Photoshop Tip: Blend a B&W Layer to add Edginess

Since the majority of my photo editing is for my stock portfolio, I tend to be rather vanilla with my editing. By that I mean that I keep my images pretty true to how they were shot. For uses outside of stock however, a friend of mine recently showed me a quick way to add edginess to an image by blending layers.

I will be the first person to tell you that I am no master of layer blending in Photoshop (I will defer that title to Ann Torrence, her knowledge on the subject is amazing!), but I really like the look that this effect creates.

In today's before/after image, I opened one of my shots from last weekend in Photoshop. The sample on the left is unedited other than the RAW conversion. On the other image (right side), I only added this simple process in Photoshop:

1. Create a copy of the original layer above itself
2. Desaturate the new layer (apple-shift-U on a Mac)
3. Set the blending of the new layer to 'Overlay'

If you want to further tweak the settings, try different blending modes (soft light, hard light, etc.) and play around with opacity.

And that's it. A quick and fairly easy way to add a more dramatic look to an image.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/50 second, f/4, ISO 100

Photoshop World Recap by Dale Welcome

(Today's post is written by guest contributor Dale Welcome)

Paris, New York New York, Caesar’s, MGM, Bellagio’s, Mandalay Bay…..what’s happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas, right? Ah, but not this time!

Las Vegas was the site of last week’s Photoshop World conference hosted by the National Association of Photoshop Professionals (NAPP) and its president, Scott Kelby. But what happened in Vegas just cannot just stay in Vegas…..its was all too good not to share!

What an extraordinary conference! Scott Kelby, world renowned instructors and artists and the NAPP staff put on quite a show, a tremendous learning experience, and truly a photographic inspiration.

By my guess, the conference had well over 3,000 participants and was hosted at the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay Resort. Aside from Kelby, instructors included the likes of Deke McClelland, Moose Peterson, Dave Cross, Matt Koslowski, John Paul Caponigro, Ben Willmore, Jay Maisel, Jeff Scheme, Joe McNally, and Corey Barker, to name a few. And the best part was that each was willing to share their knowledge, tips, experiences, and plenty of passion for the art and craft of photography.

I have attended many professional conferences, in photography as well as my various other “careers” over the last thirty years, and I cannot think of one in which I learned so much that “my head began to hurt!” I began the conference with a 4 hour Epson Print Academy workshop led by three artistic and technical masters; Jeff Scheme, Andrew Rodney and John Paul Caponigro. Over the course of the next 3 ½ days, I attended over 15 workshops ranging from still live studio shoots, portrait lighting techniques, retouching, Photoshop “jaw-dropping” tips, high dynamic range (HDR) imagery, color management, and fine art photography.

In addition to the sessions and great instructors, the tech expo itself was worth the price of admission. I spent over two hours talking and learning from Epson technical experts, doing hands-on demos of Wacom tablets (their 21” on-screen tablet is unbelievable!), trying the latest equipment, talking to print labs such as MPIX and listening to additional sessions sponsored by NAPP, Kelby Training and Microsoft on the expo floor.

However, with all of great instructors, equipment, demos, and photographic friends to meet, by far the most inspirational and capstone of the entire event was the 2 hour “digital panel” Friday night. After starting at 8:00 in the morning, I wasn’t sure I had the energy to make it through the last session of the day that ran from 7:00pm to 9:00pm. However, I am surely glad I didn’t miss this portion of the conference.

The panel consisted of some of the greatest digital photographic artists and teachers of our time. Each shared a slideshow or two of their personal work and passion as well spoke to the heart and soul they each put into their work. Words cannot describe the emotion these images evoked, the gesture they represented, the colors that impacted us, and visual stories they told. You simply had to be there to fully comprehend the significance of these works of art. These artists poured out their souls right before us.

I have returned from Las Vegas with a new sense of experimentation, inspiration and passion to this wonderful craft of photography that far exceeds the immense amount of learning I received from Photoshop World. We are truly blessed to be able to capture images with our cameras that tell visual stories, evoke emotion, paint palettes of color and record our reality as well an expression of what we might dream.

Go out and capture images!

Through the Looking Glass

Creating a photo with a pure white background

Love it or hate it, a popular style of shooting in stock photography is the photographing of models or objects against a pure white background. By pure white I mean a background with absolutely NO detail, RBG values of 255,255,255 - Nothing!

There are an abundance of ways to create this look from simply cutting out the subject in Photoshop to doing it entirely 'in camera'. I prefer to go for the latter method.

For today's featured image of Michelle holding a weight, I relied on a studio setup to create the majority of the 'pure white background' in camera and then finished off the look in post-processing. To setup the shot, I placed two monolights shooting through white umbrellas onto the background of white seamless paper.



I set the monolights so that the exposure on the background was in the range between f/11 and f/16. For me, using lights of different power it took a small bit of adjustment to get it right.

The next step was to place Michelle in front of the white background at a distance that would give a nice rimlight from the background reflection but not overpower her. Since this photo was for a stock purpose I allowed the light to reflect a bit aggressively onto the left side of her face. Had this been for a portrait, I would have adjusted differently to eliminate this.

I lit Michelle with a combination of a large softbox and a reflector. The exposure metering for her was f/8. This is what I set my camera on. By doing so, I had a background that was sufficiently over-exposed but not so much that it caused excessive blow-back which can lead to problems like lens flare, blown edges and such.

In post-processing, I shoot RAW so the first step is to convert the RAW file in AdobeCameraRaw (ACR). My default setting in ACR is to show pure white highlights as red and pure black lowlights as blue. As can be seen in the screenshot, my shot came close to having a pure white background with very little adjustment.



