Printable View
This image was originally posted in the Avian Forum by Nancy. It generated a tremendous amount of interest, some great information, and a superb tutorial by David Thomasson. Thanks to all.
Hello to all. One bonus from my trip to the Everglades was this prairie warbler. But, boy are they difficult to catch!!! This one was caught in the bushes at Flamigo. Taken with a D300, Nikon 70-300Vr, iso 800, f7.1, 1/1250. I did my best with the BG. comments appreciated:)
Wonderful bird. Nice pose. Nice BKGR. Angle of inclination a bit too steep. I am betting that if you check the histogram for this JPEG that the yellows are toasted. If you go back and reduce the yellow saturation you might be OK. Let me know what you find....
Great find, details and the BG is nicely blurred. I guess you could desaturate the yellows 10-15 points.
Artie thanks, but the yellows are right in the middle and within the histogram.:) The only thing I did was increase the brightness of the yellows maybe by 4 pts to bring it out from the BG a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
Thanks Axel:)!
Nice find and angle of view already mentioned. Won't harp on it. Congratulations Nancy. Maybe pull the yellow saturation back then. Nicely framed! :)
Lovely pose, and I agree the BG is nicely blurred.
Hi Nancy, YAW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy A Elwood
#1: I do not understand what you are talking about when you say that the "yellows are right in the middle and within the histogram." You cannot see colors on the lumminosity histogram and the RGB histogram shows only RED, GREEEN, and Blue." Please explain what you are talking about.
#2: As you can see in the image, there is clipping of highlights and they are in fact the yellows. This was confirmed by holdiing down the ALT key while clicking on the highlight slider and making sure that the slider is far right.
#3: The yellows (and reds) as they come out of many digital cameras are over-saturated and thus over-exposed, especially in warm light.
#4: It is not advisable to add saturation to the yellows (or the reds) in the above situation. In most cases you need to de-SAT the yellows or the reds so that the histogram does not show clipping (as the one here of your image does).
#5: The histogram showed less clipping than I thought that it would but IAC, the yellows are too saturated and quite detail-less.
#6: The fix is easy. Go back to the coverted RAW file, check the histogram, and then start de-SATing the yellows five points at a time until the histogram shows no clipping and the yellows show detail.
:) :) :)
Actually, it is the reds that are clipped as shown below. That said, the yellows are still too bright, but not clipped.
Ok guys and thank you Jim for displaying what I was seeing. Here are some results showing what I see in NX2.
Before adjustment
http://cdn-2-service.phanfare.com/im...e30447f6bc6e_1
After Adjustment
http://cdn-2-service.phanfare.com/im...93da7c209ee1_1
Image with final adjustments
http://cdn-2-service.phanfare.com/im...800e8a889e94_1
Great discussion folks!!:)
Sensors only record Red, Green, and Blue.
When dealing with light (additive colors), Red + Green = Yellow.
Thus, if reds are clipped, then yellow is effectively clipped as well.
Don't know exactly how NX2 is coming up with the yellow in their histogram
but I'm suspecting that they will only show yellow as clipped if BOTH red and
green are clipped. But, even if only one is clipped, there is still a problem
with the yellows.
Repost is above, the first post. Thoughts appreciated.
Thanks for to Jim Poor for showing us the color version of the Photoshsop histogram. Chris Dodds and I were able to figure out how to generate it in Photoshop: 1-click on the histogram tab. 2-clcik on the downward facing arrow in the upper right of the histogram box. 3- Click on Expanded View. 4- In the channel box, select Colors from the dropdown menu.
As for the REDS rather than the YELLOWS being clipped, my understanding is that RED is a component of YELLOW and with the RED channel clipped (as Mike Milicia stated, there are only RED, YELLOW, and GREEN channels) the YELLOW channel may be clipped. When I held down the alt key while clicking on the highlight slider it was the yellow breast that came up as hot, so I will stand by my original statement.
While you could probably make semantical arguements either way here, one thing is for sure: everyone has learned something.
Hey Nancy, Your image with final adjustments is fine with no clipping shown. (That was not the case with your original post.) So way to go on that. The image is still too yellow for my taste so I toned the yellows down a bit and offer the repost above.
