Photography Post-Processing: Questions and How-Tos (HDR :getin:)

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Photography Post-Processing: Questions and How-Tos (HDR :getin:)

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

I was thinking of starting a thread like this too!

Here's one I already have a writeup for:

When I took the image, I used a 2-stop soft GND filter to keep the sky from overblowing:

Since I exposed for the sky, trying to keep as much detail in there as possible, everything else took on a flat appearance. My first order of business is to develop it in Lightroom.

I'm not at home, so I can't get the original edits (or screenshots of the interface), but it was probably this:

Exposure : +1.25
Recovery : 100%
Color Temperature : a little cooler (??)

Since the sky came out too bright in that version, I made a virtual copy in Lightroom which was underexposed until the clouds had good definition -- fully intending to merge it in later. (It was also warmed up a bit)

I brought these two into Photoshop, and stacked the dark one over the light one. (This is where my painting degree came in to play.) I took the eraser, set it to about 1000 pixels, completely soft-edged, and at about 30% transparency. I started erasing the underexposed ground from the top layer to let the bottom layer show through. After a few color and brightness selections, I was able to remove most of the ground from the top layer.

_{hrm.. where'd the oil tanks go?}

..and this is what was left of the sky.

If it's still flat at this point, check the transparency of the top layer, then try a curve layer that adds contrast.

Final step: dodging, burning, saturation

In order to be non-destructive, I create two layers (in a group):

- "Lightener" 40% overlay
- "Darkener" 40% overay

Depending on the effect, in each layer I will use a brush between 400px and 1200px across, no hardness (extremely soft-edged), and about 20-40% opacity. (The full image size is 3000x2000.)

To start with, I use white in the Lightener layer, And black in the Darkener. Some areas might need warming or cooling, so I might try some colors sampled from the image.

_{BTW, you're not a newbie if you're using masks on adjustment layers.} :v:

# ¿ Jan 12, 2009 17:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:24

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

FunkyJunk posted:

Quazi, I think there may be a better, or at least different, way to achieve what you were going for. Keep in mind this is just quick 'n dirty.

And that's the beautiful thing about Photoshop -- there's a zillion different ways of getting basically the same answer!

My excuse for taking the more complicated route was that I prefer to work in RAW as much as possible before exporting the image.

# ¿ Jan 12, 2009 20:35

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Mannequin posted:

I don't understand why people use the eraser tool.

I did that before I knew how to use masks.

The fun part is that I can go back and re-import the virtual copy from Lightroom, then use the transparent areas from that erased layer as a mask for the new layer, deleting the erased layer in the process.

Soylent Green posted:

This brings up a good point as well, for as long as possible when working on your images, I'd recommend keeping them as Smart Objects so you can get back into the RAW editor after creating adjustment layers and the like.

How do Smart Objects register with other layers? Hopefully it's just the interface, but Smart Objects don't seem to be pixel perfect, especially when resizing them. (I guess I should test it.)

quazi fucked around with this message at 15:36 on Jan 13, 2009

# ¿ Jan 13, 2009 15:30

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Everything and everybody tells me this is wrong, but I have been getting excellent results with it:

- Shoot in RAW (Nikon D70s, until I get a D90)

- Edit in Photoshop CS3 or CS4 using AdobeRGB
- Monitor : Dell 2005FPW (non-calibrated set to sRGB)
- add a 68 --> 72 curve layer before printing (well, the printer was printing dark..)

- Print (Epson 9800 Pro, Enhanced Matte paper)
-- Photoshop manages colors
-- AdobeRGB, Gamma 2.2

Go ahead and laugh, and I'm sure that if I change one single thing in this setup (different paper, monitor, printer, or even camera), everything will go to hell. I better enjoy it while it lasts. :cool:

quazi fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Jan 14, 2009

# ¿ Jan 14, 2009 20:21

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

I knew this would be trouble because I was shooting into the sun. I don't have artificial lighting big enough to flood fill the entire house (just an SB600 flash, heh), and I didn't have the time to set it all up even if I did have it.

So, two exposures. One for the ground, the other for the sky.

The Ground
_{ISO 200, 12mm, F/8, 0.8 sec}

_{(the purple window is from my polarizing filter. I kinda like it, so I'm leaving it there.}

Adjustments ( basic , HSL )

white balance. warmer : from 5000/-4 to 6167/+4
recovery, contrast, little fill light
increase saturation : yellow and green
decrease saturation : red, and a little blue
reduce luminance : blue, some orange
crop (which I shouldn't have done so early.. but hey, this is how you learn)

Which creates this:

---

Then, a totally separate image (and for the love of god, adjust the exposure without bumping the tripod. Use a cable release if you have one, or hope it ain't windy.)

