pam_r

Mario Spalla started doing this before HDR was available. It's basically just burning and dodging in an artistic manner. The easy part is burn and dodge. The hard part is "in an artistic manner". ; )

Yes, heat is a hard-drive killer. I just bought 2 WD 500gig drives. I also bought 2 AMS Venus enclosures which have built-in fans and air ducts to help keep them cool. At $37 each, it's a worthwhile upgrade.

Aaron, if you use the polygonal lasso tool, or better yet, the pen tool, you can get the flared look you're after. Here's a quickie explanation:<p>

 

First, so you can see well beyond your image, hit the "F" key to set your viewing area to full screen mode. Using the polygonal lasso tool, draw shapes like this (hold down the shift key while using the tool to add to subsequent selections. Otherwise you'll draw one ray at a time:<p>

 

<IMG SRC="http://upload.pbase.com/pam_r/image/80519155.jpg"><p>

 

 

After you've drawn your rays, go to Selection>Feather (or right-click and choose "Feather" with your selections active) and choose an amount. Too much feather and the selection will blend together in a blob. Too little and you'll have unrealistic sharp edges to the rays:<p>

 

<IMG SRC="http://upload.pbase.com/pam_r/image/80519187.jpg"><p>

 

 

Open a new layer and fill your selection with white or a very pale yellow as I did here:<p>

<IMG SRC="http://upload.pbase.com/pam_r/image/80519229.jpg"><p>

 

 

Then play around with blend modes to taste:<p>

<IMG SRC="http://upload.pbase.com/pam_r/image/80519234.jpg"><p>

Basically if the color is not contributing, I remove it and make the image monochrome. Sometimes if the subject and composition is very graphic, I'll convert regardless of color.

Set the XT to shoot RAW+jpg and you'll have the best of both worlds. What software do you use? Shoot a good WB target and set the WB in your RAW conversion program.

Anna - there is no difference using your sharpening example. But Emre has essentially explained why the Fade command exists. To allow fine tuning of filters and commands that are not available as adjustment layers. For example, I sometimes use the Maximum/Minimum filters which only accept whole numbers, not fractional inputs. If I want a .5 maximum radius, I'll run Maximum at 1, then follow with a Fade to 50% which gets me about .5.<p>

 

Another example is when using other filters. Lets say I run Chalk & Charcoal on an image layer. Running the Fade command allows me to control the amount of the the sketch effect apart from the opacity. The opacity controls how much the underlying image contributes. It's harder to explain than it is to show. Try it for yourself and you'll quickly grasp the difference.

Here's a very comfortable, cheap alternative that I use:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-Components-F8GFPC100-Nostromo-Speedpad/dp/B0000DC643">Belkin Nostromo Speedpad n52</a>

Yes...fun with paint chips! Go to your nearest super home supplies store, grab some paint samples and experiment. Just be sure to shoot raw for those important pics. Correcting jpgs this far off the scale is a test of PS skills and patience ; )

That looks like LucisArt, which is a PS plug-in. Here's an example:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.lucisart.com/Gallery_Tapp1_marsgroup.htm">LucisArt example image</a><p>

 

Here's the main page:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.lucisart.com/">LucisArt</a>

<i>"Parker J Pfister - Possibly the best, but quite expensive."</i><p>

 

I suppose Parker's are so expensive because he's having to pay Moby royalties for using his music? ; )

Hi Angie,<br>

I'm the Pam R that wrote out the workflow that drove you crazy ; ) Sorry it took me a while to find this post.<p>

 

I've searched for the file in question but it eludes me. I do remember my usual steps however. You were right on the money with the use of color balance to "tweak the colors". I used that a lot back then. But, as you have found and others have pointed out, there are many, many ways to get the final look. My original steps were but one method.<p>

 

The reason I used the vague "color tweak" rather than hard numbers is that color is so subjective. What I like you might find distasteful, so I left that up to the individual.

 

Also, I used the term "lighting effects", which someone asked me to clarify in a subsequent post. Here it is for those that missed it:<p>

 

""Lighting effects" is a filter. To use this, first open a new layer and fill with 50% gray (Edit>Fill and choose 50% gray). Set the blending mode of this layer to Soft Light or Overlay. Now run Filter>Render>Lighting Effects. The settings I used were:<p>

Style - default

Light type - Spotlight<p>

 

Click on the white square in the "Light Type" section. This will pull up the color picker. You can choose a color for your light here, I used a light yellow. In the lighting effects preview window, click and drag the handles to resize the spread of the light and/or rotate it. Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing what effect your settings will have on the image until you exit the dialog box. So experiment until you like what you see. Try changing blend modes and adjusting the opacity. Also, remember that you can add a layer mask to further control the effect by painting with a soft black brush."<p>

