Repeating Patterns

 

ISO100, 28mm, 1/10 sec., f/22

No new techniques or processing today.  Just liked the patterns in this image where the ripples in the sand mirror the small waves at the shoreline.  It’s an example of where the color would distract from the patterns so I converted it to black & white.  This lens is usually pretty sharp; I guess the softness in the image is due to the long exposure time and the wind blowing on my tripod.  It is nice to see such a broad depth of field – I think my camera was about one foot from the nearest part of the picture at the bottom and the sand is pretty detailed.

The lure of B&W continues.  Maybe it’s my bias toward sharpness and details in an image.  I like exploring all the little elements in a picture like this without wondering if the color balance is correct or being affected by warm colors next to cool colors.  Good to see digital conversion gives good results; now to learn how to get similar images using film from medium and large format.

Image information – it’s all in there

Photographers talk about data and information in an image – how to capture the maximum amount and how to capitalize on it to make the final image.  Information in a photograph can be the fine details considered important to resolution, the range of tones necessary to a fine art black-and-white image, or the saturation of colors desired for a bright summer day.  Most people who use digital cameras are unaware of how much usable data their cameras embed in their image files, or how some simple processing can make use of that data to provide flexibility to the photographer who decides what the final photograph looks like.

I’m learning more about this as I explore both digital and film photography while expanding my knowledge of digital processing.  It’s frustrating at times to realize just how much I don’t know – each new tool I learn about makes me lament not knowing about it months ago – but as I become more familiar with what’s possible in processing I find myself searching for new tools to engage my vision for the final image.  It’s amazing how a photo I’d normally delete or pass by can be processed to bring out more character.

For example, this is a picture I made on the beach in Florida, more interested in the low perspective of looking down the beach than anything else:

 

ISO100, 28mm, 1/30 sec., f/22

Applying some of the techniques I posted about yesterday I found there was a new way to visualize this scene, one that I feel brings more drama to it.

 

New Photoshop layer, Overlay blending mode, NIK tonal contrast adjustments

What I’ve done here is basically increase areas of local contrast, the small areas in the image where light and dark pixels are next to each other.  Increasing local contrast makes the light pixels lighter and the dark pixels darker, fooling the viewer’s eye into thinking there’s more texture, detail or sharpness in those areas.  This is what gives more granularity to the second image.  I also used my Brush tool on the Overlay layer to lighten and darken selected areas of the image (see my prior post for details on this technique).  I lightened the white sand in the upper right as well as the trees, darkened the sand at the bottom of the picture and darkened the line where the surf meets the sand.  There’s an interesting purple cast to the waves at the surf line; I think this is somewhat a reflection of the blue sky in the white waves but it can also be a color shift in processing.  I also lightened each of the foreground shells where they are white and darkened those same shells where they are in shadow.  Finally, I used the NIK Color Efex Pro tonal contrast tool to dial out local contrast in the sky to soften the clouds.

Did I add any pixels to the original image?  No.  Did I change any data in the digital file?  No.

All I’ve done is use the data found in the original image, changing some values and leaving others alone based on what I wanted the final image to look like and where I wanted the viewer to look.  By the way, in the days of film I could have done all the same adjustments but using techniques I’m really unfamiliar with!  All that matters is getting the most information into your image at the time you push the shutter so you’ll have plenty to play with later.

The lesson I’m learning more and more is what you get out of your camera is just the starting point, a composition that offers a story and perspective.  After the shutter is pushed the final image and tale is yet to be seen, just as a block of marble reveals the final statue only after the artist chips away the unnecessary pieces.  The great thing about digital processing is, unlike the sculptor, I can put the marble pieces back together again and start over to follow a new path to the final image.

Selective editing in Photoshop

I learned a new technique today for adjusting selective parts of an image.  This is very useful for directing the viewer’s eye through a picture so they see what you intend in the order you want.  It plays with Photoshop’s blending modes as well as the brush tool, both used in layers.

Here’s my original image:

 

ISO100, 400mm, 13 sec., f/22

I like the color palette and the horizontal lines created by the wave action, shore line and distant horizon.  What I want to do is enhance some of these lines to make them more distinct.  I’ll do this by making the dark areas darker and the light areas lighter using the technique I learned today.