The Sky
_{ISO 200, 12mm, F/8, 1/6 sec}

Adjustments ( Basic, Tone Curve, HSL, Split Toning )

white balance. cold, stupid cold. : from 5250/-3 to 3905/-7
high recovery
complete fill light. This might not work on most images. I wanted to practically eliminate the darks so the interface between this and the "ground" image above isn't so jarring.
raise the black level just a little because it started to look sickly. This also saturates the color slightly (not sure why).
tone curve : freak out:
HSL : bring up the red saturation and blue luminance
split toning : warm the shadows, because between the blue luminance and the low temperature, this was getting cold, fast.
crop : gotta make it match the other one..

Then it turns into this:

I know the ground is ugly, I don't care. All I care about is that lovely sky.

---

Into Photoshop

Put the dark layer on the bottom, and then use the other layer to brighten it.

Making a mask is fun:

_{Start with a black mask, and don't view it like this. These images only show what I came up with afterwords.}

_{Notice the registration problem along the left? Yeah, the images weren't exact.}

We're almost there..

We just need some little tweaks:

..which do this:

Now the house is warmer and brighter, which is how I remember it:

One more thing.. When you use a 12mm lens, and tilt it above or below the horizon line, no matter how slight, you will get perspective distortion. Since I don't have a tilt-shift lens, or a large-format view camera like Ansel Adams, where you can correct for this in the camera, I'll have to settle for this:

_{You have to flatten the image because this only works on one layer. Also, expand the canvas so you have room to work without the image going off the edge.}

..which does something like this:

_{I don't remember the exact settings, these are pretty close though}

And finally, the moment we've all been waiting for:

_{click for big}

Any questions?

quazi fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Jan 15, 2009

# ¿ Jan 15, 2009 11:35

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

evil_bunnY posted:

Does someone make a Lightroom plugin that repairs known lens distortions, so you could for example correct a whole bunch of pictures shot at different apertures and lengths?

PTLens. It's not a Lightroom plugin, but it has a database of cameras and lenses, and claims to* correct barrel distortion, pincushion, and even moustache distortion.

_{* - I haven't used it yet}

# ¿ Jan 16, 2009 02:38

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

kefkafloyd posted:

Bridge sucks, that's a big reason to use LR.

The only advantage Bridge has over Lightroom is its Curves function. It's pretty much a copy of the one in Photoshop, rather than being limited to 3 points like Lightroom.

# ¿ Jan 16, 2009 22:02

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

What I means is you can't do this in Lightroom:

Which turns this,

..into this.

I did this long before I knew how to use masks to overlap two layers. Since then I've been trying to recreate it with other methods, and not a single one looks as good (and was as easy to create) as this one -- which I created in ~~Bridge~~ (actually ACR) (which is a program that apparently sucks, hrm).

My overall point is since Lightroom is using the exact same RAW engine as Bridge, and is positioned to be its replacement, why doesn't it offer the ability to make a custom curve like Bridge does? It offers every other editing feature of Bridge, why is it missing this one?

quazi fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Jan 17, 2009

# ¿ Jan 17, 2009 01:06

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

kefkafloyd posted:

Bridge sucks ... opening up the RAW in PS in ACR...

AH HA! That's where I'm getting lost.. I thought ACR was Bridge! I never used it for its workflow anyway -- because it sucked. :v:

_{(feel free and replace every mention of Bridge with ACR)}

# ¿ Jan 17, 2009 01:33

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Bridge is clunky.. like two retards loving. While Lightroom is a room full of well-oiled pornstars who know what the hell they're doing.

# ¿ Jan 17, 2009 03:01

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Good Sir posted:

buying your own printer, which I've done, but I need prints larger than 8.5x11.

The Epson 9900 is pretty nice.

# ¿ Feb 17, 2009 14:17

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

brad industry posted:

Speaking of LAB color, I highly recommend this book:
http://bit.ly/SNrFi

Here's a place where you can read a couple chapters from it:
http://www.ledet.com/margulis/articles.html

The stuff he does with masking in chapter 9. Holy crap.

# ¿ Mar 5, 2009 17:18

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Myshra posted:

Betterlight scanbacks (which totally sucks)

What sucks about these? I've never used one, but is there any other 416-megapixel back you would recommend?

# ¿ Mar 9, 2009 16:18

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

The only things you lost are your history, virtual copies, and snapshots (I think).

