Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: "Big" -Processing Help Request  (Read 2547 times)

Todd Suttles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 677
  • Hi, amateur learning my way...
    • Todd Suttles
"Big" -Processing Help Request
« on: December 09, 2013, 07:44:15 pm »

I have uploaded the camera raw capture and my most recent rendering of it. This is an old 2010 image I continue to practice on as I hopefully learn a little more over time. Would very much appreciate suggestions on how to handle it (in Lr) from those of you who know so much more than I. Thank you in advance. -t
Logged
One Day At A Time

Ed Blagden

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 502
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2013, 01:16:16 am »

Todd,

This isn't such a great image to demonstrate advanced LR technique with - the "problem" is that the unedited image is basically OK with no glaring issues requiring any major fixes before you export to print or JPEG.

Colour version.  For a colour rendition of this image you really don't need to do much in LR.  If it were mine I would go to the Basic panel, find my black point and white point, reduce highlights a bit and lighten the shadows, maybe add a little clarity (this image doesn't need much) and deepen the sky using a touch of vibrance (not too much.  Please.)  Sharpen (not too much.  Please.), fix any chromatic aberrations (I bet you have lots of this in the twigs against the sky although of course we can't see this on a low res jpeg) and you are done.  Apart from the CA these are all basic and simple adjustments that you would do to most images, no LR magic is required for this one. 

B&W Version.  Why?   ???  I don't really see this image working in B&W.  I tried a number of different BW colour mixes on your image and none of them offer any real improvement over the colour version of your image.  The basic problem is that all the major details in the image (foreground, tree, house) are living in essentially the same colour channels (orange and yellow) and so messing with the B&W colour sliders doesn't really bring anything out.  Darkening the sky using the blue channel doesn't work either because of all those pesky twigs in the tree; you just end up with a mess of halos.  Some images should stay in colour, and I think this is one of them.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2013, 03:32:52 am by Ed Blagden »
Logged

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 793
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2013, 03:25:52 pm »

If you have Photoshop, just for grins...ya might try running it thru faux HDR...it might help.        ;)
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with

Todd Suttles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 677
  • Hi, amateur learning my way...
    • Todd Suttles
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2013, 05:06:10 pm »

Thanks Ed for explaining this to me. Now I understand the reason I haven't been able to find a BW version I liked. I assumed it was something I did not know how to try -not something that wasn't going to work. Your explanation of the limited color channels sunk in as the explanation. I don't think I like the image in color but will do all the suggestions you recommend. I think I know how to correct the CA: set the Lr "remove" option and then do the best I can using the sliders on whatever remains?

In addition to your suggestion to purchase Jardine Lr5; I also got his Image Correction Videos which I suspect will help me as well. I wrote him and thanked him for his videos and sent him the link to your post recommending his site to me (per his request).
As always, thanks for taking the time to help.
-t
Logged
One Day At A Time

Ed Blagden

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 502
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2013, 11:35:48 pm »

No problem, Todd. 

Look, keep in mind that I am not a LR Ninja, and certainly am no guru on BW processing so keep in mind that I may be wrong and there may be something you can do here.  My comment was simply based on spending 2 minutes on your image in LR.  My thought was "move on, nothing to see here" for the reasons I set out in my first reply.  But just remember you should not always believe everything some random guy says on the internet, even if the random guy is sincere.  Maybe I am missing something!

The basic adjustments to the colour image are something you should be doing on every single RAW image that comes out of your camera apart from the outright rejects.  These basic adjustments take less than 2 minutes on most images, at least to get you to a good point of departure.  FWIW my own workflow, after I have selected my images, goes like this: Lens Correct (just tick Profile Corrections and Remove CA); crop if needed; set a nice looking white balance; adjust exposure if needed; adjust contrast if needed (usually upwards until the mid tones look OK); set white and black points using the whites and blacks sliders; adjust highlights (usually downwards); adjust shadows (usually upwards); and finally move the clarity and vibrance sliders around until everything looks OK.

Once you learn to do this correctly then you will hopefully have an image that looks OK, and then you can decide whether to to dive off and start playing with the tone curve, HSL, the local adjustment tools etc.  But always start with the basic adjustments on every image and you will quickly develop a feel for what is going on in an image.

Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2013, 09:14:44 am »

+1. Exactly! And, as Ed said, when you describe it in words it sounds a lot more complicated than it is. It's about a two minute job, if that. Correct exposure, very slightly clipped white and black points (unless it's, say, a fog picture), and clarity, probably are the most important parts of this primary prep. Also, if you don't have preliminary sharpening already set by default, a raw image always requires a bit of capture sharpening.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Todd Suttles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 677
  • Hi, amateur learning my way...
    • Todd Suttles
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2013, 08:13:23 pm »

Thanks Ed. I appreciate your suggestions and advice as well as those of everyone else who has taken the time to give me their two cents worth. I am learning so much from you guys that respond to me, and even more from what you say to each other about your own work. While I am "new" to digital processing I am not new to the process of artistic critique and education. I have spent the last 35 years of my "real job" climbing the ladder from terrified, wet behind the ears hair stylist, through salon owner ships, international educator for L'Oreal, etc etc. Now I finally get to play at being what I said I wanted to do at age 5: photography.

So... don't worry about me although I do appreciate your "disclosure statements" I am able to recognize the difference between well intended suggestions and ego rants. I've seen them all! At least with photographs, if I mess them up I can just ignore them and move on; they don't burst into tears  :o .That doesn't happen any more. I am sure it will happen less with photography as I move along. So THANK YOU and this terrific forum and everyone in it willing to share their passion for photography with a beginner.

-t
Logged
One Day At A Time

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1797
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #7 on: December 11, 2013, 08:41:19 pm »

These basic adjustments take less than 2 minutes on most images, at least to get you to a good point of departure.  FWIW my own workflow, after I have selected my images, goes like this: Lens Correct (just tick Profile Corrections and Remove CA);

You can speed things up a little bit by changing your default settings to include the Lens Correct checkboxes. (In the LR4 Develop module, make any settings you want applied to every newly imported image and then choose Develop > Set Default Settings. IIRC it's similar in LR5.) I find that I often forget little things when processing, so having some defaults set for every photo is useful. You can have different defaults for different cameras, different ISO settings, different serial numbers, etc. (think custom profiles or ISO-dependent noise reduction defaults.) It can get complicated fast, but I just keep it pretty simple.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. https://www.instagram.com/wakeforestphoto/

Ed Blagden

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 502
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2013, 11:56:31 pm »

You can speed things up a little bit by changing your default settings to include the Lens Correct checkboxes. (In the LR4 Develop module, make any settings you want applied to every newly imported image and then choose Develop > Set Default Settings. IIRC it's similar in LR5.) I find that I often forget little things when processing, so having some defaults set for every photo is useful. You can have different defaults for different cameras, different ISO settings, different serial numbers, etc. (think custom profiles or ISO-dependent noise reduction defaults.) It can get complicated fast, but I just keep it pretty simple.

Agreed, you can do this.  I adopted the selective defaults approach some time back but then abandoned it shortly thereafter.  The reason being that I realised that I benefited from spending those 2 minutes doing preliminary corrections to each image.  Something about spending that little time helped me get to know the image and understand its unique properties, and this would help me later on if I decided to do some serious pixel mangling.  While I agree that having some intelligent default presets can speed up workflow somewhat I would not advocate that for someone like Todd, who is just starting out and needs to spend some time understanding his histograms and noise patterns.
Logged

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1797
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #9 on: December 12, 2013, 07:12:16 am »

Agreed, you can do this.  I adopted the selective defaults approach some time back but then abandoned it shortly thereafter.  The reason being that I realised that I benefited from spending those 2 minutes doing preliminary corrections to each image.  Something about spending that little time helped me get to know the image and understand its unique properties, and this would help me later on if I decided to do some serious pixel mangling.  While I agree that having some intelligent default presets can speed up workflow somewhat I would not advocate that for someone like Todd, who is just starting out and needs to spend some time understanding his histograms and noise patterns.

Excellent points on both counts. I often get into a "production" mindset given that much of my photography results in thousands of files that need immediate turn-around, so for me, efficiency is paramount. I sometimes project that, which is not always helpful.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. https://www.instagram.com/wakeforestphoto/

Todd Suttles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 677
  • Hi, amateur learning my way...
    • Todd Suttles
Re: "Big" -Processing Help Request
« Reply #10 on: December 12, 2013, 10:41:29 am »

Thanks Ed and KB
Logged
One Day At A Time
Pages: [1]   Go Up