was all by feel. From what I've gathered, this tool works VERY differently from Curves in PS.
(no option of setting white, gray or black point, no option of working in different channels). It simply gives you control over the tonal values in an image. In the end I had Highlights 41 Lights 23 Darks -9, shadows -27.
4. Sharpened
similar to Brad's in overall rendering.
1. I thought there was too much of a blue cast - so I removed it just by turning up the WB a smidgen (5409). I love the pewter gray of the clouds and the far seascape- reminds me of Lake Superior. So I reframed the image to leave out the clear patch of sky.
2. I left Saturation and Vibrance at 0
3. I burned the sky a little using the grad filter tool
3. I turned up the clarity (19) to bring out the disturbed water
4. Tone curve- Linear setting. I did not set any split points- this was all by feel. From what I've gathered, this tool works VERY differently from Curves in PS.
(no option of setting white, gray or black point, no option of working in different channels). It simply gives you control over the tonal values in an image. In the end I had Highlights 41 Lights 23 Darks -9, shadows -27.
4. Sharpened
Tucson T4R
Expedition Leader
I edited my image post with the steps I went through in my processing.
DiploStrat
Expedition Leader
Great Thread!
A mild "philosophical" comment. You will note that Trevor, unlike many, starts by running the RAW image back to its flattest possible state.
When third party RAW developers (think Lightroom/Aperture/etc.) they tended to be absolutely flat. And they were getting killed in the photo fora. "Ugly images." "Only Nikon software can get it right!" "Aperture loses data." etc.
That has changed a lot as Apple and Adobe now make a massive effort to copy Canon and Nikon's defaults. Nothing wrong with either approach; you just have to understand that neither your camera nor your software is absolutely flat.
Hmmm. Maybe we need a "lab" setting.
In the meantime, have fun with the sliders.
A mild "philosophical" comment. You will note that Trevor, unlike many, starts by running the RAW image back to its flattest possible state.
When third party RAW developers (think Lightroom/Aperture/etc.) they tended to be absolutely flat. And they were getting killed in the photo fora. "Ugly images." "Only Nikon software can get it right!" "Aperture loses data." etc.
That has changed a lot as Apple and Adobe now make a massive effort to copy Canon and Nikon's defaults. Nothing wrong with either approach; you just have to understand that neither your camera nor your software is absolutely flat.
Hmmm. Maybe we need a "lab" setting.
In the meantime, have fun with the sliders.
Clark White
Explorer
I just copied his first screen shot and cropped out everything else. Not the best way I know, but I didn't see anywhere to down load a copy? I'm betting it was probably the JPG compression when I saved it because it didn't have that look until I posted it up here.
Clark
Lost Canadian
Expedition Leader
I probably could if I did this on a more frequent basis, I don't really want to create an account for one file though, it's easier for me to just email it.
Anyway as to the photos. More then the outcomes, I found it interesting to see the different steps you guys took to process the image. Is there a specific reason why you guys do things a certain way or are your steps more trial and error, feeling your way through? Take sharpening for instance, everyone seemed to do it a little differently and at different points of the process.
Lost Canadian
Expedition Leader
Ah, if you want the RAW file just fire me a PM with your email address and I'll send it your way.
Tucson T4R
Expedition Leader
A lot of my process I learned from Scott Kelby's book Lightroom 3 for digital photographers. I try to stay away from sharpening very much and use the clarity more heavily. I have seen discussions about not sharpening first due to the sharpening of noise prior to noise reduction but per Scott, in Lightroom which step you do first really doesn't matter. So I do minor 20% sharpening on import and then either none or little during the processing. Then on export I usually go with low for screen view or standard for prints.
The only steps I do for most images are the the initial lens and camera calibrations, picking the camera calibration based on the image I am working on. Most of the time I start from the Canon Standard calibration. From there my work flow changes a lot based on the image and what I am trying to accomplish. Grad filters if I have a straight separation and I want one portion of the image to have effects applied but not globally across the entire image. I like the grad filters but only use them about 15% of the time when I need the effect.