# ¿ Mar 10, 2009 14:54

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Photoshop CS4:

# ¿ Apr 13, 2009 04:48

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

evensevenone posted:

Would anyone be intersted in participating together a "contest" (maybe without judging since that's always a pain in the rear end and contentious) where we all start with the same 3 or 5 RAWs and post-process them to JPGs? It'd be interesting to see what different people come up with.

I guess we ought to migrate from the RAW thread back to this one. No matter how hard I try to keep it on track, everybody else derails it into a pretentious bitchfest.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2009 16:31

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Cross_ posted:

For headshots take a look at the Portrait Professional software:
http://www.portraitprofessional.com/?gclid=CMHviPLw5Z8CFRMXawodVXLIHQ

Sign me up!

# ¿ Feb 9, 2010 20:54

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Ringo R posted:

Apply a tiny bit of monochromatic gaussian noise to it before saving.

# ¿ May 12, 2010 18:58

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Whitezombi posted:

How many images do you guys have in your catalogs?

A little over 24,000 and it goes up by about 2200/year.

# ¿ Jun 19, 2010 22:14

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

I didn't notice a slowdown in the first place, but an "optimized" database can't be a bad thing, right? :v:

The only thing that slows me down is trying to edit an image with 15 overlapping adjustment brushes where half of use auto masking. It results in an xmp file that's about 1.5MB (normally around 30k), and it's dog slow no matter what.

# ¿ Jun 20, 2010 05:52

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Bojanglesworth posted:

I must be retarded or something cause I have no clue what you are talking about.

Do you still have some images in Lightroom, which you didn't delete? If so, browse to them in the Library module, right-click on one of them, then select "Open in Explorer". Windows Explorer should open. Then look around and see if the deleted photos are next to them.

If not, then you're hosed.

# ¿ Sep 12, 2010 15:42

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Cannister posted:

1) ... Can someone give me a basic idea of how best to use lightroom to keep track of my photo collection and store it in multiple places, or understand more clearly what exactly it is that LR does as far as cataloging?

At its most basic, Lightroom creates a database which points to your photos on disk. The photos themselves are not stored in the database, they remain on disk. Depending on your import settings, you might be reading them from where they are, or copying them and reading the copy, or moving them to a new home altogether.

What is your workflow like so far? How do you copy images from your camera to your laptop? Do you then manually copy the folder tree from the laptop to the external, or are you using sync software? Either way, you can use Lightroom to import photos directly from the memory card to both hard drives at once. (there's a little flag in the Import dialog)

Once you have the photos available in the Library module, go through them. (You don't have to use every single one of these filter options, but they're there if you want them.)

Assign them attributes so you can filter them later:

Use the rating system to rate them from 1-5 stars
Use a flag to mark good ones, or set a 'reject flag' to mark bad ones
Assign a color (red, green, blue, yellow, purple) based on whatever criteria you want
Group photos into stacks: (one suggestion) If you took several bracketed photos of the same scene in order to create an HDR, have the finished version on the top of the stack, while the bracketed shots are below.

Set up filters:

Temporarily filter out photos using the filter icons at the bottom of the Library module. Create names for those filter settings with the listbox in the lower-right.
Use the Filter Bar at the top of the Library module to not only select by the attributes you've created above, but by metadata in each photo (time, date, lens settings, etc)
Set up a Smart Collection (just like a Smart Playlist in iTunes, except it uses your photo attributes)

Other stuff:
- I enable sidecar XMP files; this makes syncing a LOT faster. Whenever I edit a photo in Lightroom, the changes are written to that little file instead of the relatively huge RAW file. The originals get copied once, and from then on the only things that copied are the little XMP files.

..I don't know about anybody else, but I play Lightroom like it's a video game. just keep pressing buttons until you win! :parrot:

quote:

2) Does anybody have any good links regarding color correction?

Get this book:
Photoshop LAB Color: The Canyon Conundrum and Other Adventures in the Most Powerful Colorspace

Then again, Lightroom is getting powerful enough that it can solve most of your color correction issues. Personally, I reserve LAB for once-in-a-blue-moon fiddly stuff that Lightroom can't do.

quote:

3) Can anyone link me to the post/posts woot fatigue has made about his (lengthy) photoshop processes? I think it was in a PAD thread a while back, but maybe I'm wrong.

I can't find the link, but I think his work involves a crapton of masks and layers.. something insane like a dozen adjustment layers just to get a small portion of the photo to come out right. I could be way off, who knows!

