I need another pair of eyes

[jammer_jammer]

I don't know if any of you have ever recorded and mixed music but while mixing,

it can get to the point where you can't really hear any longer. I'm finding

that it's kind of the same with editing photos. After a while it seems like I

can't really see the image any longer. I'm thinking I've got a half decent

capture here but I'm not real positive on the color balance and levels and

such. I know this is all fairly subjective but what would you do if it was

yours. Should I leave it alone at this point?

 

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/5559/1oceanpo0.jpg

[raymond_ocampo]

Personally. just like mixing music and editing videos - it's all subjective.

 

Frankly the photo looks exactly what is seen - a rock on a shoreline. There isn't much

happening here in terms of subject. Nothing to draw my eye to a specific item but to

generalize and check out the rock texture (which I would lift and use more for something

else) and the splashing waves.

 

The thing is that based on the reflection of light on the waves, it's a bright sunny day but

the brightness and exposure was crippled in post.

 

If it were mine own photo and I was bent on using it, I would brighten the picture and even

add flare on the lens to give me direction as were the Sun is coming from which is

obviously high above at this point because of the shadows cast on the rocks. I would add

tint to make it visually interesting.

 

But if it were mine, I'm sorry I wouldn't use the photo unless that was a Lochness monster

on the top.

 

Cheers.

[sattler123]

I just applied Shadow/Highlight to better bring out the rocks.<div></div>

[patricklavoie]

Well there is at least 2 problem there;

 

1_no contrast

2_red cast

 

Do you have a calibrated screen to start? if so check your calibration, if not that will be the first step for image retouching.

 

here is my version.<div></div>

[robert lee]

How's this.<div></div>

[robert lee]

Oops. Too big.

[robert lee]

Aarrgh...<div></div>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Yep, that looks like a mighty RAW file from the looks of the

purplish blue cast. Maybe your nikon's settings need to be

checked.

 

To get the results shown I had to apply an old canned Fuji paper

1.0 gamma table based scanner profile that came with my 1997

Agfa Arcus II scanner. Then I converted to another 1.0 gamma

matrix based profile called StandardRGB that also came with the

Arcus. Assigned EktaspaceRGB and converted to sRGB. If I

didn't do this I'ld had to apply a lot of time consuming selective

coloring.

 

Then applied small tweaks in levels to the bottom left/right red

slider, green highlite and a .90 middle slider on the blue. Applied

Hue/Sat selectively neutralizing the magenta in the white water

and an increase of 15 saturation overall.<div></div>

[jammer_jammer]

Thanks to everyone for their input. I really appreciate it. Now I have some ideas to play around with. Have a great weekend and thanks again.

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Well I was wrong. I didn't need to use the profile process

method.

 

Here it is just setting end point neutrals, adjusting gamma and

blue channel. Some selective Hue/Sat to take the purple out of

the white water breaking waves and select blue and cyan Sat.<div></div>

[jammer_jammer]

Thanks Tim.

[papasan]

I just applied a bit of level and curver adjustment to bring out contrast and enhance the colors in the rocks, and some sharpening with unsharp mask.

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Jammer,

 

Is this a drum scan or off a Nikon digicam? Geez, I can't believe I

can't tell the difference. Always did like Nikon's treatment of color.

 

Nice shot BTW. Its rule of thirds compositioning is working pretty

good with an abstract quality that makes you wish you were

there. Has a kind of hypnotic effect with those velvety dunes in

the foreground. Reminds me I've got to get out to the beach soon

but the Texas hill country keeps pulling me back.

 

Pardon the buttering up approach here but I'ld like to ask a favor

of you and was wondering if I could use your image for

instructional purposes only illustrating profile processing. I'ld

leave your name in the image of course. I post on quite a few

threads and plan to start training others in my local area on

photo restoration if I ever get around to it.

 

I used to have to do this method on restoration work in the past

with faded dark prints that had lost so much color this method

saved tons of editing time scanning 48bit RAW off my Arcus II

scanner. The bluish cast messes with the eye's adaptation

causing you to fish around for hours finding the color as I'm sure

you've discovered. I happened upon this method out of the same

frustration.

 

Here's a better version with less green.<div></div>

[upscan]

Hi: Jammer:

I think your observation is wise and correct. Sensory fatigue is a well known fact. It applies to odor, sight and sound. The brain needs to take a rest as it is involved in every one of these processes. It is amazing what we see the day after.

 

As far as color, what feeling do you want the photo to communicate?

 

For me, the problem with this image goes beyond color and stems from composition: two elements fighting each other and forcing a divided attention. Waves, pretty, common and not remarkable, compete with rocks, none wins, it is a stalemate. Dividing these two elements on a 1/3, 2/3 ratio might be more effective than the 1/2, 1/2 approach here. Color though important is no substitute for good composition. The right color I'd suggest should be the last thing design element.

 

Part of the problem is the fixed position lens as in your 35. With a 4X5 you are helped to think of composition because the camera itself gives you more options. The ease of shot making with other cameras is conducive to easy shooting. The fact that you appreciate beauty is evident and with time and effort you will be happier. The biggest problem with photography as I see it is not technique, it is art. Profiles, etc are not brain surgeon stuff, what is more difficult is getting it right from the side of art. Wish you success in your path to discovery.

[jammer_jammer]

Tim,<br>

The image is the result of scanning a Kodachrome 64 slide with a Nikon LS 50. I do very little with Nikon scan, choosing instead to do most corrections with PS. It is often extremely difficult dragging a decent image out of these slides. Images that look great projected on the screen, end up very dark and or extremely contrasty when scanned.<p>

 

I'll never object to a nice buttering up and yes you are more than welcome to use the image for the purposes that you mentioned.<p>

 

Julio,<br>

Thank you very much for sharing some of your knowledge and for your very kind approach. Very much appreciated.

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Thanks for giving me permission in the use of your image in the

future. Woah! So that's Kodachrome? I had no idea. Oh well. I

thought it was a digicam RAW shot that got stripped of its color

temp data.

 

Well then you really do need to get the color management in

order on the Nikon scanner because they are known for

producing better renderings than what you provided without a lot

of fuss unless those slides really do look that blue and dark on a

light table. Didn't the Nikon software come with canned scanner

profiles per film brand and type used? Can you apply them in PS

and edit from there?

 

I doubt my attempts are accurate going by the methods used, but

I'm curious how close I came to the original scene and/or slide

viewed on the light table.

 

Here's an example of how a similar profile processing solution

got me out of a jam when I first started out learning digital

imaging when CM was first being implemented back in the mid

to late '90's. I was teaching myself all this color stuff by way of

photo restorations which at the time did seem like brain surgery.<div></div>

[jtk]

Your original was slightly magenta, perhaps as little as 3-4CC. I'd neutralize that and deal with the density issues by dodging and burning, rather than overall levels adjustments. Photoshop's great for dodging and burning. You might even want to do local color and contrast adjustments.