An Attempt at High Key Birds

[ajohnw]

John,

Thank you for advising and sharing. Yes, I used two adjustment layers, curves and exposure. The increased exposure was to make the blue water a white background and I had a hard time around the edges of the swan against the water. It is something that I need to practice and learn to do well.

Yes, I seem to have a preference for muted colours. Thank you for the link. I will view the video. Appreciated!



Mike,

Thank you for the tip on saturation. I will tuck it away in the back of my mind for future.

Yes, I definitely prefer colour and I'm not ready for b&w. It was simply that something about the colours on the swan didn't seem to fit with the image, likely the blue water I overexposed for the white background... I didn't know how to fix that so I converted it to B&W. Colour challenge solved, only to find new challenges arisen.

There is a video by adobe that mentions contrast change via curves. Mike's adding more grey isn't a good way of appreciating that. Say a curve has one point on it and you add another at a darker tone level and drag it down. It will darken that tone and all tones above it up to the next point where ever it is. What has happened is that the brightness range between the 2 points has been expanded. This is an increase in contrast. Another way of looking at it is that the slope between the 2 points is steeper = a contrast increase. If you push the point up the opposite happens, the slope is less steep, the brightness range between the 2 points has decreased so contrast has been reduced.

The video. As usual it doesn't cover different situations and you are probably aware of the options but just in case. The CinC tutorial is better.

https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-clo...h=fundamentals

As always it's just an S curve. Usually based on 3 points that quarter the 45 degree line things start with. Often another point splitting the dark region into 2 is useful. The 3 points can be moved around if needed.

As the swan is a good simple example the 1st thing to do is adjust the exposure so that the darker tones in this case black are correct while the curve is still a corner to corner straight line. You'll probably find that when you look at the histogram there will be space at the dark end. Ok for now. Then look at the highlight end. It might stop short, the image might look great apart from titivating. No need to do anything else here. Ideally if the image needs local contrast, clarity or what ever titivating adjustments some space is needed at both ends of the histogram anyway.

Life often isn't this simple so the first thing to do is to use highlight recovery sliders to see what they can do. Again space is likely to be needed at the end of the histogram for titivation. Rendering such as film like and other similar bits and pieces will make a difference as well if they are there. Then there is often a shadow/;low light recovery slider. That along with exposure changes can be used to bring more high lights in,

Many shots need no more than this and the curve is still a straight line, It's a good idea to use clipping indicators as this work is being done especially if the result turns out perfect so final adjustments need to be made. Generally black tones need elevating by a few bits due to the way PC screens work otherwise they will just give a flat black. All depends on the shot. I suspect Adobe show all channels clipping from some one else's work a while ago. Some times one or two channels clipping has no visual effect on colour at other times it does. Depends on the degree. When that happens the tone levels have to raised some how until colouring is restored. Lightroom had been used to process the shot. I looked at it with a package that allows any channel clipping or all channels clipping to be seen so could see the problem. The problem with adjusting for any channel clipping is that it can make images flatter than they need be. On this shot allowing some channels to clip left grass looking like mush.

Still no good - this is the time to play with curves bearing in mind the contrast effects. A typical S curve will always have a point at the centre and be an even S shape too start off with. The idea at both ends is to avoid clipping. At the dark end that means not allowing black to reach zero. Your viewing sRGB but the software is working at a greater colour depth so providing that it retains the numbers they can always be brightened up latter so that the look right in sRGB. A fill light might do that or a shadow recovery slider or brushing a higher contrast dark end curve over it. In some case an inverted S curve can be used. This reduces mid tone contrast but some of the titivating adjustments mainly work in this area.

Moving the exposure to take out a background is just making life more difficult. If it works then it should be possible to produce a mask of sorts by duplication the results from above in PS, Not that it will always work so some hand painting is likely to be needed. Masks can be inverted so it's a case of isolating the easier one.

