| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/02/2005 04:07:00 PM · #1 |
Hi guys,
I´m really new using photoshop to adjust levels. I was making some proof with an image to get high contrast and something similar than Adam´s pics.
What do you think about it? How can I improve it?
Thanks in advance |
|
|
|
03/02/2005 04:09:02 PM · #2 |
I think if you leave it there you won't be able to submit it! A bit of work on the sky and I think you'd have a decent submission.
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 04:17:45 PM · #3 |
Yeah, remove that photo and it won't get less than an 8 from me...likely a 9 with some finishing touches.
Nice work! (but get rid of it)
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 04:32:30 PM · #4 |
I need to experiment a bit myself, but my understanding of 'the look' is to convert to monochrome using channel mixer in PS. When mixing the RGB channels they should all add up to 100% in total. The trick is that you can use negative values. i.e. 100% red, 100%, Green and -100% blue. This would give the 'dark sky' effect that you often see in Ansel's work... (I think!? Not tried it myself yet..!)
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 06:00:51 PM · #5 |
Alexys, don't forget that for anonymity reasons your challenge entries should not be posted to the forums. If you wish to enter this photo in a challenge, please remove it from the forums immediately.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 06:05:54 PM · #6 |
Well, I posted the first reply 2 minutes (and 2 seconds) after the initial post, Alexys, I think you'd now run into difficulties if you submitted this (especially if it did well) - 133 members have seen it.
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 06:11:58 PM · #7 |
I don't think this is a possible entry, just something he was playing with for practice. After nearly 2 years, 63 entries and 365 forum posts I think he might know about not posting entries.
Poor guy is probably really paranoid now wondering why everybody wants him to delete his shot. ; )
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 06:56:19 PM · #8 |
I'm sure we could all argue for days - or even, perhaps, that we already have - about the zone system. In terms of its relation to our finished images here at dpc, I would suggest that you're along very much the right lines, covering all of the range from black to white.
Personally, I shall probably draw the line for zones 2 and 9, to use the not necessarily appropriate zone system standard, a little further away from pure white and pure black, to allow for the variations in momitors used by voters.
However, there is an understanding of the compositional habits that defined Adams' style also required. It should not be overlooked that Henri Cartier-Bresson was also a 'zone system' photographer, and as their styles could poerhaps not be more disparate there is obviously more to AA's 'style' than that technical process. Almost all his masterpieces are incredibly simple images, working at the most basic level in broadly graphic strokes - even the still lifes, and almost incidental architectural studies follow this principle. The landscape work also used enrmous depth of field, very little bokeh at all if any, and he was certainly a pioneer of the simple trick of using a foreground detail to enhance the sense of distance in his work.
I also think that a common thread throughout almost all his work that i've seen is the impact of the forces of nature - not just the grand geological millennial forces apparent in his big landscapes, but also the weathering processes on buildings on smaller environments. He worked, often, I think, to portray the character of his landscape in the same way a good portrait photographer would when presented with an interesting face.
If you get somewhere near nailing that, and stick to the exposure rules (basically keeping all the luminosity values within the range of the histogram), and have the patience and time to wait for the right light, you'll do well in this challenge. In fact, if you really nail all that, I'd go so far as to say you'll win it.
E |
|
|
|
03/02/2005 07:11:08 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by e301:
I'm sure we could all argue for days - or even, perhaps, that we already have - about the zone system. In terms of its relation to our finished images here at dpc, I would suggest that you're along very much the right lines, covering all of the range from black to white.
Personally, I shall probably draw the line for zones 2 and 9, to use the not necessarily appropriate zone system standard, a little further away from pure white and pure black, to allow for the variations in momitors used by voters.
However, there is an understanding of the compositional habits that defined Adams' style also required. It should not be overlooked that Henri Cartier-Bresson was also a 'zone system' photographer, and as their styles could poerhaps not be more disparate there is obviously more to AA's 'style' than that technical process. Almost all his masterpieces are incredibly simple images, working at the most basic level in broadly graphic strokes - even the still lifes, and almost incidental architectural studies follow this principle. The landscape work also used enrmous depth of field, very little bokeh at all if any, and he was certainly a pioneer of the simple trick of using a foreground detail to enhance the sense of distance in his work.
I also think that a common thread throughout almost all his work that i've seen is the impact of the forces of nature - not just the grand geological millennial forces apparent in his big landscapes, but also the weathering processes on buildings on smaller environments. He worked, often, I think, to portray the character of his landscape in the same way a good portrait photographer would when presented with an interesting face.
If you get somewhere near nailing that, and stick to the exposure rules (basically keeping all the luminosity values within the range of the histogram), and have the patience and time to wait for the right light, you'll do well in this challenge. In fact, if you really nail all that, I'd go so far as to say you'll win it.
E |
Excellent post, 301. Couldn't have said it better myself. You are now the official Ansel interpreter of this site, and I pass the mantle to you. As it happens I actually got a break today, and the sun peeped through an unrelenting dtormy overcast to allow me to make an image I despaired of being able to do within the challenge timeframe, and I actually have an entry that I am satisfied with.
Of particular relevance is your comment about the foreground in Adams' work...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/02/2005 09:10:52 PM · #10 |
Wasn't there a link that told exactly how to adjust the zones?
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 01:58:06 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Alexys, don't forget that for anonymity reasons your challenge entries should not be posted to the forums. If you wish to enter this photo in a challenge, please remove it from the forums immediately.
-Terry |
I know it, Terry. Just post it to try to make better adjustment to get a similar Adams´ style. I have no idea to work with photoshop, except tools like saturation, contrast and no more. For example, I have no idea what is working with zone system and, usually, when I want to get a B&W image, I just desaturated it and adjust contrast. But for that contest, I need something more. Furthermore, I took this picture last summer, so it shouldn´t be submitted... and I won´t be able to shot it again, because this was taken in my girlfriend´s state which is 900km. far away.
I needed an opinion, and I got it.
Thanks again,
Alexis |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 02:11:15 AM · #12 |
What are these "supposed" zones you all speak of and how do you use them to enhance your photos...you all and your crazy talk..
Mark |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 02:12:01 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
I think if you leave it there you won't be able to submit it! A bit of work on the sky and I think you'd have a decent submission. |
I forgot it. When you say a bit of work on the sky, what are you thinking about? Perhaps, more contrast? |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 07:40:44 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by Alexys:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
I think if you leave it there you won't be able to submit it! A bit of work on the sky and I think you'd have a decent submission. |
I forgot it. When you say a bit of work on the sky, what are you thinking about? Perhaps, more contrast? |
Alexys,
we mean something like the following. This is a rough reworking of your lo-resolution original, it would be better done from scratch on the full-size image:
Hope this helps,
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 07:50:11 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by SirBiggsALot:
What are these "supposed" zones you all speak of and how do you use them to enhance your photos...you all and your crazy talk..
Mark |
Biggs,
You know how when you're viewing challenge submissions for voting you can see a bar with a range of steps from white to black under the image? Imagine that bar with 11 steps; those are your "zones" in Ansel's Zone System. "Zone V" is the middle gray, "Zone X" is absolute white, "Zone 0" is absolute black. Each zone represents a one-stop change in exposure, basically. The number of "useable" zones variesa according to the media on which the print is to be displayed. Reflected light images (photographic prints) cannot produce as many zones of detail as transmitted light media (transparencies or this computer screen) which are more "luminous".
The charactersitic that dominates an Ansel Adams image is his use of the entire tonal range in the print, with all important dark areas reading some texture and detail, and all important light areas likewise; no blown-out higlights or blocked up shadows in areas where you need the detail for the print to express itself. Within these constraints, his images tend to read as "contrasty", with most of the image Zone IV or below and Zone VI and above, and relatively little of it in the Zone V range. This is not "true" high contrast, which tends to block up shadows and blow out highlights, because both extremes of the range are tightly controlled.