Now, with the majority of the work done, I open the image to complete editing in Photoshop. I know from what I saw in ACR that I will have a few areas to clean up to guarantee a pure white background.

After opening the image in Photoshop, the first thing I do is create a temporary Brightness/Contrast adjustment layer and pull the brightness slider all the way to the left. What this does is show me the areas that I have to finish cleaning up to get the desired white background. Any area that is not absolute white (255,255,255) will be immediately apparent.



To clean up these areas, I will use one of a couple methods. If it is an easy spot in a corner or two, I will simply create a new layer and paint the area(s) white. If it requires a bit more finesse because it's around the model (like this image), I will use a levels adjustment layer along with some vector masking. Once I get the background how I want it, I then delete the temporary Brightness/Contrast adjustment layer that I created.

After creating my white background, I then go on to complete my processing including other steps like facial retouching, whitening eyes and teeth, sharpening, etc.

As you can see by this example, the easiest way to create the background and my preferred method is to do as much as possible in camera. In doing so, the Photoshop work required for a series of images is minimized and this dramatically drops the time needed sitting in front of the Mac.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/160 second, f/8, ISO 100

Calling Photoshoppers II - The Results

Last week I put out a second call for readers who would like to put their photo editing skills to work on one of my images (original post). Within an hour I received email from four volunteers wanting to take on the task.

I have since received the four edited images. In addition to doing a great job applying their editing chops to the image, they each wrote a narrative on what they did and why they did it. While the results are similar in many ways (no one cropped the shot?), they each added a little variation.

Each person was provided with an unedited JPG and RAW image (shown above) of the model standing on the rock at the Great Salt Lake. The only guideline given was that they could do whatever they wanted. Here are their results in no particular order.

Jake Spurlock



I was really excited when I saw that this was going to be the photo to work from, especially after I was unable attend the Photowalk at the Great Salt Lake a few weeks ago, and was further depressed when I saw the breathtaking images that came back to Flickr as a result. So, how cool is it then to get the chance to edit this image, and get to put a little bit of Jake Spurlock into it.

To Start:
I do all of my processing by starting with Apple Aperture. Beginning with the RAW 2.0 processing, I delved into the levels adjustments. I pulled black to black, crushing the blacks a little, created some highlights in white, and the made a nice midpoint. I did this on all three of the color channels respectively.

After levels, I moved into contrast, definitions, saturation, and vibrancy. When I take pictures, and then edit, reality isn't at the top of my list of rules to follow. If I was going to make movies, 300, Batman Begins, and Speed Racer would be the inspiration. That being said, this photo evokes the idea of a warrior princess, standing guard over a kingdom. So, contrast is pushed, super saturation, and the image gains a lot of character.

One cool Aperture feature is the shadow recovery tool. Basically, it selectively adds some gain to the black areas of the photo. For video people, similar to setting the knee level for broadcasting equipment. Boosting this brought a lot of detail in from the rocks, and really shows off their awesome texture.

With these adjustments, I was really satisfied with the clouds, rocks and water. Yet, the warrior princess was a little dim, and lacking the glow that she deserved. So, I created a new version from the master, and went to work again creating the same look for her. When I was content with how she looked, I exported versions of both images, and brought them into photoshop for some blending.

This was a pretty simple, yet laborious process. I am sure that everyone reading this has had to do this before, so I won't go into to much detail. I had my darker layer as the background, and then pasted the other on top. I went to work with the eraser/lasso/marquee tool getting rid of the excess. If you look at my image and contrast to the original, she is clearly a blond in the original, but I really like the look of her with dark hair and used the darker background source for that.

When all of the erasing was done, I used the dodge tool around her outline on the background layer to give her a little bit of an angelic glow. Followed up with spot healing brush for some legs, arm and face. I don't bother too much, after all this is a warrior, not a cover model. ;) After that, save as a .PSD, and reimport back into Aperture.

Once back in Aperture, I added another round of vignette. It created those dark and foreboding clouds, and added to the rock detail at the bottom. Part of the post process is to send revisions back and forth to my wife who has a great eye for detail. Wrote up a summary, and off to Rich for posting!

Thanks, what a fun process!

Visit Jake's Flickr stream at flickr.com/photos/whyisjake/.

Jeremy Hall



How I Did It:

1. Adjust the RAW image using Adobe RAW for white balance and contrast. Most of this was done in the basic panel of sliders. Some additional HSL panel adjustments for color, especially the skies. Opened in Adobe Photoshop CS3.

2. Placed a second copy of the same image as a layer with RAW exposure adjustments for the model (ignoring the background). Masked this layer to block everything but the model. Rasterized this layer.

3. Made a copy of the second layer and changed to "Screen" mode for even more lightening of the model. Adjusted opacity of this layer to 27%.

4. Added a layer for cloning and healing tools. Used the "sample all layers" option to adjust the models dress to hide the seam in the middle. Felt like the leg showing and uneven shadows of the dress were distracting. I also removed some of the brighter splotches of white on the rock for the same reason.

5. Added a "Dodge & Burn" layer, which is a new layer filled with 50% gray. Using a larger brush set at 8% brushed in white and black alternately in varying places for contrast and emphasis. This was mainly used to darken the rock base and even out the exposure on the rest of it. I also increased the cloud dramatic contrast.

6. Added another masked dodge & burn to give a glow around the model for a kind of other-worldly glow, like the heavenly lights are pouring down on her. Cheesy I know, but it seemed to fit.

7. Added a photo filer layer to warm up the image a bit overall. Default warm (85%) color with a little added density.

8. For the web resized image, I downsized, added some Smart Sharpen filter on a copied layer (72%, 0.3 radius). Masked the layer and brushed on where I wanted the selective sharpening applied.