To be honest though Christina with respect you would probably progress a lot quicker if you just used adobe raw for a while and learned to make full use of all of the bits and pieces it can offer and save layers for when they are needed. Adobe have done a few dumb video's about some of what it can do. There are plenty of tutorials on specifics about on the web including it's curve but none of those are likely to explain the effects, just show what the controls do. One video explains how to make an adobe raw processed image into some sort of smart object that links directly to PS and saves settings etc as well so that it's possible to go back and change them. Not that this is a good idea because the idea coming out of raw is to get a good image that contains as much information on tone levels as it can and then doing further processing. Sometimes there is just too much tone range to handle sensibly. That means sacrificing high or low tone levels completely or over compressing them with S curves or what I might do 2 exposures from raw blended with Enfuse and maybe needing a little more work on the result. This saves a lot of local work.

Reflections - easy with the right tools. Select the object, cut it, flip it vertically some how and paste it onto a transparent layer in the right place and mode so that ripples in the water are still visible. This may mean work on both layers locally to make the ripples look correct. Mentioned because I some time see shots where the ripples stop where the reflection is. Or just treat what you have locally, often easier.

All this may be a bit jumbled. I've been a bit occupied elsewhere today so have added to it several times over the day.

Me well if the camera jpg does a decent job of the tone curve I don't bother with raw and just do the titivations on it. Adobe raw will do that too. I only use layers when I need to or when basically trying methods out. My way of putting it is that I am in no way a raw snob. I have even used layer techniques on jpg's. I've never had the slightest problem with posterisation only colour shifts if things get pushed to far. I have had posterisation problems at times adjusting other peoples shots. In my view that means that the processing that produced them is NVG. Probably by doing things in the wrong order / using the wrong method to get there. Curiously my cameras don't do that. I don't seem to have any problems doing further work on my own jpgs' either. Handy as after I have finished a shot I need to get away from it for a while and then take another look. I also do a series of adjustment fairly quickly look a the results and see if it's worth starting again and doing it differently or more carefully or just chucking it away.

John
-

[Brownbear]

Hi John,

Thank you for your detailed and helpful reply. Loaded with great advice that I will need to think on.

I should say that I am working from raw files, and finding my way around Adobe Photoshop CC. It will just take a little time and further study for me to learn the program.

Here is a high-key image of a gull that I think I managed to do very well. All processed in Photoshop CC. Albeit it was far easier than the swan image or that heron image likely because it was better suited to begin with.

Here's the proof... (Good enough for me for now)



I also tried high-key on a few landscape images but it is far more difficult to find a landscape image that is well suited for this. Anyway that will come with time, knowledge when photographing the scene and experience.

John, an extra special thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge and expertise. Truly appreciated. That said I have to say that this thread has tuckered me out, so much so that I don't want to think about high-key images for at least a a couple of weeks, and it will take me a few weeks to digest all the information you have shared with me. So I'd like to let this thread fade away.

No doubt in a few weeks I will be ready to share some more high key images. Hopefully improved. Thank you John!

[Mike Buckley]

There is a video by adobe that mentions contrast change via curves. Mike's adding more grey isn't a good way of appreciating that.

I didn't take the time to read your rather exhaustive post, but I added the grey tones by changing the curve. As you know, it's impossible to change the curve without changing the contrast in the part of the curve that is changed.

[Mike Buckley]

Here is a high-key image of a gull that I think I managed to do very well...Here's the proof...

Indeed! Very well done. The image is so good that it would be well worth your while to increase the canvas size to allow more space at the top and bottom. There are few images for which increasing the canvas size will be so easy, so take advantage of it.

[Brownbear]

Thank you Mike.

I have to ask this question before I let this thread die. Why would I wish to increase the canvas? I suspect it has something to do with negative space but the gull is flying to the east (or perhaps west) so no need for room to move in an upward or downward direction, and if I increase the canvas I will be adding blank white space. Is it simply because the gull seems confined in a tight space or?

Thank you.

Indeed! Very well done. The image is so good that it would be well worth your while to increase the canvas to allow more space at the top and bottom. There are few images for which increasing the canvas will be so easy so take advantage of it.

[Mike Buckley]

Is it simply because the gull seems confined in a tight space...?

It seems confined to me at the top and bottom.

[Brownbear]

Thank you Mike!

