Let's see your re-processed images

[Brev00]

This shot is only from a few months ago, but, I played little attention to the realistic version and left it like so:

[IMG][/IMG]

At the time, I used Nik Color Efex to solarize this high key sort of shot:

[IMG][/IMG]

But, just the other day, I decided to revisit the original raw to see what it would like like closer to the actual scene. I was trying out Nik and Topaz at the time and I find my skills with the same old, same old including Elements improves over time. So, I don't think this required any major new techniques. I just lowered the exposure in ACR along with some other basic slider work then moved it into my plug-ins for Detail (topaz) and Tonal Contrast (Nik) and who knows what else. I do not keep track of the details but here is my latest final:

[IMG][/IMG]

Always nice to revisit Horseshoe Bay, Bermuda when 10 Degree F in New Jersey.

[Glenn NK]

Nice example of what a difference PP can make. That's what it's all about after all isn't it? Capturing what you experienced at that moment in time.

Oh, oh - maybe I was smoking something - or maybe the camera couldn't see the colours I could see.

[Colin Southern]

I'm sure everyone runs across an old file from time to time that gets a shot at a rework. I thought maybe we could post a few and share what techniques allowed them to be recovered. Here is an example of one previously processed in PSE8 and reworked completely within LR5.3.

The original file was pretty noisy shot at ISO 6400 in really bad lighting conditions. With the original processing, I ran NeatImage on the file for noise reduction. I then used layers in PSE8 to selectively work the lighting and sharpening on the bird so as not to make the noise any worse in the BG. As you can see below it was still pretty noisy.

Working with the RAW file in LR, I turned the sharpening completely off in the details panel. I left color NR at the default settings then with the image at full resolution tweaked the luminance NR until I was satisfied. Working with the 16 bit image makes a big difference I suspect too.

I used a spot on the bird's head at a neutral point and tweaked the WB. Then in the Basic panel adjusted lighting, vibrance, and saturation. No clarity on the overall image.

Then I used the brush tool to select the bird and adjusted clarity and sharpening. With the brush again I selected the BG and turned clarity all the way down and NR all the way up. Finally with a circular gradient I lightened the shadows around the eye and sharpened it. A little work on the BG with the healing tool and that's it.

This was shot in pretty bad conditions. Heavy overcast skies.
Nikon D7000, 200-400mm w/1.4x TC. monopod
f/5.6 @ 550 mm, 1/1000, ISO 6400

Old version.



And the LR processed version.

I REALLY hate to say this Dan, but I prefer the first version because it has better contrast and a more realistic colours. The noise is definitely noticeable, but I feel that could probably be addressed separately.

[Brownbear]

I love the final (3rd) image. Very nice.

This shot is only from a few months ago, but, I played little attention to the realistic version and left it like so:

[IMG][/IMG]

At the time, I used Nik Color Efex to solarize this high key sort of shot:

[IMG][/IMG]

But, just the other day, I decided to revisit the original raw to see what it would like like closer to the actual scene. I was trying out Nik and Topaz at the time and I find my skills with the same old, same old including Elements improves over time. So, I don't think this required any major new techniques. I just lowered the exposure in ACR along with some other basic slider work then moved it into my plug-ins for Detail (topaz) and Tonal Contrast (Nik) and who knows what else. I do not keep track of the details but here is my latest final:

[IMG][/IMG]

Always nice to revisit Horseshoe Bay, Bermuda when 10 Degree F in New Jersey.

[Kris V]

This shot is only from a few months ago, but, I played little attention to the realistic version and left it like so:

[IMG][/IMG]

At the time, I used Nik Color Efex to solarize this high key sort of shot:

[IMG][/IMG]

But, just the other day, I decided to revisit the original raw to see what it would like like closer to the actual scene. I was trying out Nik and Topaz at the time and I find my skills with the same old, same old including Elements improves over time. So, I don't think this required any major new techniques. I just lowered the exposure in ACR along with some other basic slider work then moved it into my plug-ins for Detail (topaz) and Tonal Contrast (Nik) and who knows what else. I do not keep track of the details but here is my latest final:

[IMG][/IMG]

Always nice to revisit Horseshoe Bay, Bermuda when 10 Degree F in New Jersey.