Visit Jeremy's blog at www.whatsgottastay.com.


Patrick Fata



Thank you for the chance to work on this challenge. As a beginner, I appreciate the opportunity to concentrate on the post-processing only, while knowing that the result will be critiqued by a gifted and experienced photographer.

The picture has a very interesting composition and a lot of detail. This abundance of detail, especially in the rock, made me decide to go B&W. I also liked how the model's dress stands out in the original, so I ended up going with selective desaturation.

To obtain the B&W, I output the red channel to gray using a channel mixer layer. I also added a Curves layer to darken the shadows a bit. Still wanting more contrast in the rock, I isolated it, copied it onto a new layer, and applied an overlay blend mode.

The red dress was isolated using a color range select, and then tweaking that selection with mostly the eraser. I then brightened the red a little by turning the cyan down in the red channel of a selective color adjustment layer.

I hope to have done justice to your great photo.

Visit Patrick's blog at www.lestrodesigns.com/blog.


Seva Seetharaman



The original image itself had a very nice contrast to it so I decided not to tamper with it too much. To me, this was one of those images that needed very little modifications to make it look the way it should. So below are some changes that I thought would make the image look better.

1. I started off by adjusting the color curves in GIMP to enhance the overall temperature of the image.

2. I then adjusted the color levels to enhance the contrast of the models bright red outfit to the cloudy background.

3. I sharpened it to make the image crisp.

Thanks for giving me this opportunity and would like to participate in another one if possible.

Visit Seva's blog at picsnbytes.blogspot.com/.
___________________

And there you have it, the four edited images. If anyone else would like to take a shot at this image, grab the original from leggnet.com/images/blog/photoshop and post a link to your edited version in the comments.

Calling Photoshoppers, Take 2

Last January we had a bit of Photoshop fun here on the blog with the Calling Photoshoppers post. In it I invited a few photographers to give a shot at editing one of my images. I then posted the results for everyone to see. It was pretty cool to see the different take each photographer took in editing the image.

Well, it's time to do it again.

I am looking for four blog readers that would like to put their photo editing chops (Photoshop, Gimp, Lightroom, Aperture, etc.) to work on an image that I supply. They will each have one week to do whatever they would like to the image. In the end, I will post all the edited images along with the photographer's commentary on what they did and why.

If you are interested in participating, please email me at rich(at)leggnet.com with the subject of "COUNT ME IN!". I will take the first four respondents (plus one alternate).

UPDATE: We've got our participants. Thanks for the speedy replies.

Mirrored Imagination

Today's image is a concept shot I did after last week's White Bedroom shoot. I like the idea, but I think I'm going to photograph it again in a more natural setting (bedroom, store, etc.).

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/125 second, f/7.1, ISO 100

Muted Color

One effect that I use occasionally on portraits is Muted Color. This treatment can help to give an antique feel to the image similar to sepia-tone while still retaining color.

The young couple in today's image wanted an old-fashioned look to their engagement photos. Their initial thought was to go with black & white or sepia-tone. However, upon seeing the muted color version it immediately became their favorite.

There are several methods available to create this look. The method I use is simple and straightforward. I process the original RAW image in three ways: color, sepia-tone and cross-processed (I use Linge's Photoshop Actions for the sepia and cross-processed effect). I then create a Photoshop layer of each version of the file. Once I have the three layers, I use the color layer as my base and blend the other two layers over it, adjusting the transparency until I get my desired result.

If you have a process you use to create a similar effect, please share it.

Canon 5D, Canon 70-200 f/4L lens - 1/200 second, f/4, ISO 100

Photoshop Tip: An Alternative to Brightness/Contrast

When editing my images in Photoshop, I always begin with a couple simple adjustment steps before venturing into the more advanced edits. Since I shoot most of my shots around 1/3 f/stop underexposed (to preserve highlights), the first simple editing step I do is an adjustment to the brightness/contrast of the image. But guess what? I don't use the brightness/contrast adjustment to do this. I use LEVELS.

By using the LEVELS adjustment, I am able to fine tune the brightness of the image while causing very little damage. This is extremely important in my stock images since they have to go through a rigorous inspection process to be included in my portfolio. Here are the simple steps I use:

1. Create a new LEVELS adjust layer.

2. Slide the upper clipping adjustment (red circle below) down until it is just above the upper end of the histogram.

3. Slide the lower clipping adjustment (blue circle below) up until it is just below the lower end of the histogram.

4. Inspect image and fine tune the adjustments as needed

As you can see in today's featured image, the sample on the right 'pops' quite a bit more than the original on the left. This was done strictly using the levels adjustment. Once I complete this step, I then go on and finish my editing of the image.

If you haven't tried adjusting brightness/contrast this way, give it a shot and see how well it works for you.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/160 second, f/4.5, ISO 50

Calling Photoshoppers - My Version

It was great to see the response to the Calling Photoshoppers project we featured this week (original post). I received a few suggestions that I give a shot at editing the image, so I spent a few minutes with it this morning. Here is my version.

I didn't keep a detailed list of my editing steps (like the others did so well), but I will touch on a few highlights.

- Cropped and leveled
- Removed rock (thanks Brian)
- Blended two versions of the images, one sepia and one color
- Warmed up and softened using an action
- Brightened faces
- Vignette

My goal was to create a sepia image with a subtle color on the couple (especially the jeans and her top). Similar to others, I sought to create an old-fashioned feel to the image.

So, how'd I do?

Canon 5D, Canon 70-200 f/4L lens - 1/250 second, f/5, ISO 100

Calling Photoshoppers - The Results

Last week I put out a call for Photoshop users who would like to put their skills to work on one of my images (original post). I received a very nice response and selected the first five to participate.