PS Time to close this thread and wait for another one on high-key.

It seems confined to me at the top and bottom.

[ajohnw]

Hi John,

Thank you for your detailed and helpful reply. Loaded with great advice that I will need to think on.

I should say that I am working from raw files, and finding my way around Adobe Photoshop CC. It will just take a little time and further study for me to learn the program.

Here is a high-key image of a gull that I think I managed to do very well. All processed in Photoshop CC. Albeit it was far easier than the swan image or that heron image likely because it was better suited to begin with.

Here's the proof... (Good enough for me for now)



I also tried high-key on a few landscape images but it is far more difficult to find a landscape image that is well suited for this. Anyway that will come with time, knowledge when photographing the scene and experience.

John, an extra special thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge and expertise. Truly appreciated. That said I have to say that this thread has tuckered me out, so much so that I don't want to think about high-key images for at least a a couple of weeks, and it will take me a few weeks to digest all the information you have shared with me. So I'd like to let this thread fade away.

No doubt in a few weeks I will be ready to share some more high key images. Hopefully improved. Thank you John!

Tuckered out - not surprised. What I was suggesting in a round about way is to start thinking about efficiency and where to do what. One problem with PP is it's so easy to buy more and not really be aware of what you have can do or how to use it. In many cases that can make life more complicated than it need be. Some do that for ever as it makes what ever the extension to a package does easier rather than learning to do it with the package itself so people remain stuck with that. The important thing is the creative aspects - taking the shot and the final result. The root between the 2 really wants to be as simple and quick as it can be bringing in the big guns when they are needed.

Working on things like the Egret shot can teach people a lot - probably impossible jobs in other words.

The seagull is a nice shot. I'd agree with Mike on the cropping but wouldn't make it too big. Sometimes it pays to think in terms of where it's heading and leave some space for that. Looks like it's heading up - interesting problem.

On the other comment some tutorials on curves mention that it is a way of increasing contrast some range at the expense of decreasing it elsewhere but that on it's own doesn't seem to get the point across to some as it doesn't explain why. I don't think adding more grey does either and wish some one would write a decent succinct tutorial on curves as I suspect many would find it useful. Some find levels easier and it also has less pitfalls.

John
-

[Mike Buckley]

wish some one would write a decent succinct tutorial on curves as I suspect many would find it useful. Some find levels easier

Completely agree about the need for a great tutorial on using a Curve tool and a Levels tool. It's not possible to adjust the levels without also adjusting the curve, so the two tools and their relationship should be addressed in the same tutorial.

[ajohnw]

Don't know about merging them Mike. The advantage of levels is that the input range can be selected - usually the entire length of the histogram - and where it is positioned in the output is set by numbers/sliders. The inputs grey slider is fairly easy to describe move it about until happy with the result or achieve something which can be improved with further work of some sort. On what I use this moves around of it's own accord and only needs slight touches. Levels might even be the perfect tool to see if high key is on or not. It can also be used to improve a cameras colour recording errors on some shots.

Curves is a different kettle of fish. Adobe just states that more points can be used. I didn't look at their levels video.

Both I feel need examples and why. As a for instance curves generally need to be smooth but not always. There is an example in the CinC tutorial of one with a hump at the dark end that drops like a cliff..

Perhaps some people eyes just glaze over when they start reading or watching a video about them. I have seen some video's that use them on a grey scale. Sounds like a great idea but it seems that doesn't get it across either.

Curves and levels can be used for none obvious things as well. There are a couple here on the GIMP but most packages use the same arrangement. He's using them manly for colour correction.

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHuT...aW1DJLA/videos

John
-

[Brownbear]

Thank you John!

The programs that I have are far beyond my needs, so no worries. The only fancy stuff I wish to learn at this time is how to process/create high key and low key images. I will watch that video.

As always, appreciated.

[Brownbear]

Just a thumbs up for your recommendation.

Completely agree about the need for a great tutorial on using a Curve tool and a Levels tool. It's not possible to adjust the levels without also adjusting the curve, so the two tools and their relationship should be addressed in the same tutorial.