So, Taffy and I have been taking these PS classes and I posted a before and after collage yesterday. But I'm still more comfortable in LR so I re-imported it back into LR and worked on it a little more. Brought up a little of the sun light (might be making the thunderstorms on the horizon show up a bit?) and downplayed the sharper contrast in the foreground. But now I wonder -- is it too much manipulating? Does it look artificial? Hawaii does have extremely contrasty-weather. Hmmm . . .
I think this is a terrific addition to your processing of this photo. It captures the morning well -- the contrasts fit the original scene as well as just look good as processed.
I do most of my editing in LR or Topaz Studio I do my creating in PS. Also I prefer the healing brush in photo shop and if I need a mask I go to photoshope.
@joansmor PS is still so new to me that I am limited to the few things we've learned to do so far. This one involved combining two photos -- sky in one and ocean in the other. They were taken only a few minutes apart but it brings out the best portions of the two, and still seems in the same moment. I hope. @ludwigsdiana -- I'm so glad I had all these just sitting and waiting for me to have time to learn how to process them! Nothing like pandemic "travel" through photography. @mcsiegle -- thank you for your feedback! It IS quite dramatic, isn't it? It transports me back to that moment in Hawaii. I grew in on a small island in the Pacific Ocean so it also reminds me of my childhood. @pamknowler --@taffy and I were both "frightened" of PS because it seemed so inexplicably stubborn and we were so frustrated by it. But we've been having fun together and MattK is very methodical, understandable, and by buying his lessons as a series it progressively builds understanding. Plus you can go back and rewatch something you don't remember as well later because the lessons are in named modules. In fact, just last night Taffy and I went back to a very early lesson on gradations to jog our aging memories for a rather simple solution. @taffy -- I can't imagine doing these lessons by myself because I'm learning so much more doing them with you!
This shot expresses power to me, a great dramatic scenery. I like your processing and the deep colors. I have just started to get into LR.....those programs for processing is a job on its own. Good luck with the classes.
@jyokota Ditto!!! I actually would highly recommend partnering with someone to go through the lessons together. It makes it more fun, and it also means you are likely to have someone to help, as rarely are we both confused at the same time.
Looks natural to me. Thank you for your lovely comments on my project this year and our chats on our threads!! Have a good 2021 and happy new year to you
I really like it (even better in big ;-) and don't see any obvious transition between water and sky (but that should be a rather straightforward one being mostly a straight line with good contrast).
I do notice a bit of a halo around the big rock (around and just under the horizon) that I would attribute to sharpening or pushing the (local) contrasts just a bit too far.
With regard to contrast, brightening, and other steps you applied, I was also questioning the validity when I started to edit more "aggressively" - by which I mean to the point where you see things after the edit you did not before.
I do think now that most of these steps do not really alter the image but rather may make visible what you captured but did not show initially. To make the point, our cameras capture their images at a bit depth somewhere between 12 and 15 (depending on make and age) while most screens display at a bit depth of 8 (mine does). That means you cannot expect all the detail there is in your image without adjustments.
Besides, the human eye is still quite a bit more capable than camera sensors with respect to dynamic range so you "see more" than the camera is able to capture.
The sky replacement is a different topic that I started exploring a bit when Luminar made it so easily accesible. I'm still rather reluctant using it myself, but in this case I think it is a nice fit and, given your description, perfectly fine.
Overall I think your edit looks much more "natural" - and appealing - than what you started with ...
Here’s a thought. Try making it smaller and see if you still like it. The problem with LR is you can’t change the opacity of everything you’ve done. Or if you can, i don’t know how to do it easily there. Take the version you had in PS back into PS (if you stilll have it) and take this new version to PS as a layer on top of the other one and then play with the opacity so it’s just enough. As I thought about this in the night, i realized to my eye it is a bit overdone so here’s a way to play with it
January 1st, 2021
Leave a Comment
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
@mcsiegle -- thank you for your feedback! It IS quite dramatic, isn't it? It transports me back to that moment in Hawaii. I grew in on a small island in the Pacific Ocean so it also reminds me of my childhood.
@pamknowler --@taffy and I were both "frightened" of PS because it seemed so inexplicably stubborn and we were so frustrated by it. But we've been having fun together and MattK is very methodical, understandable, and by buying his lessons as a series it progressively builds understanding. Plus you can go back and rewatch something you don't remember as well later because the lessons are in named modules. In fact, just last night Taffy and I went back to a very early lesson on gradations to jog our aging memories for a rather simple solution.
@taffy -- I can't imagine doing these lessons by myself because I'm learning so much more doing them with you!
I do notice a bit of a halo around the big rock (around and just under the horizon) that I would attribute to sharpening or pushing the (local) contrasts just a bit too far.
With regard to contrast, brightening, and other steps you applied, I was also questioning the validity when I started to edit more "aggressively" - by which I mean to the point where you see things after the edit you did not before.
I do think now that most of these steps do not really alter the image but rather may make visible what you captured but did not show initially. To make the point, our cameras capture their images at a bit depth somewhere between 12 and 15 (depending on make and age) while most screens display at a bit depth of 8 (mine does). That means you cannot expect all the detail there is in your image without adjustments.
Besides, the human eye is still quite a bit more capable than camera sensors with respect to dynamic range so you "see more" than the camera is able to capture.
The sky replacement is a different topic that I started exploring a bit when Luminar made it so easily accesible. I'm still rather reluctant using it myself, but in this case I think it is a nice fit and, given your description, perfectly fine.
Overall I think your edit looks much more "natural" - and appealing - than what you started with ...