I have since received the four edited images (one person was unable to complete the assignment). In addition to doing a great job applying their Photoshop chops to the image, they each wrote a narrative on what they did and why they did it. It is very interesting for me to see the different style and approach each artist took.

Each person was provided with an unedited JPG and RAW image (shown above) of the couple walking on abandoned railroad tracks. The only guideline given was that they could do whatever they wanted. Here are their results in no particular order.

ANN TORRENCE



Technically

In short - two Adobe Camera Raw interpretations of the same image,
over and under exposed. The diffusion is simulated by copying the
over-exposed image, blurring it, and using the Screen mode.

The under-exposed ACR conversion is blended with Multipy at a partial
opacity to bring back the dark zones. A Curves Adjustment Layer
introduces the Cross Processing look; search on-line for many cross
processing curve examples to download. One more thought: edit in 16-
bit mode when making dramatic shifts and expect a spiky histogram.
Down-sampling to 8-bit will smooth much of the spikiness out.
Cropped to 8x10, light sharpening for Rich to resize and sharpen for
printing.

Artistically

I imagined this couple would like one image from their engagement
session styled for fashion. I wanted to give them an image that they
will like now, their kids will laugh at on their 25th wedding
anniversary, and treasure on their 50th.

I liked the pose, motion and expressions, and how the color of her
shirt pops out of the image. But their beautiful skin and hair tones
get lost in the muddy colors of the tree leaves. And the unfocused
weeds at the bottom of the image have to go (Rich was smart to keep
the camera plane parallel to the couple, and allow some room in the
composition for cropping.)

Cross-processing refers to an old-school color film technque of
processing slide film as if it were color negative or vice versa. It
gives a characteristic color shift and contrast transformation to the
film, and has been used a lot in fashion photography. Another tool
fashion photographers might use is a diffusion filter. Since Rich
didn't use one on his lens, I faked one. I wanted to use both ideas;
retaining a full range of brightness called upon a bit of Photoshop.

BRIAN AUER



Technically

I processed the RAW file using Adobe Camera Raw 4.3.1. I left the white balance as shot, and I started with the “Auto” adjustment for the exposure settings. I tweaked a few minor things, then I got started in Photoshop CS3. Once in Photoshop, I applied a curves adjustment layer to increase contrast. Then I converted to black and white using the Channel Mixer adjustment layer at 34% red, 66% green, and 0% blue. I set the blending mode of this adjustment layer to “Overlay” and dropped the opacity to 80%. Then I desaturated the image using a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer by dropping the Saturation slider to -35. The final adjustment step was a Photo Filter adjustment layer using an LBA Warming Filter at a density of 35%. Then I cropped the image (see why in the next section). And finally, the rock in the foreground was a little off for me, so I cloned it out. No sharpening was applied.

Artistically

I felt the scene had a lot of potential and I knew I wanted the image to have a kind of timeless and carefree look and feel to it. The adjustment layers got the overall mood where I wanted it, but the composition was off for me. I loved the slight tilt in the image, but the upper half of the scene wasn’t working for me – the background was too dark on the left and too light on the right. It added too much tension and took away from the “carefree” feeling I wanted. So I played around with different crops and I finally landed on a 3:2 aspect that cut off just below the cuff of the white shirt on the left arm. To me, this was the most interesting part of the image (no offense to the models… or Rich for that matter). The photo was suddenly more timeless and relatable. It wasn’t about the two specific people in the photo -- it was about the carefree feeling of walking down the old tracks on a sunny summer afternoon, hand-in-hand with the person you love.

RICHARD MILES



Technically

My first step was to eliminate some of the empty space around the couple, so I cropped the image to bring the couple forward. I then tilted the image to take away the linear power that the original had, and also in hopes adding a more visual element to the picture. Overall, I felt the image had too much space around it, and was too much on the straight and upright!

Artistically

I bumped the contrast a little! I also played with different levels of contrast and decided that since the couple are wearing jeans containing pattern and texture , to bring out that element and use that as a unifier that this is a "couple"!

I then added a soften glow to the shot, and then layered a sepia toned layer on top. I took a black paint brush at around 2% opacity and painted over the whole image to achieve that black/sepia combo and add a little warmth and hopes of a romantic flair.

TIM MILLER

ARTISTICALLY

I looked at the photo and it seemed to be a pretty candid shot snapped mid action, but when I thought about it from the perspective of the couple, there was obviously going to be some memories associated with the event. It was obviously a staged candid shot. The railway tracks and the way they were dressed and walking holding hands suggested that a photographer had set this shot up for them – maybe as a anniversary special photo occasion or something. So while wild fantasies of photo shopping an old fashioned steam train in behind them to make them look as if they were in danger crossed my mind (in fact I even found some suitable photos) I didn’t attempt this. Instead I reasoned that the couple would be interested in framing this photo on their wall as a memory of this event or time in their lives. So I created two different looks and borders that would lend themselves to printing on canvas or photo paper and framing with a nice frame.

TECHNICALLY

Shot 1 – the sepia image. First I tightened the shot by cropping substantially. I then copied this onto a larger white canvas to create a large margin. I then changed the image to black and white using a gradient adjustment layer and then added a colour adjustment layer of sepia. I then created a slightly larger selection in the background and filled this with black to give the old time real photo look of the black edges and sepia tone. I then added the text at the bottom. This would look good in an old wooden frame – probably 2-3 inches in width in an old fashioned style.

Shot 2 – the soft edges. Once again I tightened the shot by cropping the extraneous material. I then create a border inside the edge and feathered this by 170 pixels. I then selected the inverse and deleted to create the soft edges. This would look good on a matt photo paper and framed in a thin metal frame, gold or maybe silver.

