136

gIMP 2.6 wut

7/25/2009 4:26:52 PM

gIMP is the way to go from what I can tell. I mean, assuming you don't feel like pirating CS3/4 or paying for it.

7/25/2009 4:40:53 PM

CS3 is actually easier to use and just as good imho.

the only real feature i like of CS4 is that with adjustments (ie color and gamma) it automatically saves it as a layer. less keystrokes really.

there are a few more tools...but all in all CS3 is just as good as CS4. actually it's a lot easier to use imho. i think id rather have it (much easier for batch editing)

7/25/2009 4:42:26 PM

My version

You know, I need to know how to batch edit because I spend a lot of time individually doing it, simple things like saturation, contrast, and levels. I think I add too much to my workload by not taking the time to learn. I'm sure it's easy to do too, import??

7/25/2009 5:02:36 PM

what do you mean by import?


i just make my own actions, save, and apply them to what pictures have similar lighting and whatnot.

i do however have a few editing actions that i downloaded of the interwebs (urban acid biotch )

im not too familiar with a lot of the technical talk...most of my knowledge comes from
a)playing around
b)other photographers

7/25/2009 5:26:17 PM

Yeah, I used Google and lots of playing around to figure CS3 out. I, too, have actions. I've made a lot of my own but have found some on the intarwebs, as well as brushes and gradients! Woo!

I meant import my entire folder, I literally open each picture one by one... fiddle for 30 minutes and move on to the next one.

7/25/2009 5:32:09 PM

oh geez. i've been using a way where you import (i guess its import) the folder and then you can select which images you want to be modified (if they are in consecutive order then i can just type in the numbers).

i don't do it very often at all though because i am picky and perfectionist when it comes to images. even in very basic adjustments i won't necessarily do the same thing. im a mood editor.

and i cant for the life of me explain how to do do it unless i am actually doing it...so i am of no help lol



[Edited on July 25, 2009 at 5:36 PM. Reason : ]

7/25/2009 5:36:04 PM

You know, actions DO help out a lot as far as time is concerned but I am picky too about the images. I like doing a variety of things to them so batching images may not be for the best. Good thing I have plenty of time to waste.

7/25/2009 7:19:19 PM

Okay guys, here's another. Cody, I tried A priority with the aperture at f11 but it WAY overexposed so I went right back to manual at f16, 1/4000 sec. and ISO 800... Hmm should I fix the ISO? Maybe that's part of the issue yes?

I fixed her up a little bit, same way I did the last lady. Blurred the skin for smoothness, fixed fly aways, whitened teeth a little. I moved the lights back by about 2 feet back this time as well as raised them up higher by about a foot. I thought these lights weren't strong yet I'm overexposing really easily. Is the ISO to blame? I just realized I haven't changed it since I last shot a concert at dusk, I'll put it to 200 to see if that fixes it.



[Edited on July 26, 2009 at 3:42 PM. Reason : hm]

7/26/2009 3:26:20 PM

What can i do to the red to make it look better?

7/26/2009 9:19:09 PM

[Edited on July 27, 2009 at 7:48 AM. Reason : .]

7/27/2009 7:39:37 AM

you should have had that 50 prime for that party

7/27/2009 9:50:12 AM

Details on that?

7/27/2009 11:12:39 AM

These are 3 quick shots of my cat, Zoey. Unedited, taken with a D40






[Edited on July 27, 2009 at 11:56 AM. Reason : larger]

7/27/2009 11:54:58 AM

Quote :

"i don't know for a fact, but i doubt there is anything better. http://www.hasselblad.se/products/h-system/h3dii-50.aspx find a better camera..."

The hasselblad is a great medium format SLR system, combined with a digital back and it's golden, but truth be told, it is not the best or biggest system out today. There are digital backs for large format camera's that are equal to or higher resolution than the latest medium format sensors, but most of them are scanning backs, which have a real limitation of only shooting still life or table top. There are regular digital backs that can be used for the large formats, but most of those are digital backs for a medium format camera, but altered to fit them.

What's the reason to have a medium format digital back on a large format camera when it has a huge crop factor (4x5" cropped to a 645 size), well complete camera controls and having the ability to control the front and rear standard - a tilt and shift lens basically with extreme movements.

personally, I like the Leaf backs better than a hassy just because of the tools that comes with the leaf is a lot more simple to operate (nor do you have to spend an extra grand on the software like the phase one capture program), plus their digital backs can be used on a lot of other SLR systems with the right adapter plate. The Mamiya 645 AFD III system with a leaf back is just as good and just as comparable and a bit cheaper by a few grand.

Quote :

"CS3 is actually easier to use and just as good imho."

CS2 was a mild jump from CS, CS4 was another mild jump from CS3, but from CS2 to CS3 was a complete generation jump with new features worthy of an upgrade. If you have CS3, stick with it, CS4 offers very little, at least for photoshop and for photographers. The biggest update with CS4 has been the introduction of the graphics accelerator, which boosts productivity when editing large files on a high end system with a good graphics card. It's just faster in most regards on the same system compared to the CS3. CS4 also supports for multiple core chips for faster crunching; I think it supports upto 8 or 16 cores where as before it was only 2 or 4.

I'm not sure of the color or gamma feature that automatically comes up as its own layer with adjustments being only with CS4, but you can add color, gamma or any other adjustments in it's own layers very easily with the any photoshop using the "creating new fill or adjustment layer" button at the bottom of the layers panel. It looks like a circle half black, half white. It's been there before CS I believe.

7/27/2009 4:40:26 PM

Nevermind.

[Edited on July 28, 2009 at 3:40 AM. Reason : Saw it]

7/28/2009 3:27:29 AM

From Prague




From Berlin






From Dresden

7/28/2009 8:32:16 AM

are any of you dslr people planning on coming to the tww free expression tunnel painting on august 17th? some pics would be cool.

7/28/2009 8:34:38 AM

^^ now those are actually pretty good shots

7/28/2009 11:11:29 AM

First one would be better without the cables but yeah the last three are hotness. I like the black and white one the best.

7/28/2009 11:15:12 AM

the b&w is definitely my favorite; the dresden pic a close second.

7/28/2009 11:20:01 AM

danke

7/28/2009 9:27:51 PM

7/29/2009 7:24:31 PM

try using the shadow/highlight filter to add some detail to the blown out background. she's exposed well enough, but that overexposed background is meh. should be easy to fix decently.

7/29/2009 7:58:39 PM

the background is pretty distracting to me. maybe adding detail would keep my eye from studying that instead (reverse thinking there, huh?). also, the rocks being angled in the background is really distracting for me. but i don't know how the picture would look with them straight.

i like the B/W conversion though. the tree looks awesome monochrome.

7/29/2009 8:01:17 PM

Yeah, the light on her face is nice. Maybe a tighter crop and correcting some exposure issues would make it a bit less distracting.

7/29/2009 8:02:26 PM

yeah, that's your problem, you only have CS3.... that's it alright...

7/29/2009 8:14:39 PM

I let it stay overexposed because there are some pretty ugly buildings back there but I'll play around with it some.

Sorry about the crooked rocks, not intentional kiwi cropping there.

7/29/2009 8:18:45 PM

nah. i could tell you were going for a straight tree. like i said, i don't know if straightening that will improve the image or not.

7/29/2009 8:19:23 PM

Ever heard of history brush? You may want to check that out.

7/29/2009 8:25:18 PM

?

7/30/2009 11:06:48 AM

can you post the pics side by side and smaller so i can see them on one screen. i would like to compare... i think the background looks better with more detail though.

and did you try straightening it to see what that would look like?

7/30/2009 12:09:35 PM

vs.

7/30/2009 12:14:24 PM

i love weeping willow trees

7/30/2009 12:17:20 PM

the one on the left is definitely better, Kiwi

7/30/2009 12:25:52 PM

Yeah, I just hate that I lost some of the detail of the tree on the top. I could try and fix it but that will be time consuming I think.

7/30/2009 12:27:19 PM

you know there is a simple way to fix all of this right?

7/30/2009 1:08:46 PM

Sigh, I'll bite, NO WHAT IS IT??

7/30/2009 1:14:23 PM

to be totally honest i liked it better the way that it was. gave more separation between the front subject and the background. some detail if you want to look closer to the background but still keeps the bold stuff in the foreground.

i feel like when you bring out the background more it blends in with the tree more.

i don't think that would be a problem to me if it were in color but since it is black and white it blends together more.

just my opinion ofcourse since there is no real definitely better or worse.

7/30/2009 1:27:16 PM

Shoot with a more open aperture, that'll help with a distracting background.

Unless you've got some 4.5-5.6 variable aperture bullshit, then good luck.

7/30/2009 1:34:17 PM

^ yep.

^^ i found the background more distracting when it was blown out because i could still see there and i couldn't tell what it was. therefore, my eyes were studying that instead of the subject. like you said though, that's just an opinion.

[Edited on July 30, 2009 at 1:37 PM. Reason : k]

7/30/2009 1:37:11 PM

did your eyes go to it and study it before noticing the subject or was it... look at the subject... then move to other things around the picture?

7/30/2009 1:41:14 PM

kind of a half glance at the subject then move to the brighter area of the photo, which was distracting

7/30/2009 1:42:09 PM

ah, my eyes didn't do that. honestly i'd imagine if it were hanging up on a wall, the eyes would do something different than seeing it on a computer screen. probably a difference between reflecting light and emitting light. maybe the ability to stand back and look at the picture a bit more as an even wash as opposed to be up close and studying it like text on a computer screen.

who knows.

7/30/2009 1:49:43 PM

you could be right. but i've only seen it on this screen.

7/30/2009 1:52:28 PM

random thought.

7/30/2009 1:53:41 PM

first version i am definitely drawn to the large white area right in the middle

distracting

[Edited on July 30, 2009 at 7:28 PM. Reason : a]

7/30/2009 7:28:04 PM

7/31/2009 9:22:09 PM

Is it me or is the first one with a green sky?

7/31/2009 9:29:01 PM

Really? It looks orange to me. I made some adjustments to it, but not that much.

7/31/2009 9:38:37 PM