First, duplicate this layer, on the new layer change the blending mode to Overlay, and then fill the new layer with 50% Gray (Edit>Fill>Contents>50% Gray):

Duplicate Layer

Change Blending Mode to Overlay

Fill with 50% Gray

At this point the image on your screen should not look any different.  The Overlay blending mode works like this – any pixels that are more than 50% gray become darker; any pixels that are less than 50% gray become lighter.  Since the new layer is exactly 50% gray it has no impact on the layer below it.  That will change as we edit the new layer.

Using the brush tool and the default colors (white/black) I can now brush directly on the image (keeping the new layer active) to darken (brush with black) or lighten (brush with white) selective areas in the image.  Set the brush itself to 20-40% opacity (each image will be a little different) and use a soft brush.  When I’m through with my brushing the thumbnail in the layers palette will look like the following – note the different lines of darker and lighter grey:

Edited Layers Palette

And my final image will look like the following, with the darker and lighter gray areas in the new layer affecting the original image to give me the desired result:

 

Final Edited Version

By the way, you can get this same result using layer masks and levels adjustments.  As with any Photoshop technique, there are at least three other workflows that will arrive at the same result.  I like this one because it’s pretty simple and in keeping with non-destructive editing of the original image.  If I don’t like what I get I just delete the new layer and start over.

The webinar I attended was taught by Joe Brady, a member of the MAC Group and longtime photographer, and sponsored by X-Rite.  You can see Joe’s image galleries and get information about his workshops here.

Combined with the NIK software I use and other Photoshop tools I can see where this technique will be a wonderful addition to my toolbox as I continue learning both what I want my landscapes to represent and how to create them.

One more HDR post

While traveling recently I read a blog about HDR techniques (can’t find the link now, sorry) and the author used a different approach to merging the different images.  His approach was to put the multiple images into Photoshop as layers, then auto-align and aut0-blend to create the final image.  This was the one he took into the HDR software for processing as a single image (tone-mapping).  It was his opinion this minimized some of the color shifts resulting from using the HDR software directly.  Since I’ve had problems with color casts in my HDR images I decided to compare his procedure with mine.

Initial process in Photoshop, HDR process in HDR Efex Pro (NIK)

Process directly in HDR Efex Pro (NIK)

 

Processing:  3 images, about 2 stops range, NIK HDR Efex Pro processing for Fine Structure, Warmth = 0, Structure = +40

Now that I look at it this may not have been the best image to test this difference – not a very wide range of colors or tones.  Have to try it again on a different and more varied set of images.  Still, I did find differences.  To my eye letting the NIK HDR Efex Pro software handle all the processing preserved more detail than initial processing in Photoshop followed by HDR processing in NIK software.  There is a color difference, though.  The reddish-pink in the sky that is present in the Photoshop/NIK version is more accurate than the NIK-only version.  This is the setting sun lighting up a fogbank and is the source of the similar color in the concrete blocks on the right side of the image.  The NIK-only version resulted in a color cast that masked the reddish-pink and reduced the color in the concrete.  I actually find the left image more pleasing, maybe because it has less of a cold feel to it from a color standpoint.  There’s also a halo around the top of the wall that’s more prominent in the right image than the left.  The software has a setting to reduce halos but I didn’t apply it to this image so it doesn’t worry me too much.

I will work on a different set of images again to see the impact on a wider dynamic range but right now I feel letting the NIK software handle everything still works for me.  The added step of running the images through Photoshop could be useful where specific color accuracy is important but where it’s just warmth or something similar I can fix that after HDR processing.

If you’ve had experience with this alternate HDR processing, or any other type, I’d love to hear about it.  Leave a comment with your workflow and perspectives.

A different world is out there

 

ISO 100, 50mm, 1/80 sec., f/3.1, duplicate Photoshop layers inverted

Color theory is one of the basics for painters.  They thrive on understanding the relationships among the various colors and how to use those to enhance or diminish elements in their compositions.  Warm colors advance toward the viewer; cool colors recede away.  Knowing this means controlling the viewer’s eye through the painting.

Photography provides the same control once you start thinking beyond the colors the camera captures and begin exploring what you get by merging images to create new relationships between the colors.  Although color can seduce a photographer, leading them to believe the color is the subject rather than the real focal point of the image, sometimes color can be the reason and the actual subject becomes a part of the abstraction.  The mind is left looking and wondering; “is there something there?  isn’t that a _______?  where have I seen that before?”  The viewer has the opportunity to freely explore the image and read into the subject what they bring to the photograph.

The image above?  The stump of a tree showing the saw marks and different hues of the wood grain.  In itself a simple image of a simple subject.  With some adjustment, new information comes out to bring new dimensions.