____________

And there you have it. I would again like to personally thank each participant for taking the time and energy to be involved in this little project. Based on the response, we will be doing this again in the future.

Calling Photoshoppers

My college age son spent some time with us over Christmas break and offered up a suggestion for a blog post here on LeggNet's Digital Capture. He thought that it would be interesting to see different photographers' final version of the same photograph after editing. I agreed that it would be cool, so we are going to do it.

I am looking for five blog readers that would like to put their Photoshop chops to work on an image that I supply. They will each have one week to do whatever they would like to the image. In the end, I will post all five images along with the photographer's commentary on what they did and why.

If you are interested in participating, please email me at rich(at)leggnet.com with the subject of "COUNT ME IN!". I will take the first five respondents.

This will be fun!

UPDATE

We've got our participants who will each be receiving the un-edited image in the next day. I can't wait to see the results.

UPDATE 2

The image file has been delivered to each of the participants. I anticipate posting the results along with their comments by the middle of next week.

UPDATE 3

The results are posted: http://www.leggnet.com/2008/01/calling-photoshoppers-results.html

Photoshop Tip: An Alternative to Unsharp Mask

Earlier this week, I mentioned my recipe for having a high percentage of my photographs accepted into my portfolio on istockphoto.com. One of the key ingredients to my system is NOT using the popular UNSHARP MASK filter in Photoshop for sharpening. While this filter does a nice job for sharpening images to be printed, I find that it can be detrimental to the quality of stock photos which get inspected with a fine-tooth-comb before begin accepted.

The alternative method I use for sharpening is the HIGH PASS FILTER method. This method provides good sharpening while minimizing image degradation. Here are the steps:

1. Create a COPY of the layer you wish to sharpen

2. Select FILTER, OTHER, HIGH PASS

3. Set the radius to 4 PIXELS (then click okay)

4. Change the blending options of the new layer (by double-clicking on the layer) to SOFT LIGHT for mild sharpening or OVERLAY for stronger sharpening

It's a very simple method for clean sharpening of photos. To make it even easier, I have recorded the steps as an action that I can run with the press of one function key.

If you haven't tried sharpening this way, give it a shot and see how well it works for you.

Additional Note (Added on 15 November)

In response to a comment about this method causing an undesired "HALO" effect, let me add a clarification (that I should have included originally). This method is intended to be used on FULL RESOLUTION images of 8+ megapixels. Using it without tweaking the 'RADIUS' on smaller images will give an undesired result.

Down on Mainstreet

I made this capture while crossing Salt Lake City's Main Street on a rainy Saturday night . The saturated color and high contrast were added using a Cross Processing effect in Photoshop. My favorite parts of this image are the the reflection created by the wet asphalt and the lines leading from the lower corners. The fact that the technical quality (noise, blur, etc.) of the image is rather low but the visual appeal is high is simply a bonus.

Canon 5D, Canon 70-200 f/4L lens - 1/30 second, f/4, ISO 250

Cross Processing with Photoshop

The term Cross Processing is a hold-over from the film era. Before digital, it referred to the act of using the wrong chemicals to develop film. For example, a photographer would develop transparency film (E-6) with developer intended for color negative film (C-41). The distortion this caused in the image's color and contrast could lead to some rather stunning images.

In today's digital world, we can reproduce this technique in our editing software. In the past when I wanted this effect, I followed some step-by-step instructions I found on the web. In an effort to simplify my post processing workflow, I am now using a Photoshop Action Set to create the effect. I purchased the set at a seminar I attended taught by Kenneth Linge. Now I can consistently create this affect to my images with one click.

Today's image of Erik has the cross processed effect applied. The stark contrast and colors add to the moody feeling in the capture. For comparison, here is a link to a black & white version from the same shoot.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/25 second, f/4, ISO 400

Alaskan Window Boxes

I'm in Anchorage for a few days before heading north on the Alaska Railroad. I spent some time wandering around the downtown area yesterday afternoon where I captured these window boxes. The window was located on the second floor and the image had a distinct 'looking up' feel to it. To compensate for this, I adjusted the vertical perspective in Photoshop to make it appear to have been shot more straight on.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/100 second, f/8, ISO 160

"S" is for Snake

This wild snake that I found sunning itself on my front porch last month was actually posing in a perfectly inverted "S" shape. One quick horizontal flip in Photoshop and I've got my "S" is for Snake shot.

Canon 5D, Canon 70-200 f/4L lens - 1/80 second, f/5.6, ISO 160

Play Ball

For this capture of an empty baseball diamond, I used some fairly aggressive settings in Photoshop CS2's CHANNEL MIXER tool to convert the shot to black & white. I pushed the BLUE slider to the 200% level and then used a negative 100% setting on the GREEN slider to even out the levels. This technique resulted in the very dark dirt and the washed out sky.

Soon though, I won't be using the CHANNEL MIXER adjustment layer for my black & white conversions. My upgrade to Photoshop CS3 should arrive this week and I will begin using the new BLACK & WHITE adjustment layer feature. This is just one of the (many) reasons I opted for the upgrade.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/40 second, f/16, ISO 50

Money to Burn?

