Can this be salvaged?

[Bill Dix]

This was taken in the Galapagos in May, in murky water conditions with a point-and-shoot Olympus. Someone on our trip asked if I had images of swimming with sea lions, and this is about all I could come up with. I've tried various interventions, contrast, NR, USM, etc. but probably can't make the murkiness disappear. Any suggestions?

Olympus Stylus 790 SW | 6.7mm lens if I believe Metadata | 1/100s @ f/3.5 | auto exp @ 0 EV

[Dan Brown]

Here's the best that I could come up with Bill. I created 2 BG copies, ran noiseware twice on the top layer along with increasing the contrast and trying to tone down the blues with curves, brightness and contrast and hue and sat layers. Then on the middle layer, I sharpened and nr with noiseware. Next I erased the top layer on the faces and some on the body of the lower seal. My best shot!!:p

[Bill Dix]

A definite improvement, Dan. That's similar to the workflow I tried, but I obviously didn't push the NR or contrast hard enough. I'll give it another go with the original jpeg; more pixels might help but I don't know if I can improve on what you've done. Thanks for the effort.

[Thanaboon Jearkjirm]

Not sure what to do with the murky water, I'm not sure if we can treat them as noise or not. Here is my attempt, I just ran a bit of NR, adjust white/black point and sharpen a bit. Good job with getting the image despite being under water, the experience must be very excited.

76318

Hmmm seem like I have a green cast...

[Bill Dix]

Thank you Thanaboon. I appreciate your taking a shot at it. I guess just as good light is critical to an image, so is good water.;)

[Arthur Morris]

I am thinking that the folks above did well but there is no saving this one.... My tack is to leave the underwater stuff to the David Doubilets of the worl. :)

[Charles Glatzer]

<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Chas/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Chas/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> Turbidity, the amount of particulate matter held in suspension is a major concern when photographing UW. The particles diffuse and scatter light knocking down contrast and overall clarity. The more turbid the water the wider the focal length typically used. Extreme wide-angles allow you to get physically closer to large subjects while capturing them in their entirety. Eliminating the water between the lens and subject eliminates much of the problem, while increasing contrast, clarity, and sharpness. Additionally, the wider lens makes the particles appear smaller in the image. Shooting into the current and not stirring up bottom sediment is also prudent. And, even though the water helps to buffer camera shake UW, slow shutter-speed scan wreck havoc with moving subjects.


Best,

Chas

[Bill Dix]

I am thinking that the folks above did well but there is no saving this one.... My tack is to leave the underwater stuff to the David Doubilets of the worl. :)

I agree with you here, Artie. This was just a record tourist shot, to remind me of how much fun it was. And I was curioius to see what folks might come up with - as you say, they did well but there's only so much one can do.

[Bill Dix]

<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Chas/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Chas/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> ... Eliminating the water between the lens and subject eliminates much of the problem....

Chas

Thanks for that, Chas. Of course eliminating the water between lens and subject means that you are no longer in the water.;) I suppose the good thing about the turbidity is that much of it is food for all the great critters that live there.

[Dan Brown]

I think that the optimisation of this "tourist memoir" has probably been achieved. So it's true, you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear:). Bill, this is a nice capture from your trip!

[Michael Gerald-Yamasaki]

Bill,

Greetings. Here's another try:

http://members.dslextreme.com/users/yamo/images/AccessibleImages/Sea-Lions-Swimming-1_Edit.jpg

Would work for me ;). Not particularly simple to describe ... I run through a bunch of adjustments fairly quickly, I would guess perhaps 30 or so for this one. Mostly a heavy NR (used topaz adjust NR for a heavy hammer), not really NR as much as selective dot blurring... Masking back detail where wanted. That layer worked the most effect. Then additional detailing (topaz detail2) on faces. Spot removal. The rest is color and toning. I used a WGCMYK profile in CMYK mode for color curves adjustments (toning down cyan and yellow a bit)... two or three selective curves to brighten faces & bodies, tone down background...

So to summarize. Heavy NR for turbulence removal, face/body detailing, spot removal, overall toning.

Cheers,

-Michael-

[Bill Dix]

Very good, Michael. Don't know where this fits in the sow's ear-to-silk purse continuum, but looks like the best so far. Sounds like a lot of work. Thanks for playing the game.

[Michael Gerald-Yamasaki]

Very good, Michael. Don't know where this fits in the sow's ear-to-silk purse continuum, but looks like the best so far. Sounds like a lot of work. Thanks for playing the game.

Bill,

Greetings. Actually sounds like more work than it is (simple matter of practice)... would be much better if worked from full res image.

Cheers,

-Michael-

[Lance Peters]

Hi Bill - hard enough to get good photo's above water - why do you want to make it harder by shooting under water - LOL Just joking!!!!

A nice record of your trip - IMHO!