BobSandford

<p>One more bit: Is PS CS4 upgraded to 11.0.1? Someone at this site <a href="http://littletechgirl.com/2010/01/03/photoshop-cs4-mouse-jumping-issue/">http://littletechgirl.com/2010/01/03/photoshop-cs4-mouse-jumping-issue/</a><br>

and at this site <a href="http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50581">http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50581</a><br>

says that the 11.0.1 update fixes a jumping mouse problem. <a href="http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4292">http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4292</a></p>

<p>Given that your video card and drivers are reasonably current, I'm leaning toward a mouse driver issue. The mouse driver is what ties mouse tracking to PS via the OS. Besides being out of date, drivers can go corrupt. Updating could solve either problem. Instead of using the "search for a new driver" feature, I would go to the mouse manufacturer site and download the latest. If it turns out you already have latest, I would uninstall and reinstall the downloaded mouse drivers to eliminate possible driver corruption.</p>

<p>The problem I found with dust inside the lense is that if the angle of the sun is right, not enough to create lense flare, but enough to catch the dust it'll put white spots on the print.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>I count you among those who deserve the consistant high praise. If you weren't critical of your own work, your work probably wouldn't be as good as it is. Perhaps you and I share a frustration with the sort of comments that pervade much of this site - comments (praise or otherwise) that express quick gut reactions and lack thoughtfulness. (Unlike the thoughts posted in this thread.)</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

For me, making photos is part of living a creative life. Photography encourages me not to take what I see and how I see it for granted. Making photos and enjoying others' photos means being open to seeing differently, which, I think, means being differently. How we see things IS who we are. When I look at my photos, I see more than the subject. I see my seeing of the subject. I see myself engaged with the visible world, striving to find beauty and when struck by what appears before me, striving to find a way to convey the moment.

I'm new to this but so far using Photomatix tone mapping on a single RAW that I save a number of times, each with a different exposure setting, seems to generate a composite that is more natural looking.

unfortunately, i have hardly a clue, just a suggestion: if it's a glitch with your scanner software, updating the drivers and/or software for the scanner might help.

When most people look at a picture of themselves, the question in the back of their minds is not "is this an accurate representation of my appearance?" but "does this show me as I imagine myself to be?" (Notice I didn't say "does this show me as I imagine myself to APPEAR", though this may be part of it.)A portrait is more likely to appeal to a subject if it expresses something of how they imagine themselves to be as a person. The difficulty of this is compounded by the fact that for all of us there is some difference between how we hope others will "see" us, and how we actually come across. The greater the difference between the two, the less people want to be reminded of the difference. Maybe if as portrait photographers we can tap into the fantasies that power the subject's persona (the "face" they put toward the world)we might create portraits that subjects like. (See, for example, Thomas Hardy's comment "this place uses another photographer to take photos of people who have put in a significant number of years on the job and all the women look elegant and the men dignified. The photos proudly hang in the corridors of the institution, and I admire them everyday." Those portraits tapped into a corporate fantasy that is one of the "persona perks" of their jobs.)

NO - but for different sort of reason I suppose. Up until a few months ago I seemed to average about ten ratings when I posted a photo. Then for some reason, it seemed to be reduced to about three on average. This has been consistent since some website changes. The ratings I'm getting are similar to before, just fewer of them and a good deal less views. I don't think it's my work. Any ideas?

As for me, I'm still learning, so layers gives the opportunity to both preserve the original in the background layer and preserve my editing in adjustment layers. If, when I look at an older picture I decide I like what I did but can't remember how I did it, by way of the layers and notes I may have added to the picture, I can retrace my steps. If, when I look at an older picture, I realize my technique was inadequate, I can return to my original work and try again.

I'll second Paul on his answer. If you want an easier option for experimenting with the angle, duplicate then hide the background. Make the backgound copy the active layer and use the move tool to rotate the layer manually.

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

This is probably not satisfactory but is an improvement. I set up a channel mixer layer and fed some of the red (26%) into the green channel and some of the red (22%) into the blue channel and got the attached. Another techniques you could experiment with to augment this is to select only the red channel in the channels pallette then Invert, the Edit and Fade Invert & set it to Multiply mode and fade to the desired level. This is a crude way to cut back on the red channel.<div></div>

Sorry, almost forgot. The second, more involved technique is more clearly explained at http://www.adobe.com/tips/phs8colorbw/main.html

To me the easiest method that gives good general results is to add a gradient map layer on top and choose black to white as your gradient. If needed you could add a levels layer for general refinement. If you need more control to get the results you need, especially when there are many colors in the photo, I would use Beau's approach which can be further refined by choosing the "color" blend mode for the hue/saturation layer. Then you can get even more refinement by not only manipulating the hue and saturation of the "master" (on the "edit" drop-down menu) but can also choose from that menu reds, yellows etc. and manipulate those. To identify which color to choose you can temporarily disable the channel mixer layer to view the color layer. This gives an insane amount of control.