Better PP ?

Newer members often state that they think their question is too basic, or stupid, or whatever, to be posted. Nothing could be further further from the truth in any section at DSLRUsers.com, but especially here. Don't feel intimidated. The only stupid question is the one that remains unasked. We were all beginners at one stage, and even the most experienced amongst us will admit to learning new stuff on a daily basis. Ask away! Please also refer to the forum rules and the portal page

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

Better PP ?

Postby Alpha_7 on Fri May 05, 2006 12:38 am

Hi I was working on these three versions of one of my self portraits, shot with Doug's 50 1.4 but at f8 as I was jumping around a lot and we couldn't afford shallower DOF. So I had to try to blur out the background myself .. to emulate something closer to 2.8 ish ? Unfortunately the border area's are calling me issues. I basically had 2 layers, cut out myself from the top layer, then gaussian blurred the backdrop and the merge the layers.. is there a better way ?

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby PiroStitch on Fri May 05, 2006 12:42 am

Don't see any issue with what you've done mate. Love all 3 versions!
Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby Alpha_7 on Fri May 05, 2006 12:46 am

Wayne,

Um, the issues I'm seeing are artifacts around the edges of me and the background... where the blur affect has gone a little weird, or I haven't cut myself out properly ? The same occured in the shot I posted in the ES Self portrait theme...

Oh I stuffed up the bit between my arms as I blurred it after flattening rather then before... (oops)
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby stubbsy on Fri May 05, 2006 10:08 am

Craig

I think you are being overcritical here (not that there's anything wrong with that :wink: ). There is a little bit of softness around your right forearm, but not unacceptable. I'd stick with what you have. Version #1 works best for me too. I like the warmer tones.
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby Alpha_7 on Fri May 05, 2006 10:24 am

stubbsy wrote:Craig

I think you are being overcritical here (not that there's anything wrong with that :wink: ). There is a little bit of softness around your right forearm, but not unacceptable. I'd stick with what you have. Version #1 works best for me too. I like the warmer tones.


Thanks for the feedback Peter, I got to work at it looks passable on my CRTs (if somewhat darker / flatter) it must just be my LCD that is showing the artifacts, so maybe I am being too critical...

Out of interest, Peter (or anyone else) what process would you use to blur the background but not me ? If I can find a better method I'll give it another shot (the pefectionist in me is begging to fix this). :lol:
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby PiroStitch on Fri May 05, 2006 11:29 am

Craig, I like the soft feel of the portrait as the backlighting adds to the effect. If there wasn't any backlighting or if the light was from a different position, I'd be inclined to say that the pic didn't work.

I usually create a mask around the object that remains in focus, inverse the selection, feather the mask by about 2 pixels and gaussian blur by 0.7px.
Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby Alpha_7 on Fri May 05, 2006 11:42 am

PiroStitch wrote:Craig, I like the soft feel of the portrait as the backlighting adds to the effect. If there wasn't any backlighting or if the light was from a different position, I'd be inclined to say that the pic didn't work.

I usually create a mask around the object that remains in focus, inverse the selection, feather the mask by about 2 pixels and gaussian blur by 0.7px.


Since I'm in the Absolute Beginners section, Wayne what exactly do you mean by creaking a mask? Also what method would you use to get the mask exactly around my outline (before you then invert it?). Sorry but it's the simple things like this that I think could make my life easier, and prevent me from doing things dodgily. BTW for reference this is what the original Raw straight to jpeg looked like.. the PP version is cropped a little and as you can see the blur was needed to hide the crinkles in the backdrop.

Image
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby stubbsy on Fri May 05, 2006 11:43 am

Alpha_7 wrote:Out of interest, Peter (or anyone else) what process would you use to blur the background but not me ? If I can find a better method I'll give it another shot (the pefectionist in me is begging to fix this).

Well what you've done is a good approach, but I'd use either the Nik Color Efex Classical Soft Focus or Vignette Blur filters in PS CS in their selective mode. This lets you paint the filter effect on (it's really a layer mask) and off. This is very similar to what you've done, but doesn't involve the need to cut you from the image. Other techniques I've used are to duplicate the image, blur the top layer and erase the bits I want sharp with the eraser set to a soft edge.

