- October 12, 2019 at 12:59 pm #421615
This is not my usual PP work so I’m wondering if it works for the sharks. I replaced the sky. I’m wondering if that’s obvious or not. My intention was to make an otherwise normal scene into something more dramatic. Any and all critiques greatly appreciated.
To my Canadian friends…enjoy your Thanksgiving weekend!!
- October 12, 2019 at 1:19 pm #421617Charmaine JoubertParticipant
Rob I love the inclusion of the angry sky, it definitely makes the scene interesting and dramatic. Just watch out for the halos around the church and they are very noticeable on the left side of the church.
- October 12, 2019 at 3:35 pm #421620
Thank you Charmaine and good catch. I’m at a bit of a loss as to what caused them. The TIFF version doesn’t show them as much as this JPG but they are there ever so slightly. I may have to go back and recreate the whole thing from scratch to figure this out. At this point I’m thinking the conversion to JPG with it’s default sharpening has made the matter worse. hmmm? Any suggestions?
- October 12, 2019 at 10:58 pm #421666
it looks like sharpening caused the halos. if they’re not on the tiff file then i’d try go back to that and try the conversion and sharpening again.
- October 12, 2019 at 8:29 pm #421632Graham HartParticipant
I agree with Charmaine Rob that the sky works really well in this scene. After zooming I can see the halos too but I’m sure you have a fix for that. I also think I can see artifacts along the ridge line to the left of the image.
It is very interesting to see this scene from a different angle. I recall this pic in one of Beth’s posts which had a flag pole or similar near the gate. This view along with Beth’s gives a great appreciation of the surrounding landscape and makes me think about how just by walking around (working the scene), we can come up with such creative variation. In Beth’s pic there was a symmetry in the simple composition and in your pic there is a symmetry between the gate and the church door.
Potential co-production diptych material 🙂
- This reply was modified 7mo, 3wk ago by Graham Hart.
- October 12, 2019 at 11:04 pm #421667
i like the sky, but the more i look at it the more i wish it were toned down just a touch.
the rich colors and dark tones of the ground and rock wall work nicely in this.
- October 13, 2019 at 2:45 pm #421723
OK I’ve redone this image due to the halos in question. I’ve also tamed the sky down a bit because it began to bug me a bit too Beth.
I’ve found out a few things.
- The original DNG conversion of the Canon RAW file had a small halo on the front left edge of the building. This was a surprise to me and I’ll have to look at the original RAW file to see if Adobe’s DNG conversion did something or if the RAW file is at fault.
- I had not cleaned up the mask I made as well as I should have.
- The conversion to JPG did not add to the halo. That surprised me!
- The major culprit was NIK’s Silver Efex Pro 2. While recreating the image I found that all of the presets caused halos. Neutral and Fine Art were the least offensive but even they added a bit. It doesn’t seem to matter how the presets are manipulated as they still cause some amount of halo particularly on hard edges. I’ll be sticking to luminosity masks from now on.
- There were some masking “tells” along the tops of the mountains as Graham pointed out. My bad! Sloppy work on my behalf! Next time I’ll do more pixel editing at 400%…lesson learned.
So here is the final reworked image. I hope I’ve caught all the issues as I intend to print and hang it. Thank you Charmaine, Beth and Graham! I really appreciate your help!
- October 13, 2019 at 3:21 pm #421726Charmaine JoubertParticipant
It will look stunning in a print. Thank you for sharing how you re-edited your image, I found it very interesting. I find the NIK’s Silver Efex Pro 2 very harsh on some my photos. When I do use it, I use it as a layer in photoshop at about a 20 – 30 percent opacity. I use luminosity mask a lot in editing.
- October 14, 2019 at 7:41 am #421831
Thank you Charmaine. I too had been using the NIK B&W filter on a layer with reduced opacity. For luminosity masking I’ve been using Tony Kuyper’s plugin for PS. If you don’t mind, what are you use for luminosity masking?
- October 13, 2019 at 10:10 pm #421796Graham HartParticipant
I like the sky better too now Rob. Great editing work. This exercise will make me pay much more attention from now on as I hadn’t really delved into these halo issues before when using Nik filters .
Ignorant question: what’s the difference between a RAW file and a DNG file. I thought they were just proprietary names for the same thing? My Pentax produces RAW files in the DNG format.
- October 14, 2019 at 7:51 am #421832
Thanks Graham. Halos are one of those things that have bug me for a long time. My first posting was a bit embarrassing.
DNG (Digital Negative) is an Adobe file format introduced in 2004. It’s a RAW file format but it’s intended to be an open source standard. Most camera manufacturers have their own raw file format which is proprietary. Canon is CR2 and Nikon is NEF for example. For further thoughts see my reply to Beth below.
- October 13, 2019 at 9:51 pm #421789
yea, the sky works better now. it was just a tad too much but now it’s perfect. and since it’s a sky replacement i like how you’ve changed the placement of the clouds so that they frame the steeple instead of intersecting it.
why did you convert the raw file to a dng? or did you choose “edit in” in lightroom and send it to ps as a dng? just curious because of the halo issue.
- October 14, 2019 at 8:00 am #421833
Thanks Beth. My first posting was kind of a proof of concept I guess…”that’s my story and I’m sticking to it”! I’m pleased you approve of the changed placement. I gave it a bit more thought this time…not that it hurt or anything¿ 🙂
Regarding DNG. I decided years ago to import my Canon images as DNG in order to standardize what I was doing. The camera profiling software I use requires the DNG format and subsequently the RAW convertor I use for my Fujifilm body also uses the DNG format.
I’m hoping I didn’t make a mistake. CR2 to DNG comparison info to follow.
EDIT: Just checked the original CR2 to the DNG version. No difference that I can see. Huge relief but small RAW file halo still a mystery.
- This reply was modified 7mo, 3wk ago by Rob Eyers.
- October 13, 2019 at 10:19 pm #421799FrankParticipant
I really like this, Rob. The colors are wonderful.
- October 14, 2019 at 8:01 am #421834
Thank you Frank. Iceland is beautiful and it’s colours in the fall seem to like my secret PP sauce 🙂
- October 14, 2019 at 9:44 am #421857Kent DuFaultParticipant
Love it Rob, especially your revised version. Great shot!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.