View Full Version : Koosah Falls in PS

09-22-2013, 09:45 PM
I broke down and got Photoshop, the least intuitive software I have ever used. Hard to believe this is the industry standard?
Using keystrokes? In 2013? Oh well, I will learn to use it for certain things but it seems cumbersome and totally user unfriendly.
Over with rant.

This is Koosah Falls, a big fall on the Mckenzie River in the Oregon Cascades.

1/3, f22, 70mm (70-200), D800, HH braced on a railing, PP in NX2 and PS cs6.

DSC_8106bp.jpg (http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=132783&stc=1&d=1379904204)

Don Nelson
09-22-2013, 11:30 PM
Nicely composed. Koosah and Sahalie are absolutely stunning falls, with real limited access on the south banks - its pretty well tree-d in, and you did very well at this capture.
If it were mine, I'd do the following
1) Lose some of the cyan in the water -- this water isn't glacial as it originates out of the ground at the edge of the lava field.. So its not that Cyan (which is the result of color boosting the overcast/shaded areas of capture). One way is to use the adjustment layer->Hue/Saturation in PS
2) Get rid of the branch extending into the white water. There are multiple ways.
3) You need to give it some (more) output sharpening -- its just not sharp as it should be as presented. After resizing, you can do filter->sharpen->smart sharpen. Do this at 100% (or "actual pixels") and watch out for halos. Back off when you see them. Sharpening in ps isn't true sharpening but edge contrast adjustment. Do the sharpening on a separate layer and then change the blending to "luminosity" - if you just sharpen you will sometimes see a color shift as the sharpening happens. Luminosity allows the layer to be the L (similar to Lab mode) and then pick up the colors of the underlying layer(s)
You'll have to do a better job at the branch removal - this was just a quickie to show the concept. Sorry, but I don't have your big raw to start with which will improve your output.
Hope you don't mind:
<Note to viewers --This is just a concept image -- its neither fully rendered nor absent of unintended artifacts. Its not final. Treat it is as a concept>


Don Nelson
09-22-2013, 11:34 PM
And Good that you acquired PS. Many of the most-used commands can be alternately brought up by keyboard strokes -- its easier than the click menus. If you don't like some, you can remap them.....

09-23-2013, 12:18 AM
Thanks, Don.
I should have removed the branch. The RAW image was not sharp. 1/3 SS and not on a tripod did not produce a great result and I sharpened it as much as I thought looked realistic.
A lot of mist at these big falls also and using a tele lens magnified the mist.
Yours looks a tad over sharpened to me. I have never been to these falls in cloudy weather and I have been there 5 or 6 times. They are a nightmare to expose in sun, so huge and
so much water. This was underexposed a couple of stops. D800 to the rescue.
Thanks for taking the time, I learn something every time you respond. I do think that PS is crappy to use software, I am a CAD designer and work with 3D software (SolidWorks) that is way more powerful than PS and much easier to use.
There is a reason Apple hates Adobe.....

Don Nelson
09-23-2013, 12:50 AM
Don't confuse "over sharpened" with "sharpened more than I would". Its not oversharpened from the former definition -- there is a really good book you need to read called "real world sharpening".... And for the latter - you and many others have likely never seen anything but digital images or little tiny 35mm film images...you need to look at some 8x10 or 4x5 film images on a light table with a loupe to see what real sharp looks like ;-)

You say the raw wasn't sharp - but the jpg holds up well for sharpening. I don't see evidence of camera movement in the jpg. There is a large area in the center of the falls that is soft due to the intense amounts of mist you saw. Yet the areas outside on left, right and top are plenty sharp for this image size.

Have you tried printing some of these on a good Epson Pro or Canon Pixma printer?

And have you tried to convert some of them to B&W -- they look pretty good by the way

Don Nelson
09-23-2013, 12:54 AM
By the way, the "loss of sharpness" behind the falls is caused by loss in contrast due to the mist. You might find this recoverable via the larger raw/tiff.

Andrew McLachlan
09-23-2013, 07:16 PM
Hi Dan, Don took care of much in his first comment and repost...I really don't mind the branch extending out into the cascading water...great job on bracing against the railing and capturing the image at 1/3 sec. I like the central placement of the falls within this composition as well. Keep 'em coming!

Don Railton
09-24-2013, 11:30 PM
Hi Dan

Very pretty falls, but I think (and agree) the OP is soft. Not surprising considering you were hand held at that speed, so well done considering.. I don't mind the tree on the side, it acts as a frame IMHO, and I like Dons water colour...



gail bisson
09-26-2013, 04:35 PM
I think this is lovely.
I don't mind the branch at all.
I like the general comp but would modify the color at the base of the falls as it looks unnatural.

Roger Clark
09-26-2013, 09:07 PM
I would leave the branch. Beautiful image!


09-26-2013, 10:24 PM
Thanks for the comments, just for fun I reworked this.
This shows the dynamic range of the D800 as I lifted the shadows.
I know some thought the water color was off, but the McKenzie looks like this (well, close?)

DSC_Koosahbp.jpg (http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=132912&stc=1&d=1380252209)

Morkel Erasmus
10-02-2013, 06:19 AM
Nice composition and misty mood here Dan. I personally like the blue water, adds nice colour balance to the scene. Perhaps a tad yellow overall, quick to sort out in color balance in PS.
Do you then use SolidWorks to edit your photos too?