Guest Post – Street Photography

Today I’m offering a perspective on an area of photography I don’t work in but appreciate people who give it a try.  Kate Cooper is a colleague from photography school who is stretching her skills to learn about street photography as a way to see differently through her viewfinder – she can usually be found in her studio creating portraits or at weddings making videos of the celebration.  Not only is this different from what I usually write about, it has the added benefit of a perspective from Great Britain, a transoceanic viewpoint if you will.  Kate does follow this blog so feel free to comment on her article.

———————————–

Street Photography

I stumbled across this genre of photography when I heard about the Street Photography Now Project (www.streetphotographynowproject.wordpress.com)
As a photographer it made a refreshing change to take images just for the fun of it rather than thinking how can I make money from this.

Street Photography aims to document the world we live in, it needs to have a strong human element, and can very often focus on human interaction, but more importantly it has to have something that makes you look at an image again and again; sound familiar?

How do you do it? A lot of the time you can incorporate signs, posters and other written messages and put a wry twist on their meaning. Other times you can take something everyday and by photographing it in a certain way use it to say something completely different.  Shadows are particularly good for conveying different meanings.

What are the challenges? The biggest are taking pictures of strangers without first asking their permission.  If you alert them that you are going to take a picture you get a pose not a natural response. On rare occasions you won’t get a positive response so you have to be equipped to deal with adverse reactions.

What are the photographic challenges? Street is usually capturing the moment so you will normally be without flash and tripod, dealing with low light or artificial light, where getting the right aperture and shutter speed is a constant battle.

You also need to be patient.  If you see a good composition you might need to wait for the right person to walk into your shot, what colour clothes are they wearing, red can be very eye-catching, does it need to be a young or older person, male or female? 2point8 (www.2point8.whileseated.org/wow-footer/) gives some really good advice on the practicalities of Street Photography. Colin W. Hunt takes his Street one step further by using fisheye (www.flickr.com/photos/25162451@N04).

Interested? Join in, its world wide, have fun.

HDR software – a visual comparison

In an earlier post on this topic Kate left me a comment asking for my preference among the software I mentioned.  Building on the answer I gave there I want to show why I continue using the NIK HDR Efex Pro.

Here are four images I used to make an HDR image.  To really use the technique to its fullest you should have a wider exposure range than this, enough to have really dark blacks at one end and really white whites at the other end.  These will do, though.  Looking through my other images with wider exposure ranges they show similar results as these.

1/3 sec., f/13

1/4 sec., f/13

1/5 sec., f/13

1/6 sec., f/13

Here are the HDR images made from the above images.  Each of these is right out of the software using the Default setting – no added adjustments were made.  The clouds look odd because they moved enough between each of the original images to create ghosts when the HDR software merged them.  A little movement can usually be handled by the software but these clouds were moving fast enough that an exposure every 6 seconds was not enough to “freeze” them.

 

Photoshop CS5 HDR Pro

Photomatix Pro plug-in from Lightroom 3

NIK HDR Efex Pro plug-in from Lightroom 3

Right out of the package the NIK software is a superior image, rendering the details better in the foreground ice, houses along the shore, and the treetops silhouetted against the sky.  The Photomatix appears to handle the moving clouds better but the overall rendering is a little too pastel looking for my tastes.  I have no idea what Photoshop was doing – to its credit this is a rare poor image out of this updated software.

Remember, these images are all the Default settings on each software, no adjustments on my part.  Could I make the Photomatix and Photoshop images look like the NIK image by making adjustments?  Possibly but why would I take the time (assuming I know what I’m doing) when I get this out of the NIK first off?

 

Will I make adjustments to the NIK image?

Of course.  Lower 2/3rds of image adjusted in NIK to give a little more detail and the sky layered in from just one of the original images (I hated the blurred, motion look of the original HDR).  Now it looks much more like the scene I saw while standing on the shore.

 

Look behind you

ISO 100, 140mm, 1/125 sec., f/11

Sometimes what you need to photograph is not what you are intending to photograph.  An instructor told me “always look behind you” as a way to keep your perspective open to opportunities.  Our western, goal-oriented, process mentality values the concept of charging straight ahead into an issue or opportunity, yet true innovation continues to reveal itself when someone stops to view the broader world around them.  Much of eastern philosophy, more open to the broader scenes in the world around us than we narrowly focused Occidentals, has this element of viewing a wider world.  One particular aspect is the idea of “soft eyes,” a key element of aikido, a non-aggressive martial art.  Aikido masters sometimes appear to have eyes in the back of their head, fending off attackers they don’t even appear to look at yet know are there.