 

<b>For Hugh and Dave,</b><p>

<i>"''This technique, espesically the final work isn't just given out.''<p>

 

"I have been asking people for years about this kind of technique and have never received an answer. I must say I find that a bit disappointing. I wonder if there are any books about these more advanced processes?"</i><p>

 

When I first started playing around in Photoshop over 4 years ago, it was very difficult to find tutorials and information on how to process images to look like something other than "adjust levels, sharpen...done". I did find a few, mostly on DPReview's Retouching forum. Almost everything I know comes from them unselfishly sharing their knowledge with me. So the tuts I write and the questions I answer are just my small way of giving back what I've received.

White House Custom Color (WHCC) will mount prints on masonite. I don't think anyone actually prints on masonite. Download their prices and services on PDF from this page:<p>

<a href="http://www.whcc.com/pricing.htm">WHCC pricing and services</a><p>

 

This company will print on almost anything, including aluminum. I haven't researched the prices yet, but I can imagine ; )<p>

 

<a href="http://www.printingprep.com/pages/PrintOnAluminum.html">Leader All Surface Printing (NY)</a><p>

 

Weldon Color will mount a print on aluminum:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.weldoncolorlab.com/mounting.htm">Weldon Color prices</a>

White House Custom Color (WHCC) will print on masonite. Download their prices and services on PDF from this page:<p>

<a href="http://www.whcc.com/pricing.htm">WHCC pricing and services</a><p>

 

Weldon Color will print on aluminum:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.weldoncolorlab.com/mounting.htm">Weldon Color prices</a>

Hi Don,<br>

 

<i>"What I am asking is since you have already applied texture-effects to your photograph would you print it on smooth paper rather than a fine art paper, a rag paper, a watercolor paper, which is a paper with its own texture?"</i><p>

 

Sorry I misunderstood your question. The paper choice would depend on your particular taste. I'm always experimenting. Who knows, maybe the image I referenced above would look even better printed on rag paper rather than smooth. I wouldn't rule anything out before giving it a try.<p>

 

<i>"Second question: is it your intention to make photographs that "look like paintings"?"</i><p>

 

I think the OP just used that expression in an attempt to describe what he thought about the images. To him, they looked "like paintings".<p>

As for me, no, my intention is to make an image that somehow "works". The colors, tonality, subject matter, mood...all comes together in a cohesive image. Sometimes that only takes a levels adjustment. Sometimes it takes a bit more. I'll use whatever it takes to make it "sing" to me. My personal philosophy is summed up by a quote I once read, "Art is working on something 'til you like it...then leaving it that way" ; )

Don,<p>

The effect you get really depends on the interaction between your image and the image you choose as a texture. Blending modes will further affect that interaction. As you said, PS textures have a repeating pattern. Also, they simply lie on top of the image, rather than interacting with the tones. To see this effect in action, here is a before/after example:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/pam_r/image/45588041">The original image, before applying textures</a><p>

 

After (or simply click "Previous" on the example given above):<p>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/pam_r/image/45588097">After applying textures</a><p>

"A question comes to mind. The 'proper' way to add texture to a photograph is with the paper it is printed on -- actually "in", such paper has depth due to its fiber as well as texture."<p>

 

The textures the OP is referring to are not the canvas or fiber-based textures you'll find in PS under Filter>Textures. These are textures as used by CGI artists. They are images of rust, peeling paint, scratched metal, etc. Since they are images themselves, printing is exactly like printing an image.<p>

 

Here is one of my favorite texture resources:<p>

 

<a href="http://mayang.com/textures/">Mayang's Free Textures</a><p>

 

Download a couple, place them on a layer above your image and play with layer blend modes and opacity to get a feel for what they do.

You can do this by using textures. These are simply photos of interesting surfaces, clouds, water reflections, etc. Place them on a separate layer and experiment with blend modes and opacities, and mask out your subject. They can be used to interact with the existing background, or replace it completely.<p>

 

I recently wrote an article on creative post-processing for the latest edition of Pbase magazine, #8. One of the three techniques I explain shows how to use textures, and I list a few online sources (you can also use your own). The article is under "Photoshopography" and it starts on page 15:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/magazine">Pbase magazine, issue #8</a><p>

 

In my gallery I have some examples of work done using textures. Here is one:<br>

 

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/pam_r/image/53024017">Dre, after applying textures</a><p>

 

Before applying the textures:<br>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/pam_r/image/53024010">Dre, before</a><p>

 

More examples can be found here:<br>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/pam_r/transformations">Transformations gallery with more texture examples</a>

I did some channel blending using the blue channel to get a bit more contrast along with a gradient map to do the b+w conversion, then some dodging and burning to get this...

