john_baker8

Here is a technique I learned from Marc Williams. 1) select bright highlighted areas with either magic wand or color range. 2} Feather selection a bit (I used 3 since image is small). 3) create layer from selection and change from 'Normal' to 'Multiply'. You can duplicate this layer a 2nd time to darken it further then adjust opacity.

 

It s a start....<div></div>

Can you tell me what the name of the song that plays on your web site? One of the girls in my office loves it!

It is called being on the Bleeding Edge of Technology. As mentioned earlier, with time Vista will become smoother to operate and install just as previous versions of OS have.

No voting for yourselves either! ;-)

1. Make duplicate layer. Disable it.

 

2. Make sure that colors are set to default (black on white) then perform an Image -> Adjustment -> Gradient Map on the original layer. This will turn it to a black and white image.

 

2. On original layer adjust brightness/contrast. Increase brightness to 100% and lower contrast a bit.

 

3. Select and reactivate duplicate layer then create a rectangular selection around subjects keeping in mind that you will need a few extra pixels to perform an inner stroke for the white border.

 

4. Invert you selection then delete outer area on duplicate layer.

 

5. Invert the selection again so that the original selection is set.

 

5. Perform an Edit -> Stroke. Set the color to white, location to inside, and pixels to 10 (or however wide you want your white border). Make sure blending mode is normal and opacity is 100%<div></div>

No backing out from here....<div></div>

Ditto. Plus I would run Task Manager to monitor your memory usage. You may be exceeding your physical memory resulting in heavy disk thrashing.

Thanks guys. I am not seeing any smearing and I have not changed my cyan cartridge in awhile. The picture otherwise printed perfect. I will try printing some smaller pictures when I next get a chance and if they look good I will try reprinting the larger one. I will see if I can find some 'optical quality cleaning paper ' to try cleaning the paper path.

I printed a test page and it came out perfect.

My i9900 printer has been working flawlessly for about 2 years now. Last night

I was printing a 13" x 19" picture and it was ruined because it was randomly

spotted with small cyan droplets. I checked the cartgridge and it looked ok.

I printed the same picture on plain paper at 8 1/2" x 11" and it looked ok. I

am afraid to waste anoth sheet of 13" x 19" for fear that it may splot again.

Has anyone else run in to this issue?

Kelvin, Laugh now! Your time will come :-( When you least expect it. It always does. It is not a matter of IF your computer hard drives fail, but WHEN they fail.

"Much as it pains me to say it, I'd agree. The barriers to entry have fallen so much recently, and a lot of the mystique has been removed, especially for computer-savvy people. "

The mystique may be removed but it takes true art and skill to be a good, professional wedding photographer. Some people HAVE it while others strive to attain it. (I fall in the second category) LOL!

Seagate has a 750 Gb drive now. You can pick one up at Fry's for about $480. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,125556-page,1/article.html

I tried finding a picture that was featured as picture of the week several months (year?) ago but had no luck. It was a beautiful infrared picture of a landscape with flowers and ocean but the couple in the picture laying on the ground was in normal color. It looked VERY cool! I always wanted to try to duplicate that effect but never got around to it.

Sorry, they failed again...

----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----

<joshrandall@joshscapes.com>

 

----- Transcript of session follows -----

... while talking to mail6.inetsmart.net.:

>>> MAIL From:<JOHNBSYS@aol.com> SIZE=10489002

<<< 552 sorry, that message size exceeds my databytes limit (#5.3.4)

554 <joshrandall@joshscapes.com>... Service unavailable

There is nothing wrong with your sensor. Did you take these in RAW mode? If so then ACR is automatically adjusting the parameters differently when you open them. If you increase the brightness or exposure in ACR the noise will be enhanced also.

I just sent you two RAW files and they both bounced back with an invalid address.

"...A lot of stuff that "sounds good" is dreadful. Specifically, I read many posts related to wedding photography that are made by people who don't shoot weddings or are still stuck in 1974. Sometimes I think the content of the posts are motivated by a desire to cut down on competition from new photographers....."

 

Internal to our brains is something called 'confident factors'. If you read one posting you assign a low confidence factor to the information read. If you read another posting on the same subject you add or subtract confidence to that subject. The more you read (or research) a subject the higher your confidence becomes on the subject matter. So if you read "dreadful" postings you can usually tell. All in all, a lot of the postings on Photo.net are very instructional and you can learn to ignore the ones that go against the norm.

David,

I agree whole heartedly. It is just nice to know that if you ever do need it, it is there.

Ian, ACR is Adobe Camera Raw. I opened the picture twice. Once normally and the other with the exposure and brightness parameters turned up high. I then copied the over exposed picture as a layer over the top of the original and masked out all but the window area. I also had to do some noise reduction to the over exposed section.

Rainer, Yes, even with the JPEG you brought out detail. Though with 16 bit RAW there is more information there to bring out.

I am always amazed at how much detail you can pull out of a RAW image. This

was not a money shot but it shows what you can do with a RAW image if you have

to pull out dark areas. The original picture does not show anything inside

the window of the car but if you raise the brightness and exposure of that

section of the picture in ACR you can see the bride and groom in the back seat.<div></div>

A story within a story?<div></div>

Here is an older thread that talks about ETTL II peculiarities that might be useful to you. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AFhw

Ditto... http://www.photo.net/photo/4087468

I am guessing that the last one is digital. The bokah seems sharper than the rest.

Thanks all. I am pretty sure that they came from a digital camera. I am trying to get the original, large JPEGs now. I do not thing that they were shot in RAW format. Here is what I've come up with so far.<div></div>