Blend Modes

[Donald]

Thanks to a piece in 'Professional Imagemaker', the journal of the Societies of Photographers, I began to explore Blend Modes in Photoshop much more than I have done in the past.

I absolutely believe that pressing the shutter is only the end of part 1 of making an image. Part 2 follows in the digital or analogue darkroom. That being said, I am, what others might consider, quite conservative in my work to finish the image with, what I call, the digital negative.

The article quotes Robert Thomas in saying, "Working with blend modes is almost always an experimental process. Because it's nearly always impossible to predict the results, you always seem to end up experimenting with different modes and Fill Opacities until you get the result you're looking for." That last point is crucial, for me at least. I think you have to start experimenting with a very clear plan in your head of what you want the image to look like. I don't go for the method of working that sees one trying everything and picking what looks the best. That suits some people, but not me. I am trying to find what will work to give me the image that I had in my head.

Anyway, as I say, I experimented with Blend Modes, to see if I could I could coax a photograph that was set aside in the past, to make the image that was in my mind.

This is the result of putting a new layer to 'Linear Light' mode and adjusting the opacity to 79%. Now I have the image that I envisaged 3 years ago when I took the photo in Yosemite, California.

[xpatUSA]

Struggling to understand the entire method because I have never used layer blending and have never used Photoshop; but nevertheless interested from a theoretical POV.

Adobe says:

"Linear Light
Burns or dodges the colors by decreasing or increasing the brightness, depending on the blend color. If the blend color (light source) is lighter than 50% gray, the image is lightened by increasing the brightness. If the blend color is darker than 50% gray, the image is darkened by decreasing the brightness."

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/us...ing-modes.html

So my understanding is that the 'blend' layer is a copy of the original and the effect of 'linear light' is that anything light is made lighter and anything dark is made darker,the opacity dictating how much lighter or darker?

I guess this must be different to simply adjusting Levels or Contrast or Curves?

[Shadowman]

Nicely processed, creates movement from a static subject.

[Rufus]

It would be interesting to see the original image as well to see the effect of what you have done, Donald.

..."Working with blend modes is almost always an experimental process. Because it's nearly always impossible to predict the results, you always seem to end up experimenting with different modes and Fill Opacities until you get the result you're looking for."...I don't go for the method of working that sees one trying everything and picking what looks the best...I experimented with Blend Modes, to see if I could I could coax a photograph that was set aside in the past, to make the image that was in my mind.

There speaks the competent photographer who has visualised the final image at the time of taking the shot and utilised their physical equipment to captuture it proficiently. For me that is just an aspiration.

In the meantime the image I create with the camera is based around an attempt to get the exposure and compositional elements (about) right in order to have a usable image to work on. Only at the computer do I develop an idea of what I want to acheive with that image.

I used to find blend modes very intimidating precisely because it is so difficult to predict the outcome, and the names of the blend modes are not very intuitive (although I now realise they are helpfully grouped within the menu).

I am beginning to find them less intimidating but I have to admit to often scrolling through their effects

[Antonio Correia]

My small contribution to this thread is here.

I sometimes use them and the results are amazing... sometimes !

[Manfred M]

Keep up the exploration Donald.

I use blending modes (on top of Normal) in virtually every image I make. Like most photographers, I tend to go back to the ones I am most comfortable with (multiply, lighten, screen, overlay, soft light, color and luminosity) all the time. I'm pretty sure I've never used "Dissolve" or "Pin Light" at all. I sometimes use them globally, but more often along with layer masks to impact just part of the image.

[Donald]

I guess this must be different to simply adjusting Levels or Contrast or Curves?

Guess it must be. I have no interest in the science or the theoretical explanations of what it is or how its works. I'm only interested in the effect of it on a photograph on which I am working. So I'm not the one to asked anything technical about it.

[Donald]

I tend to go back to the ones I am most comfortable with (multiply, lighten, screen, overlay, soft light, color and luminosity) all the time.

Indeed. I tend to use what I know and have got used to e.g. Soft Light with a 50% Grey fill for Dodging & Burning; Overlay for getting rid of Halos, etc., but was never more adventurous than that.

[Manfred M]

I guess this must be different to simply adjusting Levels or Contrast or Curves?

Blending modes do a pixel by pixel mathematical operation on the layer the blending mode is applied to the pxiels below. So, no this is not something that can be replicated using curves or other tools.