# ¿ Sep 16, 2010 15:36

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

MrBlandAverage posted:

Make a preset!

(make sure the image you use to make this preset has the profile correction on)

Dammit all to hell. A good idea in Lightroom that I haven't thought of. :colbert:

_{thanks, it's awesome!}

# ¿ Oct 21, 2010 14:50

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Martytoof posted:

Well, while we're sort of talking about Lightroom, is there any way to operate on a single stack of photos in Library's Grid view?

Assign them a color, then set up a filter for only that color.

..or survey view, or a temporary collection! Lightroom is awesome like that.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2010 14:17

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Sweet, new version! Did they make it so I could see previews when importing from my D300s?

..nope.

# ¿ Dec 8, 2010 05:45

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Guitarchitect posted:

Have any of you RAW shooters found that Lightroom can be really crappy sometimes?

Got any examples? I haven't had a problem with Lightroom (aside from the inherent limitations in the clone tool, and the total lack of multi-channel curves.)

# ¿ Sep 22, 2011 14:34

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Guitarchitect posted:

Here's a sample.
CLICKY CLICK

Not sure what could be doing that. Out of date video driver, overclocking artifacts, wonky ICC profile.

Mine looks like this:
http://jwallacephoto.com/SA/lightroom-test.jpg
_{1:1 screenshot from LR3 to CS5, jpeg 85%.}

Even though "everything is set to zero", what profile are you using for LR3's camera calibration?

# ¿ Sep 23, 2011 13:53

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

By default, Lightroom saves all the the develop settings to its own catalog. You can also save it to sidecar xmp files which follow around each image. Enable with: Edit / Catalog Settings / Metadata tab / "Automatically write changes into XMP".

Guitarchitect posted:

Is there a way for me to clear this image out of the cache, and re-import it as if LR has never seen it before?

Purge the image data:
- from Lightroom's Library module: right-click, select "Delete Photo, click "remove"
- If your image has an XMP file: remove the XMP with Explorer/Finder.

Then re-import the image.

# ¿ Sep 23, 2011 14:28

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

wizard sticks posted:

Thanks for the advice. I'm very new to Lightroom (3.5) and CS5 - is there a easy way to segregate the saturation on items in a photo (eg. only select the elephant and increase saturation) ?

Lightroom:
1. Create adjustment brush
2. Fiddle with saturation level for the brush
3. Draw where you want that saturation level to take effect

The fun part of Lightroom is that you can do parts 2 & 3 in whatever order you want.

# ¿ Nov 6, 2011 16:25

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

IsaacNewton posted:

It's much easier than this;

That's a good method too, but if you wanted to desaturate the pink background without affecting the pink elephant, then adjustment curves are the way to go.

Masking can be a pain though.

# ¿ Nov 7, 2011 23:33

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

JaundiceDave posted:

Split toning in lightroom is laughably easy, if a bit dumbed down from photoshop, but it fits to a tee lightroom's goal of being able to do 90% of post without having to open op photoshop. To get that look - that's not a film look btw - you should have the highlights set to a light green, and the shadows set to a dark purple. Adjust saturation and balance to taste.

I'm not usually into this, but it's kinda fun. And you're right, it's piss easy:

_{hipster tracks by jwallacephoto, on Flickr}

# ¿ Jan 8, 2012 05:17

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

Gravitom posted:

How does everyone organize their files in Lightroom?

I guess I'm the only one who organizes everything in the folder tree instead of collections.

Molten Llama posted:

The Lightroom 4 public beta is up

The Kelby folks have some videos up:
http://www.photoshopuser.com/lightroom4

What's awesome:
- rethought sliders in the Develop module
- clarity is WAY more sensitive! (and less halo-happy)

Finally:
- RGB curves
- color temperature adjustment brush
- grain adjustment brush
- stacks in collections

Gimmicky, but I might use it:
- maps & books
- hide module names from the top of the screen

What they didn't touch:
- Give me adjustment brushes for EVERYTHING. Why is this so impossible? Aperture can do it.
- An actual clone tool, not this half-assed spot removal thing. (Come on, Adobe.. this isn't difficult.)

Also, it's called "beta" for a reason. I got it to crash a dozen times in 20 minutes.

quazi fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Jan 10, 2012

# ¿ Jan 10, 2012 20:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:24

quazi: Apr 19, 2002; data control

joelcamefalling posted:

am I missing something? You could do this in 3.x

You could always hide the entire strip, but now you can hide individual module names.

# ¿ Jan 11, 2012 17:27

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Photography Post-Processing: Questions and How-Tos (HDR :getin:)