Matt K will tell you to lasso yourself - painstaking, but very effective - then you can sit yourself over the top of the blurred background (or any other background that takes your fancy). I lack the patience for this technique. (see this thread and this one for an example of Matt's technique)

Finally, whatever you do you need soft or feathered edges. If the transition from soft to sharp is too strong it won't work.
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby PiroStitch on Fri May 05, 2006 11:45 am

Craig,

Ditto to what stubbsy said about using the lasso tool :) I tend to use the polygon lasso method. Don't bother with the freehand lasso. I've had hit and misses with magnetic lasso so I tend not to use it.
Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby johnd on Fri May 05, 2006 4:43 pm

Craig, I found a good article in Dec05/Jan06 issue of "Digital Photography and Design" that talks about doing just what you're trying to do. The article is called "Blur is beautiful". It goes into step by step of using gaussian blur but without getting halos and bleed between strong tonal differences. The details in the article work for CS2 as well as Elements4. If you can pick up a copy it's a good read. The mag is paublished by Yaffa Publishing in Sydney. If you can't get a copy, let me know and I'll organise you to see my copy.

Cheers
John
D3, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 80-400VR, 18-200VR, 105/2.8 VR macro, Sigma 150/2.8 macro
http://www.johndarguephotography.com/
User avatar
johnd
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Sandy Bay, Tas.

Postby Alpha_7 on Fri May 05, 2006 5:12 pm

Thanks for the feedback, I'm going to give some different techniques a try and see how I fair, I didn't even know there was a Polygon lasso, only found out the other week thanks to Doug about the magnetic one that (was a little too wayward for my liking). Is the standard "free hand" lasso the best way to..(is it) deep etch myself out of the picture ?
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby johnd on Fri May 05, 2006 5:25 pm

Alpha_7 wrote:Thanks for the feedback, I'm going to give some different techniques a try and see how I fair, I didn't even know there was a Polygon lasso, only found out the other week thanks to Doug about the magnetic one that (was a little too wayward for my liking). Is the standard "free hand" lasso the best way to..(is it) deep etch myself out of the picture ?


Craig, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the magnetic lasoo. I use all three, normal, polygon and magnetic. Each has it's place. You gotta practice with each and get the idea which works best for which circumstances. When doing a complex selection, I regularly flip between all three and magic wand and all of them in both modes (add to selection and remove from selection). Actually the free hand lasoo is probably my least used lasoo. I usually only use it for grabbing extra bits that magic wand didn't grab.

Try this with the magnetic lasoo: Take something like a flower with lots of spiky bits, magnetic lasoo it really quick, like 10 - 20 secs, so it's pretty rough. Then zoom in and use the various lasoos to add and subtract. You will pretty quickly get a real good selection.

Cheers
John
D3, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 80-400VR, 18-200VR, 105/2.8 VR macro, Sigma 150/2.8 macro
http://www.johndarguephotography.com/
User avatar
johnd
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Sandy Bay, Tas.

Postby Alpha_7 on Fri May 05, 2006 5:32 pm

Well John, I've already learnt more, I had worked out how to add or subtract from a selection, which is why I got frustrated by the magnetic as I couldn't correct the places when it was off. :) So much more to learn it appears! :oops:
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby Bodak on Tue May 09, 2006 9:36 am

Don't know whether this site has been mention but is great for working Photoshop.

http://www.radiantvista.com/video_tutorials/

It will teach you about masks and a pile of other goodies.

My learning of PS has risen a very sharp curve.
Life is

Stephen
Bodak
Member
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:31 pm
Location: Somerville Victoria

Postby PiroStitch on Tue May 09, 2006 9:48 am

Craig, any more to show with your newly acquired skills? :D
Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby Alpha_7 on Tue May 09, 2006 11:11 am

Sorry Wayne but I haven't had a chance yet to revisit the PP. I still plan to do so, but I've been flat out at work and then last night I was out on the town with Wendell, so I haven't had time or energy to throw at it... but I will ;)
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9


Return to Absolute Beginners Questions