Did I really light a dollar bill on fire (in clear violation of federal law) just to make this photo? Or is this image created using a bit of manipulation in Photoshop? You decide.....

p.s. Harley, you're not eligible to answer :)

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/60 second, f/7.1, ISO 50

Want Greater Photographic Flexibility? - Shoot RAW

One of the choices that face digital photographers is the format in which to save their images. Most advanced digital cameras offer several choices of format to choose from. A typical selection would be something like this:

- Small .JPG
- Medium .JPG
- Large .JPG
- RAW

Today I am going to talk a bit about the last selection on the list - RAW. A RAW image is essentially the unprocessed capture taken directly from the camera's sensor. When the camera captures an image in the JPG format, the on-camera software processes the file before saving it. This processing includes such things as contrast, color saturation, sharpening, etc. The RAW image has had very little, if any, processing applied. Hence, the name RAW. It is essentially a digital negative, ready to be developed.

"Why would you not want the camera to improve the pictures you've taken?" I've been asked. The simple answer is that many photographers (myself included) prefer not to have the camera make the image enhancements. Instead, they opt to do it themselves on the computer. Also, the RAW format allows for much greater latitude in adjustment that can be applied.

For an example of this adjustment latitude, I walked into the field behind my home and purposely made a capture that was +2 f/stops overexposed. I set my camera to record both a JPG and a RAW image simultaneously. This would allow me the opportunity to edit two identical exposures, one RAW and one JPG, and compare the results.

Here is the unedited (other than a small crop) JPG, straight from the camera:



As you can see, the image is pretty much blown out with a very bland look to it. The highlights are completely washed out. If you were to look at the histogram (more on this in another post) of the photo, it would look like a ski ramp.

For my first go at salvaging this overexposed image, I used the JPG version. I used Photoshop's BRIGHTNESS/CONTRAST tool along with the magical SHADOW/HIGHLIGHT tool to attempt to bring the levels into shape. I also worked on the color with a SATURATION layer and did a bit of sharpening. Here is the result I achieved with the JPG:



The result is not too bad. It could be used in a pinch, though it is not an image I would be pleased with.

I then took the RAW version of the capture and began editing it. The first thing I did was to open it with Photoshop's Adobe Camera RAW tool. This nifty interface allowed me to fine-tune the image's color and exposure before opening it in Photoshop proper. Once in Photoshop, I adjusted the Curves, Saturation & Levels using adjustment layers. After a brief period of editing this is the result I achieved:



I feel that this image looks much better than the edited JPG version. Other than the section on the top/left of the wooden post, there is very little "blown out" area within the shot. This edited photo is much more pleasing. Also, it took much less effort in editing to achieve this.

Finally, still not being satisfied with the capture, I went a bit further. To complete the editing, I converted the image to black & white and added a sepia tint to it along with a bit of vignetting. The final result is the capture at the top of the page.

For me, making the switch to RAW was a no-brainer. Once I got over the initial learning curve of the extra steps required in editing, I fell in love with the greater control I received in editing. Today, if I shoot in JPG I simply don't feel comfortable. I would much rather have the control and latitude offered by Shooting RAW.

Looking for more information on the RAW file format? Here is a link to the entry on Wikipedia: RAW image format - Wikipedia

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/25 second, f/4, ISO 320

DIGG this post

Through the Viewfinder Photography

A commenter on one of my photos on Flickr suggested that I should apply a TTV Layer to this capture of an old mill I took in Salt Lake City. I read the comment and then had to admit that I didn't know what TTV photography was. A quick trip to Google and I discovered that TTV stands for "Through the Viewfinder". Here is a definition found on a Flickr group dedicated to the art:

"Through the Viewfinder photography is defined as taking a picture of any subject through the viewfinder of any camera with another camera."

The technique intrigued me. But since I didn't have the option of re-taking the photo of the mill through an old camera's viewfinder, I sought to re-create the effect in Photoshop. After a bit more searching via Flickr, I found another group - this one dedicated to images that can be used as layers to create this technique.

Once I had the viewfinder image, the rest was fairly simple. I used Photoshop's MOVE tool to drag the viewfinder image onto my original photo. I then adjusted the new viewfinder layer's blending mode to MULTIPLY. This allowed the layer with the mill photo to appear as though it is being seen through the viewfinder layer.

I am not too sure of the usefulness of this type of image, but I do think it adds a nostalgic quality to the photograph.

Inversion

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/50 second, f/8, ISO 50

I'm Still Photoshopping My Photos

Adobe, the creator of the highly popular image editing software Photoshop (the program I use for editing my captures), has recently stated that the name Photoshop is not to be used as a verb. In fact, they have a whole section on their website detailing the company's policy on this.

Here is a snippet from Adobe.com:

The Photoshop trademark must never be used as a common verb or as a noun. The Photoshop trademark should always be capitalized and should never be used in possessive form, or as a slang term. It should be used as an adjective to describe the product, and should never be used in abbreviated form. The following examples illustrate these rules:

Trademarks are not verbs.

CORRECT: The image was enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software.

INCORRECT: The image was photoshopped.

I think it is a bit late to enforce this policy on a large scale. The word photoshop has become synonymous in the photography community and increasingly in mainstream speech with the word edit. Just this past weekend I overheard the following exchange:

person #1: "Check out this picture of a giant dog."
person #2: "I already saw that. The dog's not really that big, it's photoshopped."

To further illustrate my belief that it is too late for Adobe to prevail in this area, one only has to go as far as Dictionary.com. A quick search on the popular site for the definition of "photoshop" yielded this result:

"...to edit an image using a computer program," 1992..."

What I suspect is really going on here is that Adobe is required to have a policy in effect to protect their trademark. Without this effort, they run the risk of losing the claim to ownership of the name Photoshop. Google had a similar problem last year since their name was increasingly being used as a generic term for search (i.e. "just google for the answer").

I can understand why companies like Adobe and Google don't want their trademarked names to go the way of Xerox & Kleenex and become generic terms. But in the photography community I think it is too late.

As for me, I will continue photoshopping my photos. What about you?