Hope this helps...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 08:57:59 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by SirBiggsALot:
What are these "supposed" zones you all speak of and how do you use them to enhance your photos...you all and your crazy talk..
Mark |
Biggs,
You know how when you're viewing challenge submissions for voting you can see a bar with a range of steps from white to black under the image? Imagine that bar with 11 steps; those are your "zones" in Ansel's Zone System. "Zone V" is the middle gray, "Zone X" is absolute white, "Zone 0" is absolute black. Each zone represents a one-stop change in exposure, basically. The number of "useable" zones variesa according to the media on which the print is to be displayed. Reflected light images (photographic prints) cannot produce as many zones of detail as transmitted light media (transparencies or this computer screen) which are more "luminous".
The charactersitic that dominates an Ansel Adams image is his use of the entire tonal range in the print, with all important dark areas reading some texture and detail, and all important light areas likewise; no blown-out higlights or blocked up shadows in areas where you need the detail for the print to express itself. Within these constraints, his images tend to read as "contrasty", with most of the image Zone IV or below and Zone VI and above, and relatively little of it in the Zone V range. This is not "true" high contrast, which tends to block up shadows and blow out highlights, because both extremes of the range are tightly controlled.
Hope this helps...
Robt. |
Great and helpful post, Robt. But, my question is how do you adjust those zones? Photoshop?
Sorry for my unknowledge... I´m a little bit ignorant in this subject. |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 09:13:01 AM · #17 |
Alexys,
The short answer is "yes"... :-)
The longer answer starts with the actual making of the exposure in the camera. It's important that the actual exposure is made so that you have detail in the highlights; you "expose for the highlights." It's best, as a rule, in a sunlit picture, if your camera contrast controls are set to low or perhaps medium contrast, or "none" if you are shooting in RAW. You can always add contrast later in PS.
Once you get the image into photoshop, you basically use curves and levels to adjust how the tones are rendered, and then "touch up" with the dodge and burn tools set to a low percentage (3-6%) and repeated passes over the areas you want to adjust. You will note that you can specify in the top bar whether you are working on highlights, middle tones, or dark areas, so you can (for example) dodge the highlights of clouds brighter without affecting the darker portions of the clouds around them. Likewise, you can dodge the shadows in some areas to lighten them without at the same time lightening any highlights within those shadows.
When you are doing your curves and levels work, it's often (even usually) helpful to make a selection on the image; most of the time, this will be a selection that includes the entire sky and nothing else. Then you save that selection as "sky" in the "selection" menu, invert the selection, and save it as "foreground." Sometimes it's helpful to have a third selection, "middle ground", if your image has 3 distinct fields in it; say, sky, mountains in middle distance, and a broad foreground. Then you can make the foreground rich and detailed, the mountains dark and brooding, and the sky contrasty and dramatic, or whatever works for the particular image.
When you're dodging and burning, load the selection for the area you're working on, so that any changes you make will be restricted to the elected area, and you can sweep the tool right over the edges and avoid the dreaded "haloing" effect.
Hope this helps. There are more sophisticated techniques that can be used, but I suspect you need to master this basic level of workflow before you attempt those.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-03-03 09:14:23.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 12:49:13 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Alexys,
The short answer is "yes"... :-)
The longer answer starts with the actual making of the exposure in the camera. It's important that the actual exposure is made so that you have detail in the highlights; you "expose for the highlights." It's best, as a rule, in a sunlit picture, if your camera contrast controls are set to low or perhaps medium contrast, or "none" if you are shooting in RAW. You can always add contrast later in PS.
