DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Why do my images look ..
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 24 of 24, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 08/29/2006 10:11:15 PM · #1
flat, and boring and dull? I look at pictures others shoot and ps and they are so vivid and beautiful! Is it post processing that I have to work on or ?? An example.....



It looks 1000xs better in real life
08/29/2006 10:13:39 PM · #2
post processing, unfortunately, is the key
 08/29/2006 10:16:38 PM · #3
You can probably boost the colour e.t.c. in camera as a lot of dSLR's by default produce a flat image on the assumption that you will post process. Have a look in the manual or maybe someone with the same camera can help.

Bottom line is that post will be required to make them really pop in most cases.
 08/29/2006 10:17:19 PM · #4
Definitely needs post work. I upped contrast by 10, bumped blue and cyan saturation a touch and improved the curves curve :)



Oh, could use a touch of sharpen too, I forgot.
08/29/2006 10:18:49 PM · #5


not sure if you like this better but it was pretty easy and quick let me know if you want to know the steps
 08/29/2006 10:19:23 PM · #6
Originally posted by idnic:
Definitely needs post work. I upped contrast by 10, bumped blue and cyan saturation a touch and improved the curves curve :)



Oh, could use a touch of sharpen too, I forgot.

showoff :P

errrr - -- I mean I agree with cindi-lou, a little PP to punch the colors goes a long way. :)
 08/29/2006 10:20:11 PM · #7
Originally posted by idnic:
Definitely needs post work. I upped contrast by 10, bumped blue and cyan saturation a touch and improved the curves curve :)



Oh, could use a touch of sharpen too, I forgot.

ours look very similar:) mine just has a little more green saturation.
 08/29/2006 10:20:25 PM · #8
Originally posted by liltritter:
flat, and boring and dull? I look at pictures others shoot and ps and they are so vivid and beautiful! Is it post processing that I have to work on or ?? An example.....

It looks 1000xs better in real life


a little late but here's my go at it :


nothing but a little unsharp mask and a hue/sat adjustment in the yellow and cyan ranges...
 08/29/2006 10:21:34 PM · #9


You think this looks better?
 08/29/2006 10:25:39 PM · #10
Originally posted by Elvis_L:


not sure if you like this better but it was pretty easy and quick let me know if you want to know the steps


put my exact nubmers in the description for you.
 08/29/2006 10:31:04 PM · #11
My try


Levels did 95% of the work. I ran into jpg artifacting after a NI pass, disregard 'cause you can negate that with an original.
 08/29/2006 10:47:31 PM · #12
I keep my saturation at +2 in camera, then usually have to boost with levels curves and further hue/sat work in PS to really get it done. Though I have to say, since I started shooting in RAW those photos seem to need much less than their JPG counterparts from the same camera.
 08/29/2006 10:59:21 PM · #13
ok out of the camera



My attempt with advice here



edit to add -- do the colors seem off in the leaves? Or is it me?

Message edited by author 2006-08-29 23:00:01.
 08/29/2006 11:02:29 PM · #14
Originally posted by liltritter:
ok out of the camera



My attempt with advice here



edit to add -- do the colors seem off in the leaves? Or is it me?


looks pretty good to me.
 08/29/2006 11:03:32 PM · #15
Yes, much better! :) With a little practice, you'll be editing shots like that in your sleep!!
 08/29/2006 11:06:00 PM · #16
yay - very much better!! :)
 08/29/2006 11:06:32 PM · #17
With flowers just setting the gamma to something below 1.0 is often a quick and easy way to make them look better. Changing gamma is really just a simple way of adjusting curves - setting it below 1.0 makes the dark parts darker and increases the contrast in the bright parts. Here I adjusted gamma to 0.7 and bumped the saturation and contrast a bit.

08/29/2006 11:12:47 PM · #18
Originally posted by viajero:
With flowers just setting the gamma to something below 1.0 is often a quick and easy way to make them look better. Changing gamma is really just a simple way of adjusting curves - setting it below 1.0 makes the dark parts darker and increases the contrast in the bright parts. Here I adjusted gamma to 0.7 and bumped the saturation and contrast a bit.



At the risk of sounding stupid.... setting the gamma???

karmabreeze I'm checking the camera now to see if I can change the saturation and I shoot raw. Maybe the camera can help me out a bit :)
 08/29/2006 11:18:53 PM · #19
Originally posted by liltritter:
Originally posted by viajero:
With flowers just setting the gamma to something below 1.0 is often a quick and easy way to make them look better. Changing gamma is really just a simple way of adjusting curves - setting it below 1.0 makes the dark parts darker and increases the contrast in the bright parts. Here I adjusted gamma to 0.7 and bumped the saturation and contrast a bit.



At the risk of sounding stupid.... setting the gamma???

karmabreeze I'm checking the camera now to see if I can change the saturation and I shoot raw. Maybe the camera can help me out a bit :)


If you shoot raw don't worry about your in camera settings you can adjust that stuff while converting the raw files.
 08/29/2006 11:54:11 PM · #20
Originally posted by Elvis_L:
Originally posted by liltritter:
Originally posted by viajero:
With flowers just setting the gamma to something below 1.0 is often a quick and easy way to make them look better. Changing gamma is really just a simple way of adjusting curves - setting it below 1.0 makes the dark parts darker and increases the contrast in the bright parts. Here I adjusted gamma to 0.7 and bumped the saturation and contrast a bit.



At the risk of sounding stupid.... setting the gamma???

karmabreeze I'm checking the camera now to see if I can change the saturation and I shoot raw. Maybe the camera can help me out a bit :)


If you shoot raw don't worry about your in camera settings you can adjust that stuff while converting the raw files.


There's no need to recover a shot if you shoot it properly in the first place. ;-)
 08/29/2006 11:56:36 PM · #21
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
There's no need to recover a shot if you shoot it properly in the first place. ;-)


Ever so true!! The best bet is ALWAYS get the best possible shot out of the camera. Study your manual modes and learn which settings work best for a shot. The less ammount of post processing you can do, the better!
 08/29/2006 11:56:53 PM · #22
Originally posted by liltritter:
flat, and boring and dull? I look at pictures others shoot and ps and they are so vivid and beautiful! Is it post processing that I have to work on or ?? An example.....



It looks 1000xs better in real life


Nothing wrong with this photo other than it looks real. Natural looking sky, colors, shadows. Not saying you can't edit it to suit whatever you have in mind, but if this is straight from the camera you took a fine shot.
 08/30/2006 09:00:46 AM · #23
A lot of people just tried to enhance the picture when I feel it really needs to be cropped.

There are no clouds in the sky, it is all dead space. The flower is the subject and it's being bored to death by all the blue. It really should have been a closeup of the flower which would be much more interesting unless the sky had been active in some way with nice fluffy white clouds or such.
 08/30/2006 11:41:17 AM · #24
ummmm I cloned the clouds out.... thought I would hear its too busy. LOLOL
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/07/2025 02:26:57 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/07/2025 02:26:57 PM EDT.