I like the feeling in the solarized version - but I'm probably in the minority. It almost looks like the scene of a Sci-Fi movie.
But then again, I try stuff like this all the time, and kept some of the surprising results. Most of them are definitely NOT true to nature.

[NorthernFocus]

I REALLY hate to say this Dan, but I prefer the first version because it has better contrast and a more realistic colours...

Not sure how you figure that, Colin. I was never satisfied with this image in that the BG colors didn't reflect reality. The BG colors were mainly what prompted me to stop and set up on the bird in the first place and they were definitely way off. I do agree that the contrast is better on the original version. The color tones in the dark feathers on eagles vary a lot from one bird to another so in that regard one could argue that either version is realistic. Though looking back at it now it does look like the WB adjustment that LR chose may have over corrected to the magenta side on the tint. But I'm not on my calibrated machine at the moment.

[Brev00]

I like the feeling in the solarized version - but I'm probably in the minority. It almost looks like the scene of a Sci-Fi movie.
But then again, I try stuff like this all the time, and kept some of the surprising results. Most of them are definitely NOT true to nature.

I am not so sure about being in the minority. The shot made Explore on flickr with a number of nice comments. That might be why I did not revisit it earlier. As to true to nature, for me that is a choice. I generally worry about what I like (close to life or far out) and am not true to any one type of presentation (realism, surrealism, impressionism, etc.). Thanks for your comment and Cristina's. I really enjoy the learning process. I definitely wouldn't have been able to process the image this way just a short time ago.

[NorthernFocus]

This shot is only from a few months ago,...Always nice to revisit Horseshoe Bay, Bermuda when 10 Degree F in New Jersey.

The third version is preferable to the first IMO. The first one is a bit flat.

Here in Alaska there are two reasons why I spend a lot of time cleaning up my image files. The obvious one is that there's just more time to do so if one isn't thrilled about the outdoors in the dark/cold. But secondly, it is a way to mentally escape the dark/cold and revisit the summer and/or distant locations visited

[Brev00]

Not sure how you figure that, Colin. I was never satisfied with this image in that the BG colors didn't reflect reality. The BG colors were mainly what prompted me to stop and set up on the bird in the first place and they were definitely way off. I do agree that the contrast is better on the original version. The color tones in the dark feathers on eagles vary a lot from one bird to another so in that regard one could argue that either version is realistic. Though looking back at it now it does look like the WB adjustment that LR chose may have over corrected to the magenta side on the tint. But I'm not on my calibrated machine at the moment.

I think the warmer tones in the background are a little disconcerting and seem unnatural. It is, of course, impossible to say what you saw at the time. It might be just a compositional thing where we tend to prefer cooler backgrounds. I like the way you have brought out the dark feathers--they seem smoother yet more clear. The loudest issue is often the noise but that often comes from underexposure and that seems to have led to the color and contrast issues. I might like to see a version with a slightly cooler background and some more selective brightening--the head, most notably. That is the center of our attention and I wouldn't actually mind losing some detail (which might be scarce with the noise issue) for a little more pop. I appreciate your sharing your image and starting off this thread. I have actually been thinking right along these lines for a thread (I post at DPReview)--the difference between a close to deletion original and a valued end result. Great topic!

[NorthernFocus]

I think the warmer tones in the background are a little disconcerting and seem unnatural. It is, of course, impossible to say what you saw at the time. It might be just a compositional thing where we tend to prefer cooler backgrounds....

Thanks for the perspective. And perhaps what Colin was getting at also. The whole point of these forums, after all, is to hear others' opinions.

[Colin Southern]

Not sure how you figure that, Colin. I was never satisfied with this image in that the BG colors didn't reflect reality. The BG colors were mainly what prompted me to stop and set up on the bird in the first place and they were definitely way off. I do agree that the contrast is better on the original version. The color tones in the dark feathers on eagles vary a lot from one bird to another so in that regard one could argue that either version is realistic. Though looking back at it now it does look like the WB adjustment that LR chose may have over corrected to the magenta side on the tint. But I'm not on my calibrated machine at the moment.

