Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: A String of Puffballs

  1. #1
    Julie Kenward
    Guest

    Default A String of Puffballs

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    That would be the untechnical term for this plant. :D

    I can't decide if I lightened/brightened this too much. Part of me thinks it's cheery this way and part of me thinks it's missing something. Anyone who can help me decide feel free to speak up!

    Canon 40D, EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
    f/4 @ 1/100th, ISO 200
    Center-weighted metering, Manual mode
    Handheld, natural late afternoon light
    Processed in ACR & CS3: levels, curves adjustments, sharpening, moderate crop

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    St. Charles, Missouri
    Posts
    362
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Jules,
    I really like the comp & square crop on this. Especially like the OOF BG echo of the main "string". It just looks a little flat to me. I added an LCE (USM 20/30/0; full-res image will probably need different settings), then an overal contrast boost (S-curve). I may have overdone the contrast? Couldn't decide whether a slight saturation boost was better or not, so I left that out. Does this help?
    Chris

  3. #3
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tampa, Florida, United States
    Posts
    599
    Threads
    100
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    This is great, Jules!

    On my monitor, the background of the original has more depth to it, than the repost. There's a LITTLE posterization or some cloning artifacts just above center on the right side...???

    The highlights on the repost look too bright to me. I don't mind the "flat" quality to the original because the OOF string brings depth to it - and I just love love love the repeating pattern in the background.

    :)

    Amy D.

  4. #4
    Julie Kenward
    Guest

    Default

    Chris, I think you got it! I did a couple of curves adjustments and it would either make the whites WAY too white or the darks would suddenly muddy and I just couldn't find the happy medium. I think you hit it.

    Amy, isn't that back plant just da bomb? I saw that in my eye piece and went OH HECK YES!!!

  5. #5
    Ed Vatza
    Guest

    Default

    Hi Jules,

    I'm really liking this composition particularly with the repeating image in the background. Very good eye. If there was one thing that I would wish for, it would be a bit more dof to make the bottom puffballs sharper. Of course, I wouldn't want the background puffballs any sharper though :D.

  6. #6
    Paul Marcellini
    Guest

    Default

    A very cool capture. I like the repost, but I am a fan of contrast. To me it may need a touch more sharpening for web.

  7. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    St. Charles, Missouri
    Posts
    362
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amy DeStefanis View Post
    There's a LITTLE posterization or some cloning artifacts just above center on the right side...???

    The highlights on the repost look too bright to me.
    Amy,
    My guess is the posterization is from the low res of the posted image (always an issue online) plus jpeg compression (it loves to throw away tonal values, especially in our nice smooth OOF BGs). Probably not present at all in the full-res original.

    I wasn't real sure about those highlights either. Could have taken care of those in curves at the same time as the overall contrast adjustment. I'll post a little "highlight tweak" tip separately.

    Chris

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    St. Charles, Missouri
    Posts
    362
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default Highlights Tweak Tip

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Quote Originally Posted by Julie Kenward View Post
    Chris, I think you got it! I did a couple of curves adjustments and it would either make the whites WAY too white or the darks would suddenly muddy and I just couldn't find the happy medium.
    Jules,
    Here's a technique for using curves to just tone down too-bright highlights without affecting anything else. I didn't do this on my repost of your photo, but after Amy's comment, I think it would help (I'd repost again with this additional tweak, but the system only allows me one attached image.) I find this technique useful when I have whites that aren't really blown, but aren't showing the best detail. Also helpful prior to sharpening if I expect (or find through trial and error) that the sharpening is going to blow some of the highlights.

    In case the text in the image is hard to read, here are the steps, after opening a Curves adjustment layer:
    1. Select the Pencil tool instead of the usual/default Spline.
    2. Click somewhere on the curve and drag just the tiniest amount you can in any direction -- just a twitch.
    3. Reselect the normal Spline tool. Now you have a bunch of control handles on the curve, which will serve as anchor points.
    4. Delete the next-to-top control handle by dragging it off the curve (this makes for smoother tonal gradations). Select the top right control handle by clicking on it, then use the arrow keys to lower it 3-5 steps.

    This darkens just the brightest highlights, without affecting anything else in the image.

    Chris

  9. #9
    Julie Kenward
    Guest

    Default

    I'm copying and pasting as we speak! Thanks Chris!

  10. #10
    Robert O'Toole
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Starbuck View Post
    Amy,
    My guess is the posterization is from the low res of the posted image (always an issue online) plus jpeg compression (it loves to throw away tonal values, especially in our nice smooth OOF BGs). Probably not present at all in the full-res original.

    I wasn't real sure about those highlights either. Could have taken care of those in curves at the same time as the overall contrast adjustment. I'll post a little "highlight tweak" tip separately.

    Chris
    Good chance the "posterization" is just noise created by the USM and the curves adjustment (increased contrast).

    Solution: Always run NR before making adjustments.

    Robert

  11. #11
    Robert O'Toole
    Guest

    Default

    Very nice Julie, this is one of my favorites of your actually :-) Love the BG shapes, the details and the nice soft light.

    Could use a little more USM on the puff balls only!

    Like the Chris repost additional pop but not the extra noise (posterization) not so much.

    Robert

  12. #12
    Mike Moats
    Guest

    Default

    Hey Jules, very cool comp. Like both posts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics