My misunderstanding, Bob. It certainly is an interesting one, with Photoshop composites in the right hands being impossible to tell. Whether they should be judged against folks that prefer the straight out of camera look and approach is a conundrum indeed. I seem to be amongst a minority on the interwebz these days that doesn't really enjoy colour images with the selective artificially and overly lit or the unrealistically illuminated images that are loved by so many. They tend to look too CGI for my eye, rather than photo-realistic, but each to their own I guess. When it comes to B&W long exposures, I do enjoy the unrealistic lighting that is the current trend for it. And that's the beauty of photography, that everyone can explore and further refine what they enjoy about it.
Did ya get 'InstaMask' as well? Think it came free if you had already paid out for 'Raya Pro'Originally Posted by Plays With Light
I'm now finding 'InstaMask' slightly easier to use as long as ya don't want to radically change things, just enhance what's there.
Cheers -
Yup ... the whole range of options available to us is mind boggling. I think photography must have a broader capacity than just about any other hobby. Young or old, fit or handicapped - there is something for everyone. Except young attractive nudes .... my wife has an embargo on those.Originally Posted by Plays With Light
Why is the white sky any more bland than the sky you replaced it with??
Brighten the eye a bit to help draw attention away from the sky.
I found this very helpful tute by Steve Patterson great because he takes you through the process step by step. http://www.photoshopessentials.com/p...g/replace-sky/
I'm about to do the same and was thinking I'll have to do them at different times of the day and multiple directions to allow shadows to look right.Originally Posted by Plays With Light
Good point, Kev. Wouldn't want the light on the clouds to be coming from a different direction to the subject of the image!
I didn't notice that mentioned in the tutorial.
(Is that because it goes without saying? Pretty important point, IMO.)
CC, Image editing OK.
I was also thinking about how to name the files so I can find the appropriate one when I want it. Like 'AugNW1600' taken in August, facing North West at 4pm.Originally Posted by Plays With Light
I came across this tutorial today. It works really well. It uses the channels in PS. No fringing or other artifacts. So good I thought it was worth sharing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHo9...em-subs_digest
That's interesting, Enseth, thanks for sharing it with us.
I discovered this new tutorial from Serge Ramelli which uses the 'Multiply' blend mode and is really simple and quick, but so effective.
But not for everything. AFAICT, Multiply "multiplies" the "value of the pixel" by itself, so...Originally Posted by Plays With Light
Brights > brighter
Mids > "Midder" (actually a bit darker).
Darks > darker.
That brights > Brighter and darks > darker could lead to blown highlights or irretrievable shadows.
I have replaced the sky in one of my bird photos with a gradient but I have also used sky images in some of my portraiture. You can buy sets of skies on the web or you can photograph your own to make it cheaper. Just one thing to remember when you do use an image of the sky that you make sure the tones in the rest of the image match the ones in the sky. When purchase some sky images they come with a photoshop action to help with placement and blending.
The image below had a horrible grey sky (it was taken in England). I chose a sky image that had similar tones to the lavender and the grass and then used a photoshop action to warm up the skin tones in the portrait.
_DSC5984-Edit copy.jpg
Last edited by NikonNellie; 21-08-2017 at 9:12pm.
CAMERA: Nikon D800, Nikon D7000
LENSES: AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Macro, Sigma 10 - 20mm F/4 - 5.6, Sigma 150 - 500mm F/5 - 6.3 APO DG OS, Nikkor 18 - 200mm F/3.5 - 5.6 VRII,
Sigma 70 - 200mm f/2.8 APO EX DG OS, Tamron SP 24 - 70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD, Sigma 85mm F/1.4 EX DG, Nikkor AF-S 16-35mm F/4 ED VR, Nikkor AF-S 200-500 f/5..6E ED VR
MY WEBSITES: www.nawimages.com, http://nelliewajzerphotography.smugmug.com/, http://NellieWajzerPhotography.blogspot.com