One theoretical operation could be to take the raw data and overlay a row resolution JPEG and use either the difference or subtract blending modes to see where the data has changed. Wikipedia does a reasonable job with the math that is used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blend_modes#Difference

[xpatUSA]

Originally Posted by xpatUSA I guess this must be different to simply adjusting Levels or Contrast or Curves?

Guess it must be. I have no interest in the science or the theoretical explanations of what it is or how its works. I'm only interested in the effect of it on a photograph on which I am working. So I'm not the one to asked anything technical about it.

OK, I get it.

As to what you actually did: was the 'blend' layer a copy of the original image, perhaps converted to grayscale? Was the 'Linear Light' blend straight, without any fancy brushwork on the 'blend' layer?

As mentioned in post #4, I too would be interested in seeing the image prior to the blend, so that we can see the effect of it ...

[Donald]

OK, I get it.

As to what you actually did: was the 'blend' layer a copy of the original image, perhaps converted to grayscale? Was the 'Linear Light' blend straight, without any fancy brushwork on the 'blend' layer?

The Blend layer was a layer converted to 'Linear Light', above all the other adjustments that I'd made. The Opacity was then scaled back to 79%. On this occasion there was no layer masks or 'fancy brushwork' .

[xpatUSA]

The Blend layer was a layer converted to 'Linear Light', above all the other adjustments that I'd made. The Opacity was then scaled back to 79%. On this occasion there was no layer masks or 'fancy brushwork' .

Thanks for your explanation. I am unfortunately lacking in PS layer terminology, therefore "converted to Linear Light" doesn't mean anything to me, sorry. I best retire from this discussion before I start to irritate people. Thanks again Donald.

[Donald]

Thanks for your explanation. I am unfortunately lacking in PS layer terminology, therefore "converted to Linear Light" doesn't mean anything to me, sorry. I best retire from this discussion before I start to irritate people. Thanks again Donald.

Here is the file before the Linear Light layer was applied.

Once you choose to add an additional layer the default for that is 'Normal', but you can choose one of 26 other styles for the layer. Linear Light is one of those.

[xpatUSA]

Here is the file before the Linear Light layer was applied.

Thanks for posting the "before" which makes the effect quite clear:



The histograms tell the tale for me. The mid-tones got re-distributed quite drastically into the upper and lower levels, trending the image toward almost full black and white (not grayscale)!

Hope this is of interest. The images posted for illustration only with no intent to circumvent any copyright.

[Donald]

There speaks the competent photographer who has visualised the final image at the time of taking the shot and utilised their physical equipment to captuture it proficiently. For me that is just an aspiration.

That is not so much a skill that you have or have not got, David, but practice, practice and more practice. It eventually starts to form in your mind and, then, it's about keeping at it so that you don't lose it. It's like riding a bike, or swimming etc.

[xpatUSA]

Thanks for posting the "before" which makes the effect quite clear.

The histograms tell the tale for me. The mid-tones got re-distributed quite drastically into the upper and lower levels.

That re-distribution did throw away a lot of gradation detail (see top right and also shadow areas in the comparison images, post #14).

For what it's worth I got a similar, but not identical, histogram by cranking CIELAB contrast up to 100% and then adjusting blown highlights down a bit and bottomed shadows up a bit.

[Donald]

Fow what it's worth, I got a similar but not identical histogram by cranking CIELAB contrast up to 100% and then adjusting blown highlights down a bit and by adjusting bottomed shadows up a bit.

There are many ways to skin a cat.

[xpatUSA]

There are many ways to skin a cat.

OK, I'll get my coat ...

[Rufus]

That is not so much a skill that you have or have not got, David, but practice, practice and more practice. It eventually starts to form in your mind and, then, it's about keeping at it so that you don't lose it. It's like riding a bike, or swimming etc.

The practice, practice, and more practice mantra is why I committed to the Project 52 this year. Practice will increase familiarity with hardware and editing tools, but I feel the pre-visualising and the imaginative and creative aspects are more inherent to individuals. It can be learnt to a certain extent, thank goodness, such as what effect do you want from the depth of field and what contributes to good composition, but "seeing the picture" in the first place is another matter!

[Donald]

OK, I'll get my coat ...

I think you misunderstood me. That is an expression to say that there are many ways of achieving the same thing.