Interesting technical discussion about the yellows in this image. My first impression was the same as Arthur's: some of the yellow are clipped in the breast feathers. But that isn't the case. In fact, there are no clipped highlights at all in this image, anywhere. And yet the yellows do seem a bit too something -- so what's going on here?
One problem might be that the blue channel is heavily blocked. And blue is, of course, the complement of yellow. Just for fun, I tried applying a deep blue photo filter at the default 25% density, and voila: The blue channel shifted to the right so that no blue pixels were blocked anywhere.
The upshot is that when yellows seem too bright or glaring, as it seems to me in parts of this image, check the blue histogram. If it is blocked, as here, open a blue filter, invert its mask, and then paint with white in the brightest yellow areas. That tones down the brightness of the yellow and even brings out some details that were hidden by the blocked blues.
Play with this in Photoshop and you'll see the effect on the yellows more clearly. Here's an illustration using screen shots. (The blue filter is applied globally, not confined to the brightest yellow areas.)
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/7688/yellow12.jpg
Congratulations Nancy, I am glad that the Everglades had such a beautiful species to photograph. You did well to capture this image and again it was a pleasure to see you again.
Great thread, I learned a ton and it is a lovely picture Nancy (great pose and HA), and that bird really is yellow:) even with some reduction in colour.
Hey David, Thanks for the great post. I do have a comment and a question or two.
re:
Interesting technical discussion about the yellows in this image. My first impression was the same as Arthur's: some of the yellow are clipped in the breast feathers. But that isn't the case.
Note: in Nancy's original post there were clipped highlights in the yellows.
In fact, there are no clipped highlights at all in this image, anywhere.
That was true in Nancy's re-post but as above, not in the original post.
One problem might be that the blue channel is heavily blocked. And blue is, of course, the complement of yellow. Just for fun, I tried applying a deep blue photo filter at the default 25% density, and voila: The blue channel shifted to the right so that no blue pixels were blocked anywhere....
That tones down the brightness of the yellow and even brings out some details that were hidden by the blocked blues.
Play with this in Photoshop and you'll see the effect on the yellows more clearly.
Your technique worked really well; it toned down the yellows and restored detail to them.
If you could write a short how-to piece on using Photoshop filters here, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again for your efforts here.
Wow, a lot of great info here for sure.
I didn't realize getting to the color histogram was that complicated or I would have posted quick instructions. All I did was click Window> Histogram and the color one came up. Maybe it is "sticky" and that was the last one I used?
[quote=Arthur Morris;249793]Hey David, Thanks for the great post. I do have a comment and a question or two.
re:
Interesting technical discussion about the yellows in this image. My first impression was the same as Arthur's: some of the yellow are clipped in the breast feathers. But that isn't the case.
Happy to. A preliminary suggestion about histograms. I set a function key to display the histogram (in CS3) with an all-channels view. When assessing an image, I generally pop this up first thing to see what's what on the histogram. On this one, for example, you can see right away that the image has a red cast, because the red histogram is further to the right than both the green and blue channels.Quote:
Your technique worked really well; it toned down the yellows and restored detail to them. If you could write a short how-to piece on using Photoshop filters here, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again for your efforts here.
http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/7939/histo.jpg
Photo filters. These are easy to use. To get going, just click the adjustment layer icon at the bottom of the layers palette and choose Photo Filter.
http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/6656/filter1.jpg
When you click that, you get a dialog box with a drop-down menu with all the pre-set filter options. In the yellow bird image, I used deep blue:
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6555/filter3.jpg
Once you've chosen a filter, you can adjust it in two ways. If you click the color swatch, the color picker opens and you can alter the filter color any way you like: brighter or darker, more or less saturation, and different hue. The density slider determines how much color will be applied -- and you can see all of these changes on the fly while you're making them. (I generally leave the "Preserve luminosity" box ticked.)