It’s one of the seeming paradoxes of photography training.  Many instructors emphasize the very positive benefits of having personal projects (as opposed to commercial or editorial ones) as a way to rally your thoughts around why you are making an image or searching for a composition.  Personal discipline is certainly a good behavior to get you out and looking, if only to get you away from the computer!  Still, I wonder how many other image opportunities get passed on the way to the “shot” that you can check off your personal project list?

Street photographers seem to get this idea the best.  They are explorers of the human landscape, watching for a nexus of story, person and action, always open to the possibilities.  One street photographer I know talked about watching a crowd with a sense of what could happen and then having their camera ready when the anticipated action took place.  It’s like any game where the ball is moving and it’s  your job to be where it will end up.  Didn’t Gretsky attribute his hockey greatness to going where the puck will be in the future?

I’d love to tell you the above image came from being wide open to the possibilities around me but in reality it was a gracious accident.  I was composing a scene to the east, looked back toward the setting sun to see how much time I had left or whether anything would be blocking the light, and there was this tree superimposed on the horizontal lines of clouds that were passing by.  A few minutes earlier or later and the scene would not have been there so this was one of those gifts you accept and tell others about, and hope they share the sense of wonder with you.

2010 in review

Below are some data on this site from 2010 describing how my contribution to the blogosphere has done in its first year.  I want to thank all of you who come here to see what I’m thinking about and who refer my site to others to take a look at.  I plan to continue right here through 2011, sharing what I see through my viewfinder as well as my thoughts/findings/attitudes/experiences.

As they say on the airplane, you have a choice in your online reading and it’s a pleasure to have you come here, take a look and engage in some commentary.

Have a wonderful New Year and keep dropping by.

———————————–

The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.

Crunchy numbers

A Boeing 747-400 passenger jet can hold 416 passengers. This blog was viewed about 2,800 times in 2010. That’s about 7 full 747s.

 

In 2010, there were 135 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 165 posts. There were 284 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 63mb. That’s about 5 pictures per week.

The busiest day of the year was November 11th with 69 views. The most popular post that day was No color, no excitement?.

Where did they come from?

The top referring sites in 2010 were omahacameraclub.weebly.com, photo.net, Google Reader, en.wordpress.com, and jimmywhitephoto.wordpress.com.

Some visitors came searching, mostly for olympus 300mm review, 300mm olympus review -“70-300mm”, olympus 300mm where to buy?, olympus 300mm, and kirk tuck.

Attractions in 2010

These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.

1

No color, no excitement? November 2010
2 comments

2

Olympus 300mm review April 2010
1 comment

3

What goes around… July 2010
6 comments

4

Alternate Realities February 2010
5 comments

Looking for style in 2011

In my mind 2010 was a year for me to play with photography, learning a variety of techniques and tools as a way to understand my comfort zone while becoming proficient with the means to create an image of what I was seeing.  In addition, I tested some business opportunities, learned more business practices, got involved with different events, attended a few workshops and met many other photographers to exchange experiences.  All in all, it was a year to both solidify what I learned in school in 2009 while stretching myself to experience new things.  Looking back I can think of two major themes I probably didn’t fully explore, both from comments I got in photography school.  One instructor told me to fail more often and more spectacularly and a classmate told me to make photos like I write.  in 2010 I found the former harder to achieve than I expected and I’m still working on the latter.

Going into the new year I keep coming back to a couple of things I enjoy although I’m not sure where they will lead.  One is HDR photography and the other is Photoshop compositing.  With the former I’m pursuing a greater dynamic range and finer detail than possible in a single digital image.  My challenge for HDR is to create film-like images, like fine-grained transparencies that are correctly saturated and appealing in their exposure.  The composites are something I just like, the challenge of predicting which images will lend themselves to an interesting outcome or what manipulations and processing will develop into a unique way of seeing a landscape.  It’s not an original technique for me – I’m following in the steps of Robert Glenn Ketchum and Darrell Gulin who instructed me in the basic manipulations.

For the first image I’m posting in 2011 I’ve combined these two, modifying a HDR image of an icy stream into a circular composite to create a snowflake-like appearance.  Could this be created by a good graphic artist directly in Photoshop?  Probably, but I like knowing it started out as a landscape scene and being able to use all the irregular details found in nature to express a new way to see the scene.

Original HDR Image

Processed Composite Image