The crooked tree

[Mongwopman]

Yet another one I have just rolled out, Im not sure but the picture seems to be a "flat" for me. Not sure why, anybody got any pointers I could try?

C&C always welcome.

[Donald]

Damien

Can you say if there were any unusual lighting condition present. The tree looks unnaturally bright to me, with light in areas of the tree that I would expect to see in shadow, as if there was some sort of artificial light on it on it; e.g. a bank of several dozen flashlights illuminating it.

Or did you do a lot of dodging in post-processing?

[Mongwopman]

I see what you mean, amazing how someone else's view point can make you aware of soemthing.

This is the original to comapare it to :

[Donald]

Ah hah! Much more natural.

I think that maybe the biggest challenge you have is that very bid bank of very white cloud behind. If that was an image I really wanted, I'd be tempted to say I need to re-shoot and wait until the whole conditions are better. Your original shows, I think, a good bit of work in terms of the trees and hedge in the background. But you'd need to mask the tree so that the same pp actions were not affecting it so much.

[Mongwopman]

Ahh great. Thanks for that. Unfortunently I couldnt have waited for a re-shoot as the rest of the day was cloudy like that, but I know what you mean, it was a pain trying to PP with all the white in the background. Something to look out for in future shots for me.

I will try and do a mask on the tree although to be honest Im new to photoshop and not so clued up on masking etc.

[oldgeezer]

It depends on what software you use but you can open Jpegs in Camera Raw which will give you most of the tools apart from White Balance multi menu.
Or you can do it with Photoshop in loads of ways.
I just warmed it up a little and played with various settings till it looked ok. No masking by the way, all selective colour tools which is far easier.
What software do you use ?

[dje]

It depends on what software you use but you can open Jpegs in Camera Raw which will give you most of the tools apart from White Balance multi menu.
Or you can do it with Photoshop in loads of ways.
I just warmed it up a little and played with various settings till it looked ok. No masking by the way, all selective colour tools which is far easier.
What software do you use ?

Nice bit of pp work Pete. Just had a look at your Photoshop Video Tutorials on Vimeo - wow you've certainly put some work in. I'm going to go through them one by one because they appear to contain a wealth of information. Out of interest, how did you produce the videos ? It doesn't appear like a video camera shot of the screen but something much better.

Not bad for an Old Geezer !!

Cheers Dave

[oldgeezer]

Thanks Dave, I use a piece of software called Camtasia which records whatever you do on the screen. The great thing about it is showing in real time what can be achieved in a few mins. Photoshop is a bit daunting when starting out so I hope to help people see some of the not so well known features to speed up their workflow. No matter how expensive the gear, by defalt, all digital images have a blur and you never see a published photo that have not been through some manipulation. It is the equivalent to a Dark Room.
Unlike the slick videos you find around, I never rehearse them so they can see I am as confused as the viewer.

I would like to produce Photography videos but can't find anyone willing to help. Again there are so many ways of achieving shots, I don't understand why many get bogged down in one set path, its too much fun just to stick to rules. Yes you must understand what you are doing but then go your own way.

End of rant. just have fun, it's not set in stone....................

[dje]

Thanks Pete for this information and thanks Damien for what I hope is your tolerance of my encroachment on your thread. I think Pete's pp illustrates well the importance of pp work in getting the best out of an image.

Dave

[terry j]

Yes you must understand what you are doing but then go your own way.

End of rant. just have fun, it's not set in stone....................

Pete it seems that we hail from the same photographic era. As a much younger chap I think that I devoured every Focal Press booklet that was published and then bought one of the early editions of "The Focal Encyclopedia Of Photagraphy" for the price of 5 pounds 15 shillings and six pence. It was printed in Great Britain in 1956 and was a single book later prints that I have seen were 2 book editions. These days it makes a great doorstop This served as my reference for many years, can you remember there were no computers or Google then. I suddenly came to the realization that my photography was for my own enjoyment and decided to take what I liked and how I saw it rather than what the book said.
Hope I have'nt bored you to the point of giving up photography.

[oldgeezer]

Terry, hitting the nail there mate. Once I realised I didn't have to do what everyone else was doing left me completely free.

Too many serious answers will intimidate newcomers as we were, its all about the enjoyment, no matter how we get there as long as we arrive.......................

davidstinger, who gave me this link is of the same mind as are a lot of others, they just need to come out. LOL

I do a s little PP on my personal stuff as I want to see it as it was and not tarted up for someone else. This digital stuff 'ROCKS'