From there I am all over the map. :sombrero: Sometime I will desaturate to tone things down and sometimes I push up color vibrancy and saturation if I feel it takes me where I want to go. Sometime I push the curves to accentuate tonal contrast and sometimes I like a more linear contrast curve. To me each unique image requires a different approach.
An example is how you approached your car on the street shot from Cuba. By starting with a very flat RAW image it gave you the room you wanted to make the car pop with the color and contrast you wanted that made it stand out form the more neutral background.
Lost Canadian
Expedition Leader
Cool!
When it comes to sharpening I do it at the end and I approach every image individually. With a full 12-16 megapixel image I find I can typically get away with a radius of 1-1.5 pixels. If I crop the image or it's an image from a lower res. camera I almost always have to reduce the radius. Also, if it's something like a portrait shot I tend to use a lot less, (numerically high) masking and detail (numerically low) to keep the sharpening away from things like skin and to keep the emphasis only in areas I want sharpened, like edge details in the eyes.
When it comes to sharpening I do it at the end and I approach every image individually. With a full 12-16 megapixel image I find I can typically get away with a radius of 1-1.5 pixels. If I crop the image or it's an image from a lower res. camera I almost always have to reduce the radius. Also, if it's something like a portrait shot I tend to use a lot less, (numerically high) masking and detail (numerically low) to keep the sharpening away from things like skin and to keep the emphasis only in areas I want sharpened, like edge details in the eyes.
nwoods
Expedition Leader
That worked brilliantly. I really like the effect.
Tucson T4R
Expedition Leader
Thanks. I think warming up the image with WB combined with pulling down the blue saturation made the sail a lot whiter looking which helped make it stand out a bit more.
It's funny though when I go back to an image I processed in the past and start from scratch I never seem to make all the same choices. I guess more consistency will come with experience.
I'm looking forward to seeing some more personal approaches to compare. In the end I am hoping Trevor will post up his final version. Then I can go crawl back under my rock. :elkgrin:
Pathfinder
Adventurer
I started with this image in Lightroom3, but quickly realized I would prefer to render this via two different renderings and then blend them, so I opened the file in Adobe Camera Raw and into Photoshop as a Smart Object. I then duped the Smart Object ( Convert to New Smart Object via Copy ) so that I could take the upper layer back to ACR and render it into B&W to do a luminosity blend to that great sky, to add some drama to it. I got my white balance with the eyedropper off the cabin of the boat, and increased the steepness of the curve for the sail.
I used the Hue/Saturation sliders to pop the orange jacket for a bit of color in this almost monochromatic image and captured this image which resembles pretty closely what other folks have already done.
So I brought the rendered jpg back into Lightroom3 and decided to capitalize on the monochromatic quality of the image, and just take it to Black and white.
The settings in LR3 for the B&W conversion are in the following image - it is not in sRGB but a screen grab so the color will not match the image above which is tagged to be displayed correctly on the web.
I used the Hue/Saturation sliders to pop the orange jacket for a bit of color in this almost monochromatic image and captured this image which resembles pretty closely what other folks have already done.
So I brought the rendered jpg back into Lightroom3 and decided to capitalize on the monochromatic quality of the image, and just take it to Black and white.
The settings in LR3 for the B&W conversion are in the following image - it is not in sRGB but a screen grab so the color will not match the image above which is tagged to be displayed correctly on the web.
Tucson T4R
Expedition Leader
Wife's artistic input
My wife gave me her artistic input and we modified the crop to only show smaller view of the blue sky, desaturated the color a bit in the ocean and added more black to the storm clouds.
And she wants to know which "Garland version" is better. :sombrero:
My wife gave me her artistic input and we modified the crop to only show smaller view of the blue sky, desaturated the color a bit in the ocean and added more black to the storm clouds.
And she wants to know which "Garland version" is better. :sombrero:
Similar threads