Sometimes I like the effect of burning and dodging directly on color information. Sometimes I want just the luminosity affected, so as to avoid unwanted color shifts. Here's my method for burning and dodging color without affecting the color.<p>

 

- Open a new layer, we'll call this layer #2. Fill it with 100% black or white. Set the blending mode to Saturation or Color (it makes no difference). This will strip the color without affecting the luminosity of the image.<br>

- Open another new layer, which we'll call layer #3. Hit Ctrl + Alt + Shift + N + E. This will populate the new layer with all changes made up to this point. IOW, you should now have a b&w image layer on top of the stack. Set the blend mode for this layer to Luminosity.<br>

- Turn off layer #2.<br>

- Now, use the burn and dodge tools directly on layer #3.<p>

 

Alternatively, you can use curves for finer control. Continue as before. Instead of burning and dodging on layer #3, you can use the lasso tool to make a loose selection of the area you want to burn or dodge. Feather generously. Then clip a curves adjustment layer (hold down the Alt key while you open a curves adjustment layer, then click on the box marked, "Group with previous layer"). Now "burn/dodge" to taste by adjusting using curves. Fine tune the selection area with a soft black brush.<p>

Check out Ebay. I bought a brand new Sekonic L-608, in the box with warranty and battery a couple of weeks ago for $335. I would recommend the 608 over the 508 for one main reason. The 608 shows the meter reading in the spot viewfinder while the 508 doesn't. Very, very handy. Also, the 608 has a 1-4? zoom spot.<p>BTW, the 608 is the updated version of the 508.

One more important point about upgrading. This is from Adobe:<p>

"In addition, customers who are still using Photoshop version 6.0 or earlier will benefit from taking advantage of a more liberal upgrade policy for Photoshop CS2. Adobe will not offer upgrade pricing more than three versions back on Photoshop CS3."<br>

<a href="http://photoshopnews.com/2006/12/14/photoshop-cs3-beta-qa/">Photoshop CS3 Beta Q&A</a><p>

 

Another good CS3 video link:<p>

<a href="http://movielibrary.lynda.com/html/modPage.asp?ID=327">Deke McClelland's CS3 preview</a>

I consider myself an advanced PS user. I don't upgrade every time. I've gone from PS7 to CS and never upgraded to CS2 (I didn't think it was worth it) But I think CS3 is a major update and well worth upgrading to. Here are a few reasons:<p>

- Smart filters. Excellent. No need to dupe your image to run filters on it. Any filter can be adjusted after the fact....shadows and highlights included! This alone is worth the price of admission : )<br>

- The quick selection tool. Magic! Just amazing. I think it has a brain. This combined with Refine Edge will simplify your masking jobs like nothing else you've ever tried.<br>

- A super improved Camera Raw with much more control over your Raw conversion. Lots of control over B+W conversions.<br>

- A much improved Photo Merge.<br>

- Improved interface. Changes to the palette layout leave much more real estate available for the image you're working on.<br>

- New and improved Bridge.<br>

- Improved vanishing point with multiple planes.<br>

- Improved speed. Many people are reporting much faster performance.<p>

 

See for yourself. Here are some video links that show CS3 in action:<p>

 

<a href="http://photoshopnews.com/2006/12/15/russell-brown-releases-cs3-video-tutorials/">Russell Brown's CS3 videos</a><br>

 

<a href="http://russellbrown.com/tips_tech.html>More Russell Brown CS3 videos - scroll down to CS3)</a><br>

 

<a href="http://www.photoshopuser.com/cs3/index.html>NAPP CS3 videos</a><br>

Here are a couple of good links that describe what's happening between layers in different blend modes. The first link is less technical than the second:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.arraich.com/ref/tool_blend_modes.htm">Jay Arraich's Photoshop tips</a><p>

 

This one is more technical and includes the formulas used:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.pegtop.net/delphi/articles/blendmodes/">Pegtop's technical explanation of blend modes</a><p>

Scroll way down to "Get a Good File" for a good one with lots of skin tones along with some color charts and grayscales. Also comes in different flavors:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.gballard.net/nca.html">Test file with skin tones</a><p>

Simon,<p>

If you downloaded and unzipped the action, you need to place it somewhere on your hard drive and remember the location. It's not a good idea to place into the PS folder because you might lose it if you need to re-install.<p>

 

Open PS, open the image file you want to work on. Go to Window>Actions to open the actions palette. At the top of the palette you'll see a small arrow pointing right. Right-click on it and go down to "Load actions". Navigate to where you placed the action and load it. Continue as above.