I had a quick play with the image (hope you don't mind). The WB was interesting; I sampled the birds head many times and got many different readings - and in the end left it pretty much where it was. I did feel that the midtones and sharpening could be pushed a lot more though to give it more pop.

[NorthernFocus]

Thanks, Colin. The mid tone tweaks and sharpening definitely look a lot better. You pulled out a lot more detail on the head and on the bird overall. Sharpening is definitely one part of LR that is going to take some practice to get used to. Why they didn't include a simple USM tool is beyond me.

I encountered the same issue trying to use the head feathers for WB. It is common for the feathers to have a good bit of yellowing and/or be dirty/bloody. But there shouldn't be a blue tone. So I sort of searched around and found an area that had a blue channel a couple of points higher than red channel. Then I balanced that spot to neutral. The result looked reasonable.

[Colin Southern]

Thanks, Colin. The mid tone tweaks and sharpening definitely look a lot better. You pulled out a lot more detail on the head and on the bird overall. Sharpening is definitely one part of LR that is going to take some practice to get used to. Why they didn't include a simple USM tool is beyond me.

I encountered the same issue trying to use the head feathers for WB. It is common for the feathers to have a good bit of yellowing and/or be dirty/bloody. But there shouldn't be a blue tone. So I sort of searched around and found an area that had a blue channel a couple of points higher than red channel. Then I balanced that spot to neutral. The result looked reasonable.

To be honest Dan, and I could be wrong, but I doubt the LR is going to be able to touch Photoshop when it comes to multi-pass sharpening.

In the original image I thought I was also seeing somewhat of a tint in addition to the normal WB, which make me a bit suspicious.

[Jeff S]

Original Image:




Processed Image:



I wish I could remember my work flow, but I appear to have deleted it. Most of the work was done in LR5 basic panel and HSL. I also made some selections with the radial filter to make several narrow highlight adjustments on the cliff.

I converted this to PScc for high pass sharpening and NIK for output sharpening. I also spent a good deal of time cleaning up the sun flares and spots. I used a 9 stop ND filter that required a bracket for the lens I was using, resulting in some unwanted corner gear intrusion, which I cropped out. I also got rid of some signs using the lasso tool (edit>fill>content-aware).

EXIF: 1/20 sec at f/16, 0EV, ISO 100, 19MM using 17-40mm f/4L USM lens.

[Jeff S]

Love the Eagle shot. Reworked image really improves an already fine image measurably IMHO.

[xpatUSA]

A few years ago I snapped a sunflower - not a great shot per se. Developing in ACR 5.4 didn't do that well, there was blotching in the bright petal parts even tho' they were not over-exposed in the RAW data. Later, I discovered RawTherapee:

[rpcrowe]

This is an image that I shot outside the Grand Bazaar in Istanbul, Turkey; one of my favorite cities and one to which I would love to return and spend some more time shooting...



Looking at the image, I decided that it might be a candidate for a B&W conversion and used my NIK Silver Efex Pro 2 to make that conversion...



I always carry a pair of Canon 7D cameras on my travels wearing 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses. This was shot at 106mm, ISO 640 (the area was in the shade of a portico) exposing at 1/160 second @ f/4....

It is very handy to be able to switch lenses by simply switching cameras, The second camera also acts as backup insurance in case of one body failing for some reason.

The following shot was done from the top of a double-deck tour bus (while the bus was stopped) with the 70-200mm f/4L IS at 116mm; using ISO 200; 1/320 second @ f/5.6.



Since the image was basically monochrome, I decided to try it using NIK Silver Efex Pro 2.



I used the Silver Efex, Yellowed 2 Preset, for both of the above conversions but modified that preset to my own tastes...

I think that in both images, the eye slits draw a bit more interest in the monochrome versions...

IMO, the dress of the lady in the second image looks a lot more comfortable than the clothing worn by the lady in the first image...