« The 5-Question Game | Main | Weather »
August 12, 2004
Juicing the Image
My hand's been slapped more than once for juicing my photographs via Photoshop. Ever since I discovered the curves tool, I really haven't been able to keep my hands off it. It's a drug for me, a dreamy tool that instantly lightens or darkens an image. Outside of the obvious uses for this tool, I've used it for experimenting, and include an example of such a test below. In this image, I used the curves tool to deepen the overall image, which wasn't bad in its original format but a bit too light. The photo was taken about 15 minutes before the sun really began to set, and the evening was both hazy humid and windy.
After infusing the photograph with curves juice, I often end up with a nasty bout of pixelation. Since I'm still a newbie when it comes to using Photoshop, I'm sure you photo mavens out there know how to avoid this (yes, I realize that if I don't use the curves tool at all the photo won't end up with pixel chunks) ... however, I'm interested in knowing other ways around that problem. Regardless, I still like the end result for this particular photograph.
Cindy
Comments
I learned to re-size my images first, then lighten or darken them. That gives me less pixelation. or is it the other way around? Hmm... But I do love to manipulate photos every chance I get.
Brain matter deposited by: paul on August 13, 2004 6:56 AM
I don't understand this constant rehashing of post-processing techniques. As long as there has been Photoshop there has been a common perception that a digitally manipulated image is of less merit than one right out of the camera. This makes no sense to me.
Anyone who took photography in school remembers the b&w darkroom. Among the first things taught were techniques to dodge, burn, mask and manipulate exposure with development time. More advanced students moved on to color and the addition of color specific filtering and a new, more complex, set of tools.
All the digital darkroom does is make tradtional post-exposure processing available to the masses. Sure, it can be overdone, but the same applies to a darkroom. Anyone who walked away from the tray to smoke a cigarette hanging out the lab window in ninth grade can attest to this.
Unless your a journalist the idea is to translate your vision into an image. How that happens is irrelevant. Ansel Adams spent hours upon hours in the darkroom and considered himself as much a printmaker as photgrapher. Weston often hand tinted his images. I don't think many people look at 'Moonrise, Hernandez' and say it's a bad picture because he tweaked the chemicals and masked the background while printing.
Brain matter deposited by: Al on August 13, 2004 10:05 AM
Al, valid points. I take photographs because I enjoy it, and that enjoyment spills over into tweaks in Photoshop. What I put on this blog or the photoblog is simply a reflection of that enjoyment - period. (I know you know this.)
Be that as it may... did you like the photograph? :-)
Brain matter deposited by: Cindy on August 13, 2004 3:18 PM
I think it could have used a little more foreground and a little less sky.
Sorry, but you should know if you ask me a question like that I'm going to tell you what I think :)
Brain matter deposited by: Al on August 13, 2004 5:53 PM
Al - Since the setting sun and the sky was my subject, that's the image... but I'll take _constructive_ criticism anytime, so
your two cents on the topic was greatly appreciated.
Brain matter deposited by: Cindy on August 13, 2004 7:57 PM