September 14, 2013 at 9:09 am #12997
ebi – that’s sounds like an over complicated way to make a vignette. here’s how I do it.
Open file – well derrrrrrr.
Draw an 88px feathered OVAL marquee from top to bottom
Hit the action button that you’ve already made which –
duplicates the layer, turns the marquee into a mask on the top layer and then selects the bottom layer.
All I do then is use the curves to darken the bottom layer, dragging in the middle means the lights stay bright and the blacks don’t turn to soot and you can see the effect happening, so you can do every shot differently if you want.
The beauty of using masks is that, if the vignette clips anything that you want to see clearly, you can just paint it back in.
Hit the other action that’s already made that, flattens the image and saves it.
Move on to the next one………
Duplicate the image, draw the 88px Oval marquee on the top layer, hit delete,change the layer mode to soft light, gaussian blur at about 50 also makes a nice effect on some images.September 14, 2013 at 9:13 am #12998
cpowers – well done for not stomping off in huff!
I really like some of the new shots, but as has already been said. They are still over processed and way to over saturated and red. Do you have any kind of calibrated monitor set up?September 14, 2013 at 11:54 pm #12999ebiMember
WCS – i’ll take yours for a spin when I have a moment. thks.September 15, 2013 at 8:21 am #13001CPowersMember
I came here to get better, learn from my mistakes and get honest criticism. It would have been disingenuous of me to ask for critique only to get pissed when I didn’t hear what I wanted to hear. Those people need to stick to asking their mommies for their opinion. Thanks folks.
On the subject of the vignettes, I have been doing them in LR. Is there a significant benefit to doing them in PS?September 15, 2013 at 8:23 am #13002CPowersMember
I’m not sure what you mean by calibrated monitor setup. I have run prints to compare to my monitor. But otherwise no other calibration has been done.September 15, 2013 at 9:07 am #13003cameraclickerMember
Are a couple of the popular ones.September 15, 2013 at 9:41 am #13005ThomasMember
I looked specifically at your most recent shoot with the little girl. For me, this http://crash1976.smugmug.com/Clients/Russell/i-B2KCBgm/A is my favourite shot. It’s simple but lovely. Great sharp focus on the eyes, a nice soft feel to it with the muted sepia tone, and a genuine smile.
My main 2 criticisms of the other images (aside from white vignetting) are the saturation/white balance, and composition.
The skin tones look very red in most of the images on my monitor, this is a combination of white balance, saturation and colour profiling. The reds and oranges can be brought down individually in lightroom, just be careful it’s not overdone or they will turn grey and look weird.
Some shots look poorly composed or cropped. Care should be taken not to cut off body parts and sections of someones body. It works in the shot I said was my favourite (not the only one it works in I might add) but on ones like this http://crash1976.smugmug.com/Clients/Russell/i-qQTmqtN/A and this http://crash1976.smugmug.com/Clients/Russell/i-wHczb6M/A, I find it just looks strange.
You are producing some good work, it’s not proper faux stuff, you just need to improve in some areas. Well done for taking the plunge :o)
TomSeptember 15, 2013 at 9:42 am #13006
CC, which one do you use? I’ve been using the Spyder 3 Pro for a few years now, but I’m wondering if I should upgrade with the Spyder 4 or ColorMunki. I’m using it on two Samsung 27″ S27B350 LED monitors.September 15, 2013 at 10:11 am #13007cameraclickerMember
I use a Colormunki. I changed from the Spyder II when I changed operating systems and the Spyder didn’t work with Vista. It was a good choice because it let me profile my printer and it can read a colour from a piece of paper without additional pieces to get lost or take up space.September 15, 2013 at 10:23 am #13008nesgranMember
You could probably benefit more from having a better screen than upgrading your colour calibration kit. I can’t find anywhere the technology used in the screen but the 2ms gtg would suggest it is TN display. This combined with the low resolution doesn’t make for a good monitor for a photographer. A decent reasonably priced option is the Dell U2713H if you want a 27″, otherwise the 24″ version is a bit cheaper. Just make sure you can return the monitor as Dell has a very spotty QC. EIZO and NEC are the better known brands otherwise for photo work but with their better specs and warranty they are expensive. Having a consumer grade screen like your samsung is a good idea to see what the photo will look like on most people’s monitor but isn’t really up to it for colour critical work.September 15, 2013 at 10:24 am #13009
I never had a problem with the Spyder3 in any of XP, Vista, 7 or 8 on either desktop displays or laptops. Reviews I’ve come across have rated the Spyder4 and ColorMunki as being pretty equal in price, features and usability. Maybe other posters would like to weigh in? CPowers might benefit from the discussion or maybe get more confused! 🙂September 15, 2013 at 11:04 am #13011
Nesgran, thanks for your input. I really didn’t give much thought to photography when I upgraded my system, but I realize now I probably should have. One of the first monitors I ever had for a desktop setup in the late 90s was a 19″ NEC CRT and, in retrospect, it was a far cry better than anything else I’ve used. Photography wasn’t the addictive passion then as it is now, but I’ll be sure to pay more attention to my displays when I can upgrade. For now, I’ll just have to make due.
If you think 1920 x 1080 is low resolution, I can only imagine what you’re looking at as you do your own PP! 🙂September 15, 2013 at 11:54 am #13013
Cpowers – colour calibration is whole new world of pain, it can take ages to even get your head around some of the concepts! I’m wondering if your images look any thing like as colourful on your monitor?
can you upload a raw file to your website? if you can, I’ll run it through my system and then upload it again some where. If it looks awful to you, you’ll know that your monitor is way out.September 15, 2013 at 1:09 pm #13015ebiMember
As a mac user, I don’t know anything on the PC end that equates to an Apple Cinema Display, but that is the lowest end I would go for getting a good gauge of your color. But I do not do color work on these monitors as they are extremely unreliable. I’ve compared both NEC PA302W and an EIZO CG276. I find the difference between the two to be unremarkable, with the NEC being a few hundred dollars cheaper. You can, of course, go smaller than the 27/30″ and save even more. With proper calibration your color will improve vastly. Or you can save a little over a grand and go the cinema display route and still have pretty decent color. Better than what you have now.September 15, 2013 at 8:40 pm #13022
I took a look at those displays and I’m impressed, to say the least. They’re out of my price range for now, but I’ll definitely keep the Apple Cinema Display in mind when it’s time to upgrade. Compared to the resolutions of those, I can see now why nesgran said I had low res!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.