Once you get the image into photoshop, you basically use curves and levels to adjust how the tones are rendered, and then "touch up" with the dodge and burn tools set to a low percentage (3-6%) and repeated passes over the areas you want to adjust. You will note that you can specify in the top bar whether you are working on highlights, middle tones, or dark areas, so you can (for example) dodge the highlights of clouds brighter without affecting the darker portions of the clouds around them. Likewise, you can dodge the shadows in some areas to lighten them without at the same time lightening any highlights within those shadows.
When you are doing your curves and levels work, it's often (even usually) helpful to make a selection on the image; most of the time, this will be a selection that includes the entire sky and nothing else. Then you save that selection as "sky" in the "selection" menu, invert the selection, and save it as "foreground." Sometimes it's helpful to have a third selection, "middle ground", if your image has 3 distinct fields in it; say, sky, mountains in middle distance, and a broad foreground. Then you can make the foreground rich and detailed, the mountains dark and brooding, and the sky contrasty and dramatic, or whatever works for the particular image.
When you're dodging and burning, load the selection for the area you're working on, so that any changes you make will be restricted to the elected area, and you can sweep the tool right over the edges and avoid the dreaded "haloing" effect.
Hope this helps. There are more sophisticated techniques that can be used, but I suspect you need to master this basic level of workflow before you attempt those.
Robt. |
Great post Robt. Thousand thanks. |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 01:22:25 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by Alexys:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
I think if you leave it there you won't be able to submit it! A bit of work on the sky and I think you'd have a decent submission. |
I forgot it. When you say a bit of work on the sky, what are you thinking about? Perhaps, more contrast? |
Alexys,
we mean something like the following. This is a rough reworking of your lo-resolution original, it would be better done from scratch on the full-size image:
Hope this helps,
Robt. |
Yes Robt, as I was thinking (was just not very clear, sorry Alexis)
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 03:36:30 PM · #20 |
Somebody below mentioned 'waiting for the right light". Ansel Adams used to set up his tripod and sometimes wait hours, even several days to get the right light and the shot he envisioned. I have great scenery around here, but I didn't have the time to wait for the right light. Maybe I can shoot again sometime this weekend. I never thought I'd say it, but these clear, blue Colorado skies are starting to get on my nerves!
JD
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 04:11:19 PM · #21 |
That's why I left Southern California and moved to Cape Cod; I was damned tired of the same old sky, day after day. Od course, they've had some "weather" lately, but...
You're right about Ansel and his relaxed approach to time. That's actually true to some degree for most large format landscape photogrpahers. I'd go on a 3-week road trip in the American West, come home with perhaps a dozen shots exposed, at most 3 dozen, and consider it time well-spent.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 05:48:52 PM · #22 |
| I've printed this thread out, great info. Thank you Robt for taking the time to explain. I appreciate it. |
|
|
|
03/04/2005 12:40:18 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by smellyfish1002:
Somebody below mentioned 'waiting for the right light". Ansel Adams used to set up his tripod and sometimes wait hours, even several days to get the right light and the shot he envisioned. I have great scenery around here, but I didn't have the time to wait for the right light. Maybe I can shoot again sometime this weekend. I never thought I'd say it, but these clear, blue Colorado skies are starting to get on my nerves!
JD |
Was that me? I had to get my shot for that challenge today, what with the GTG tomorrow and working on Sunday: I left London at 5:30, got to the site just before 7, got the shot I think I'll use at just after 3:20 this afternoon. I almost left -- it was exceptionally grey and dull for most of the day, but eventually the sun came through for me, after 6 hours or so :-)
If I were a proper photographer, I'd have stayed even after that: I'm pretty certain some storms came across that would have given me a wonderful shot. Not patient enough, you see ...
e |
|
|
|
03/04/2005 12:42:45 PM · #24 |
Nawp, yer definitely not a proper photographer. Turn in your ribbons and go home, sir.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/04/2005 12:44:23 PM · #25 |
| I hope that people remember in this challenge that Ansel did more than just take pictures of landscapes. I'm afraid that if your picture is not from Yosemite it will get dinged. I hope I end up being wrong. |
|