An Experiment in Post-Processing

This image is the result of some recent post-processing experimentation. I had seen a similar style applied to portraits and sought to create the effect myself. I wanted the eyes to remain fairly sharp while having much of the remaining image appear almost animated with a blurred glow. My workflow on the shot was mostly trial and error. The resulting photo came very close to what I desired.

Now, if I could only remember the steps I took to create it... :)

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/125 second, f/22, ISO 50

Creating a Cross-Processed look in Photoshop

Sometimes an "Oops!" can give you an unexpected good result. This is the case with Cross Processing.

"What is this Cross Processing you speak of?" you ask. Simply put, it is the processing of film in chemicals that are not intended for the type of film being processed. An example is developing slide film (E-6) in chemicals intended for negative film (C-41), or vice versa. I can imagine the first photographer's reaction upon discovering that he (or she) mistakenly created this process when looking at their developed film. The resulting effect that this gives an image can vary quite a bit but one common result is blown-out highlights and colors that just "aren't right".

In seeking to create a cross-processed effect in Photoshop, it took a short trip to Google. The search resulted in a couple of tutorials on the subject. The easiest instruction set I found was located at PhotshopSupport.com. The tutorial there was easy to follow and included screen shots of the Photoshop steps. I created the image of Michelle in this post using their formula. Notice the yellow-green tint to the skin tone and the bright color of the lips. The effect can be a bit surreal.

Here is another example of the process on a similar shot. On this photo, I added a film border as recommended in the tutorial to add to the effect.



And finally, here is one more example applied to an image of an old mailbox.



If you have given Cross-Processing a try (either with film or digital), please share you results - I'd love to see them.

Cross Processing Info on the Web

On Wikipedia
PhotoshopSupport.com
The Wonders of Cross-Processing

Images 1 & 2: Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/125 second, f/22, ISO 50
Image 3: Canon 30D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/320 second, f/9, ISO 100

My Post Processing Technique

I have received a couple of questions about my technique in processing images. To assist in showing how I do it, I thought I'd detail the steps I took in processing a photo such as the one posted yesterday. This photo was taken on the spur-of-the-moment when Michelle walked by. I was playing with a soft-box and asked her to stop and pose for the shot. I am self taught in all of my post-processing so I am sure that the 'pros' have better techniques, but this is what works for me.

ORIGINAL IMAGE

Here is the original image after doing the RAW conversion from the camera file:




STEP ONE

I use the CLONE tool to remove her necklace, earring holes, skin blemishes and background distractions.




STEP TWO

I apply noise reduction, slight sharpening (via Unsharp Mask) and crop the image.




STEP THREE

I create a new layer from the background layer. I apply 48 pixels of GAUSSIAN BLUR to the newly created layer. I blend the new layer at 35% and mask the eyes to keep them sharp.




STEP FOUR

I create a CHANNEL MIXER layer and set to monochrome (70% red, 30% blue). Adjust brightness -5




STEP FIVE

I merge my background layers, then create a duplicate of the background. I adjust brightness to -25 then mask out face (this darkens the background).




STEP SIX - COMPLETE

I merge the background layers then create a new copy of background. I apply 1.5 pixels of GAUSSIAN BLUR (smooth the skin more). I then mask out eyes to keep them sharp. Add photo filter (Sepia, 10%), Burn/dodge eye to make it more dramatic



As I said earlier, this is the process that works for me. I find as I continue to advance in post-processing that I am constantly finding new and improved techniques. If you've got some pointers, please don't hesitate to share.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L - 1/125 second, f/22, ISO 100

Pink Shoes and Photoshop

I have had this idea for a photo bouncing around (pun intended) in my head for awhile. My oldest daughter was very willing to model for the shot, especially since it involved a new pair of pink shoes.

I am generally not a huge fan of selective colorization, but in this case I like the result. There are several methods of doing this effect. The one I use most often is to convert the capture to monochrome using a [CHANNEL MIXER] layer in Photoshop. I then add a [VECTOR MASK] and paint out the area of the photograph that I want to remain in color. This is a quick and easy method that provides good results.

Here's another example of this process applied to a different shot taken at the same time:



If you've done some colorized shots, please share them with me. I'd love to see them.

Canon 30D, Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens - 1/125 second, f/2.5, ISO 100
Canon 430EX strobe with Lightsphere attached

Hot and Cold

The weather's been crummy lately so I haven't done much photography. With a lack of 'new shots' to select from, I was browsing through my February archives last night looking for a photo that I might have overlooked (I usually only process a low percentage of the shots I take).

I came across this fairly plain image of a lightbulb taken on Valentines Day at the Texas Roadhouse restaurant. While the family watched American Idol, I tried different types of processing on the photo. The reflective globe of the bulb is what attracted me to make the shot, but ultimately I opted to downplay that part of the object. Instead, three hue/saturation layers later (along with vector masks) and this is the result.

Now, if the weather would only clear up so I can experiment on some black & white scenery captures with the IR filter I recently purchased.

Canon 30D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/50 second, f/4, ISO 100

Creating soft skin tone in Photoshop

In a comment on a post from a week ago, Charles wrote:

"I like too much this BW portrait. Could you tell me how you post-processed it to give this smooth and bright look?"

Thanks for the question Charles. The process I use in smoothing and brightening the skin is a relatively simple process. I use Photoshop CS2 for my editing, so I will detail the steps I take in that program. I believe you could easily use a similar process in Gimp, Elements or Paint Shop Pro though I haven't used these programs so I do not know for sure.

1. Select your your main layer and adjust the brightness upwards to approximately +35-45%. The image will appear washed out, but you will recover the detail in the following steps.