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2818/filter2.jpg
In many cases you'll want to apply a filter effect to just part of an image. Simplest way to do this: After closing the dialog box, invert the mask (Ctrl-I) to turn it black. That masks out the effect entirely. Now paint with white wherever you want to apply the effect. If you use low brush opacity -- say 20% or so -- you can paint the effect in gradually. And of course you can open the filter dialog and make further adjustments after you've applied the effect (the joy of adjustment layers).
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/5369/filter4a.gif
-- continued in next post (I've hit my image limit on this one) --
-- continued from previous post --
With the yellow bird, I used a blue filter to unblock the blue channel and restore some detail in the yellows. But there are endless other ways to use filters. Here's one example that's often useful. You have a bird's eye that is dim and needs brightening. Maybe something like this:
http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/7615/eye1i.jpg
I open a warming filter (yellow filter for a yellow eye) and push the density up to 100%. Then close the dialog, change blend mode to screen, and invert the mask. So I have this:
http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/9342/eye2.jpg
Now paint with white, 100% brush opacity, around the yellow part of the eye. This reveals the brightening screen effect -- and the filter enhances the color as well. Leaving the layer opacity at 100% was a little too bright, so I dropped that down to 78%. Here's the before and after:
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/2323/eye3a.gif
Very interesting discussion and thanks once again, David, for your tutorials and explanations. They do help a lot of people.
Nancy, great catch, glad you had a great time!
Bravo to all!!! Always learning, that is what it is all about!:D:D
Many of us had never seen the "Colors" histogram and it took Chris and me a few good minutes to sort it out. IAC, thanks for opening our eye to it. I am not sure if it is a sticky as mine keeps opening to the luminosity version...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Poor
Hey David, Thanks for the great two-part tutorial! The brain is a strange thing. I used to use Photo Filter/Warming Filter (81) quite a bit but I never thought to look there. The best thing about your tutorial is that it is well written and easy to understand and follow so thanks a ton.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Thomasson
If you use Select Color/Refine Edge or Quick Masks in combination with Photo Filter, I think that you would be making your life easier and get great results.
Thanks Nancy for posting this one. It has generated some great stuff. I am copying this thread to Educational Resources so that all may benefit.
ps: If you do wish to use Photo Filter on a Layer Mask you will need to access it via Image/Adjustment/Phhoto Filter rather than as an Adjusment Layer or else it will affect the entire image.
I think you inadvertently got that backwards: If you want to use a layer mask on a photo filter, use an adjustment layer (via the icon shown in my tutorial above). Best practice for any edit: If you can use an adjustment layer, do. I generally don't go to the Image > Adjustments menu unless there's no other option.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
Hey Dave, Perhaps I used the wrong term. I make a Quick Mask and then hit Control J (with the BKGR highighted). This place the QMed area on its own layer in the Layers palette. At that point, if you hit Black and White cookie and then Photo Filter, the Photo Filter will affect the whole image. That is why if you are using a QM on its own layer you need to go to Image/Adjustments (as there is no shortcut for Photo Filter on a QM layer). For Levels you can hit Control M, for Hue Saturation, Control U, etc. I have created a few of my own and will likely invent one for Photo Filter.
Alternatively, you could use a clipping mask on the adjustment layer (or any layer actually) to force it to only blend where the layer it's attached to has non-transparent content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
To do this, insure the layer you want to clip (in this case the adjustment layer) is directly above the layer you want it to effect, well call it the target layer, in the layers pallet. Then either alt+left-click the line separating the two layers or with the layer you want to clip as the active layer, use the shortcut key ctrl+alt+g (I think that's the default, at least it is in CS2). If you're alt+left-clicking the mouse cursor will change when it's in the right place. Either way the layer that's being clipped (bound/attached whatever you want to call it, in this case the adjustment layer) will become indented and show a small down arrow indicating it's clipped to the first non-indented layer below it (you can clipping mask more than one layer to a target layer).
I think the original advice though, was to use a simple layer mask on the adjustment layer to only affect the desired area.
Fortunately, Adobe gives us enough ways to skin a cat to confuse just about anybody for eterniety.
P.s. Using a masked adjustment layer seems to keep file sizes smaller than duplicating content and adjusting it either with a clipping masked adjustment layer or images->adjustments.
