Once again, I stopped at India Point Park on my way into work this morning. The low sun and long shadows made for very interesting lighting. I liked the background here with the path, the granite blocks, the river, and the Port of Providence in the distance. Again it was a waiting game, hoping someone interesting would cross into the scene. I was hoping for someone to come up the path facing the camera, but it didn't happen all the while I was there. Having both the walker and the runner enter this frame at the same time, though, was perfect. I don't think I'd have taken the photo had it been just one or the other.
Post processing started with a brilliant warm filter in Topaz Adjust. I then adjusted adaptive exposure, contrast, and protect highlights. Back in PSE, I duplicated that layer and brought it into Topaz B&W FX. I adjusted color sensitivity sliders, adaptive exposure, regions, contrast, boost black, and boost white. In PSE, I layered the b&w on top of the color layer using a soft light blend mode to which I applied a high pass filter with a 4.6 pixel radius. (That layering provides a sharpening technique that does not impact the colors.) A levels adjustment was added to the finished product.
These two photos are really at the same spot--am I right? One is looking one way and one the other. I love the clouds in this one, as well as everything else about it, of course.
@chief Thanks, James! The shadows, lighting, and deep colors are what enabled me to resist the b&w conversion temptation.
@cejaanderson Pretty close, actually. They were taken within about 100 feet of each other. The alternate photo was taken just as I arrived and was walking towards the water from my car. This one was taken a few minutes later after I'd managed to find a spot to use for the background setting.
I agree, it's the two of them together in this frame that make this composition more interesting than one alone would have. You must wake up super early to take time to photograph on your way to work. Do you set up with a tripod and then wait?
Your description of processing always intrigues me and makes me want to buy the entire Topaz suites, whereas I am an Aperture user with only a couple of Topaz plug-ins to date. What particularly piques my interest today is that you layered a b & w on this -- is that how you get the three dimensionality depicted here? I don't think Aperture does "layers" so that must be a PSE thing, or if I buy Topaz suites does that have a layers option? Sorry for asking so many questions but I appreciate your knowledge sharing!
@jyokota Layering is common to most of the photo editing software including Gimp, PSE, Photoshop, and Paintshop Pro. Of all of them, I find it easiest to use in PSE (or Photoshop, but I don't like the CC concept there.)
The technique of layering the b&w image with a soft light blend mode and then applying a high pass filter to the b&w image is primarily used as a sharpening technique. I believe the three dimensional feeling in the image is thanks to the effect created by that 35mm lens when the foreground subject is extremely close to the camera. (I was only about four feet away from him when I took this photo.)
Topaz itself doesn't have a layering capability. It's intended for use as a plug-in, and is usually a layer unto itself. Before launching the Topaz filter, I duplicate the background layer so I'm never touching the original. But once in Topaz, it doesn't have the ability to add layers internally.
On the tripod question, I'm normally hand-held. I found that, if I set up a tripod, people went around behind me so as not to - in their minds - ruin my photo! Rarely do they realize that I WANT them to move into the scene. So keeping the camera hand-held solves that problem most of the time.
I completely understand about the tripod -- I would walk around one, too!
Thanks for clarifying the purpose of the b&w layering. I went online to look up buying PSE but I found: Precision Shooting Equipment, Puget Sound Energy, Porn Star Experiencee, Pi Sigma Epsilon, until I happened on good ole' Wikipedia that listed many possibilities. Photoshop Elements! I went online and a chat box opened so I asked how PSE compared to Aperture and the "expert" on the other end said, "I don't know." I had decided not to get Photo Shop at this time because it's so expensive to have a subscription but this Elements is a viable possibility if it does something Aperture doesn't, and I want to learn to do it. Seems like Layering is one reason to consider buying it?
@jyokota LOL Who knew that PSE would resolve to that many different titles? I took a look at the various sites that compare Aperture and Elements, and, well, they serve two entirely different purposes. I think Aperture would better compare to Lightroom since both are designed to be batch RAW processors of large volumes of photos. Elements is comparable to GIMP or Paintshop Pro since it's a photo editor. Both Aperture and Elements have features that are not available in the other product. For instance, Elements supports layers but Aperture does not. Aperture has a curves function, but Elements does not. Each have trade-offs. You can download a free trial of Photoshop Elements 12, though, so you can at least try before you buy! If you shoot in RAW, then I think you'll really like Adobe Camera RAW, which loads automatically if you edit a RAW file. My only complaint with Elements is that it doesn't support layers in 16-BIT mode, only 8-BIT. Small price to pay, though.
November 9th, 2013
Leave a Comment
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
@cejaanderson Pretty close, actually. They were taken within about 100 feet of each other. The alternate photo was taken just as I arrived and was walking towards the water from my car. This one was taken a few minutes later after I'd managed to find a spot to use for the background setting.
I agree, it's the two of them together in this frame that make this composition more interesting than one alone would have. You must wake up super early to take time to photograph on your way to work. Do you set up with a tripod and then wait?
Your description of processing always intrigues me and makes me want to buy the entire Topaz suites, whereas I am an Aperture user with only a couple of Topaz plug-ins to date. What particularly piques my interest today is that you layered a b & w on this -- is that how you get the three dimensionality depicted here? I don't think Aperture does "layers" so that must be a PSE thing, or if I buy Topaz suites does that have a layers option? Sorry for asking so many questions but I appreciate your knowledge sharing!
The technique of layering the b&w image with a soft light blend mode and then applying a high pass filter to the b&w image is primarily used as a sharpening technique. I believe the three dimensional feeling in the image is thanks to the effect created by that 35mm lens when the foreground subject is extremely close to the camera. (I was only about four feet away from him when I took this photo.)
Topaz itself doesn't have a layering capability. It's intended for use as a plug-in, and is usually a layer unto itself. Before launching the Topaz filter, I duplicate the background layer so I'm never touching the original. But once in Topaz, it doesn't have the ability to add layers internally.
On the tripod question, I'm normally hand-held. I found that, if I set up a tripod, people went around behind me so as not to - in their minds - ruin my photo! Rarely do they realize that I WANT them to move into the scene. So keeping the camera hand-held solves that problem most of the time.
Thanks for clarifying the purpose of the b&w layering. I went online to look up buying PSE but I found: Precision Shooting Equipment, Puget Sound Energy, Porn Star Experiencee, Pi Sigma Epsilon, until I happened on good ole' Wikipedia that listed many possibilities. Photoshop Elements! I went online and a chat box opened so I asked how PSE compared to Aperture and the "expert" on the other end said, "I don't know." I had decided not to get Photo Shop at this time because it's so expensive to have a subscription but this Elements is a viable possibility if it does something Aperture doesn't, and I want to learn to do it. Seems like Layering is one reason to consider buying it?