Hiding Blown Areas.

[arith]

Is it sometimes possible to hide blown areas or does it always look fake?

I've added a concrete texture behind here with a bit of white paint to brighten it up; am I just wasting my time? Is it possible to remove the blown bits another way.



I also added extra dof to be the same as a print I've done; but even on pearl paper the white is too bright.

[Donald]

I think what you've done here works fine. I have, in the past, resorted to cloning something adjacent to the blown areas at, say 5%, just to introduce a bit of detail and obliterate the blown bits.

I notice, Steve, that with the blur you have applied it to the bridge, the people and buildings beyond, but you've left the water and the wall and roadway at the right-hand side beyond the bridge, sharp. They need to be blurred as well.

[arith]

Got that Donald; on the print I did that bit right but don't like the luminous rails. I was thinking of painting them a completely different colour.

[arith]

Had another go but can't get rid of the edge around the railings.



One day I might get one right

[Clactonian]

I am assuming that you are feathering the edge of your selection Steve? You might also try expanding your selection by say one pixel and then feathering by the same amount. I have found that using this method and a little experimentation with the number of pixels softens the edge quite nicely under these circumstances.

[arith]

I didn't try that Mike; I'll give it a go.

[pnodrog]

Cloning works well I select the area I am repairing expand it by about 5px then set the cloning mode around 4-7% and darken. This allows you to ensure that the edges look natural. If you try to clone over any existing detail no cloning takes place. I often don't bother making a selection if the area around the blown area are a fair bit darker. You can always clone onto a new layer with the blending mode set to darken and then adjust the layer opacity until it looks natural.

For adding a touch of detail to a dark shadow just set to lighten.

The rails need a 100 years of rust on them and toning them down would be an improvement.

[arith]

Cheers Paul; I think it is a really good image apart from the luminous rails. Would be nice to get it right even if it doesn't look like the real place.

[arith]

Obviously too hard for me



It wouldn't be so bad if I could get it right next time but I can't; I have to have blinkies to know I'm banged up to the right.

[pnodrog]

It can be done. It will depend on what software you have available to do it.
I worked on another layer that had a layer mask made from selecting the highlighted areas then expanded by 2 px.
Once you have formed the mask you can fill the layer with what ever colour or pattern/texture you can find.
Set the layer blend property to darken and then adjust the layers opacity until you get a result you like.
For the colour and texture I had the layer opacity was set at 15% bit I could have gone lighter or darker by decreasing or increasing the opacity value.



The other alternative is just to clone them out completely.



I have just noticed a few little dark lines in the above photograph. This has occurred because the layers blend mode was darken and the shadow lines were darker than what was cloned over them. I could see how it looked with the blend made as normal or do a little local patching to correct them. Not a bad idea to save all the layers until you are 100% sure your edit is perfect.

[arith]

Cheers Paul; I've got PSE10 that does layers and masking but nothing else that does. I find the clone tool a little difficult to use in PSE10 and don't think I can manage such accurate detail as would be required. A different texture might work; I used flaking paint but then had to change its colour and blur it. Will look for a finer detail rust.

[arith]

I'll have to get some more software because it is too difficult on PSE10.

[Dave Humphries]

I can sympathise on the cloning difficulties Steve, the tool in CS5 is much better - in that it gives you a "hover preview" (from the sampled area) so you know exactly what's going to be put down when you click, whereas in PSE, it is trial and error.

I know that's a lot of dosh, probably more than you have to spend on a hobby
What's the tool like in GIMP, I wonder?

When shooting I tend to use the RGB histogram more than blinkies these days - and look for any lines climbing up the right (or even compressed peaks) on any of the colour channels.

The last one isn't too bad, although the rust texture is way sharper than the towpath stones.

Cheers,

[arith]

Cheers Dave; when looking at blinkies if there isn't many of them and the histograms look like they are heading to the floor, I guess I got it right. But not in these cases and I suppose if it is sunny from behind then I'm going to have to think more than one exposure.

No attempt to correct the problem looks real enough to me; got to think of a different way to do it.

[gcowan]

Steve,
I may be a heretic but I can't see a problem with white handrails being white. If there is no detail to preserve then why worry? There seems to be a little shadow to give the roundness to the rail, although the angle of the sun seems to make the shadow quite small.
I have been finding this website quite helpful. There are a few articles there which might give some ideas, if you don't go with my heresy..
http://www.photoshopdiva.com
The woman's name is Katrin Eismann. I have just bought one of her books Photoshop Masking and Compositing, and I am finding it very helpful.
Graham

[Clactonian]

Steve,
I may be a heretic but I can't see a problem with white handrails being white.
Graham

I'm so pleased I'm not the only one!! For all the skills on display here, I still think the original looks best. It is almost impossible to hide the fact that all other attempts are contrived.
It reminds me of a shot I posted some time back now of a quiet street in Rouen, France with a young couple wandering along. In the distance, on the main road was a yellow Poste van. The suggestion was that I change the colour of the van so that it didn't stand out. Why? It was there!
Surely the point is that if the van was so obtrusive as to ruin the photograph, then the shot is not a keeper. I, as the photographer, failed because I didn't take enough care to see the problem. No amount of editing is going to cover up my failings.
We now have the perception of a safety net with sophisticated programs such as Photoshop. Is this not one of the major problems with digital photography?
Sorry Steve, not getting personal here, because I fall into the trap all too easily. Just throwing a brick into the lock.

[arith]

Cheers Graham and Mike. The biggest problem is getting it to look real and I've tried everything now anyway. I'm not buying CS6 because that is serious dosh and I would have to learn how to use it anyway. I printed one without modification a long time ago on Pearl paper with the extra dof done right, it is just the brightness of the whites and in future if something is white and it is sunny I will bracket the shot.

[gcowan]

Well I agree that the handrails dominate the image, maybe the solution is to not press the shutter. Sometimes the problems of the real world are not in the favour of the photographer. Of course if you were doing an illustration for an HSE brochure the image would be perfect.
Graham

[wobert]

I will throw in my ideas- Use the channels to find the best to make a mask. Throw a colour layer below the image and mask- it can be any colour and control intensity with 'Fill %' to fill the white areas.
Images to show layers-

[arith]

Cheers Robert