2. Create a copy of the main layer.

3. Select a blur option (I use Gaussian Blur) and apply it liberally to the new layer. On a large image, I use a blur radius of around 40-50 pixels.

4. On the now-blurred layer, select LAYER, LAYER STYLE, BLENDING OPTIONS (from the menu) and set the BLEND MODE. I use either MULTIPLY or OVERLAY. Now lower the OPACITY to somewhere in the 40-60% range (set it how you like the image best).

5. (Optional) Convert the image to black & white. I don't do a simple de-saturate. Instead, I create a new CHANNEL MIXER layer and check the MONOCHROME box. I can then adjust the three channels (red, green & blue) to obtain the b&w tone I desire.

6. For a final touch, I create a MASK on the top layer (the one with the blur) and mask out areas that I wish to remain crisp such as the eyes.

While I don't proclaim to be a Photoshop Guru (there are plenty of them around already), these are the steps I use in many of my black & white conversions. I find the soft tone and bright eyes create a pleasing result.

Today's image of young Christian is a good example of this process.

Canon 30D, Canon 300 f/2.8L IS - 1/50 second, f/2.8, ISO 100

Smokin' Photography

My previous post (available here) detailed some of my process for taking photographs of smoke. Today I thought I'd give a few more examples.




This shot titled Smokin' Sax has been rotated just past 180 degrees. When I saw the lined up spirals of smoke I immediately thought of a saxophone and attempted to line up the smoke to appear as one. As I said earlier, the color is added in processing, so I chose a gold color to further enhance the similarity to a sax.



On this one, I held a cup over the smoke stream for about 10 seconds then quickly removed the cup and took the picture. This created the curls at the top. In processing I then inverted the image to create the white background and added the rose color.




This picture of a smoking gun barrel was created by holding an unloaded (and magazine removed) Glock handgun over the incense stick and letting the smoke drift upward. The smoke worked its way through the gun and out of the barrel. I chose to leave the smoke its natural color of grayish white.




On this one, I allowed the smoke stream to calm down to just a single column and then gently placed a spoon over it. The smoke then accumulated under the spoon briefly before coming out around the edges.




Similar to the above shot, I placed the fork into the stream and allowed the utensil to disrupt the smokes flow. This one was also inverted to create the white background.




Here's the same shot as above, but without the invert.




And lastly, this shot was rotated 90 degrees clockwise to enhance the presentation. With the invert and the rotation, I felt it looked like silk blowing in the wind.

There you have it, my first few attempts at smoke shots. I used simple incense sticks that I purchased for under $5.00. For a background I used a black sheet and then placed my light source (a Canon 430EX strobe) at about an 80 degree angle. Feel free to comment with any questions or comments.

Purple Rose

UPDATE: I've posted more smoke shots on my follow-up post.

This past week, one of the readers of my blog (and frequent commenter) Genevieve from the Prairie Bluestem blog emailed me a link to an article about photographing smoke. The article was quite interesting so I decided to give it a try.

The first hurdle I had to overcome was finding incense sticks in Sandy Utah. After visiting several businesses suggested by my wife Michelle, I found some on clearance at Pier 1 Imports. Incense in hand it was time to start shooting.

To create the images I used an off camera flash positioned at a 90 degree angle to the camera and shot against a black background. I placed the incense on a stool and let the smoke drift upward into the shot. I then did various things to disrupt the air and create the patterns. Capturing the smoke required a bit of experimenting with exposure. I ended up shooting stopped down to f/22 with a shutter speed of 1/250 (the fasted my 30D can shoot and still synch the flash). I had the camera on a tripod and used a remote release to trigger the shots. Since this procedure involved the use of more than two hands, I enlisted the help of my frequents assistants Missy and Sarah (my daughters).

The only manipulation I did in Photoshop was to adjust the colour and a bit of cloning to clean up the edges. This particular shot was also inverted, causing the background to become white.

You can see some more examples of the shots on my Flickr account. Click here to view them.

How Much Editing?

I use Adobe PhotoShop to edit all of my photos that are presented on the web. I get asked about this quite a bit. There is a school of thought that some people hold that if you PhotoShop your photos that you are manipulating them and that this is 'cheating'. I even heard a person once refer to digital photography as digital fakery. Here are some reasons why I don't share this view.

1. I shoot my images in RAW. These images have no processing (sharpening, contrast, saturation, etc.) done to them in the camera. When viewed on the computer they tend to look dull and drab. The reason I do this is that I have a high quality digital negative with the RAW image file. I can then do the equivalent of developing the image when I convert it in PhotoShop.

2. I view the use of PhotoShop as the computer equivalent of what I used to do in the darkroom. When I am working with the image on the computer I am essentially printing the shot much as I would have done on an enlarger in the analog days. I always ask myself when editing if the edit I am doing could have been done in a darkroom. In most cases, it could be.

3. Due to the limited dynamic range of a camera's digital sensor, it is difficult to capture with a camera what you see with your eye. The human eye has a much broader dynamic range then any digital camera on the market today. Since this is the case, I use PhotoShop to present the image closer to what I saw with my eye when I captured the shot. Sometimes this involves combining multiple exposures to achieve this result. The capture I made of a full moon over the Wasatch Range is an example of this.

My goal in using PhotoShop is to edit the image in a way that when it is viewed it does not appear edited. Today's photograph of Noah is a good example of what I mean. I did the following to this shot:

- Crop unneeded area out
- Vignette edges
- Sharpen
- Reduce digital noise
- Increase color saturation
- Increase contrast
- Burn in around the edges and the bright areas on the forehead
- Dodge his right eye to brighten it

That's quite a bit of editing, but the resulting image doesn't scream PhotoShopped as much as just a beautiful golden retriever.