Photoshop

[aperture]

So, how well can people here use photoshop for tweaking and/or drastic changes?

and how often are you guys using PS?

[DonSchap]

Photoshop represents your "digital darkroom." Where the film-photographer had to rely on light tricks and timing, to treat the film grains of emulsions and prints, the digital-photographer relies on pixel-shifting with this tool.

How important is it? You cannot graduate with the current "Photography Certificate" without taking at least one course in how to use it. You usually have two. Not having some level of Photoshop is tantamount to shooting with a "Polaroid" SX-70 camera ... where you have no real options to what you print. It is what it is ... good, bad or ugly.

The Adobe Photoshop-standard allows you to refine, define and redefine your images in ways that go far beyond the days of darkroom imaging. Obviously, the photographer should routinely do his/her level-best to minimize the need for Photoshop improvement, but the point will still be to have it to put the finishing touches on your final product.

Just wait until you realize that your work needs to be "Color Managed", also. Now, we're talkin' a whole new headache. A better LCD monitor (easily a $1000), a Colorimeter ($250), a Spectrophotometer (another $1000), a better printer ($2800) ... oh, how those investments in your photography swell up to proportions you hadn't even considered! :eek:

To heck with the cost of the mirror flippin' camera ... now, we're going to publication ... and then you have to ask, "Just where will this publication be viewed?" Lighting makes a difference everywhere.

It is a rare shot, indeed, that couldn't use a little improvement. Believe it.

Good luck with your enhancement tool. :D

[D Thompson]

So, how well can people here use photoshop for tweaking and/or drastic changes?

and how often are you guys using PS?
I can find my way around it. ;) Pretty much every image gets something in ACR or CS3 or both.

[aperture]

I've been using photoshop for about 3 years now, was just curious if alot of people used its capabilities alot like I do :P

[AdamW]

I can find my way around it. ;) Pretty much every image gets something in ACR or CS3 or both.

Ditto. I shoot RAW, so it has to go through at least ACR. At the minimum, I crop and sharpen. Often a great deal more.

It's kinda like asking a film photographer, "how often do you use a darkroom?"

[erichlund]

Since I make no money from photography, I don't choose to put that much money into the software. So I use CaptureNX, and if I have to do a little extra, I'll use Paint Shop Pro by JASC...er...Corel. I also recently picked up Noised Ninja to fix some :o:o:o issues :o:o:o in some photos I did for family.

I've also added ViewNX, but that's free, so it doesn't count against the cost of things.

From a process standpoint, I now do the following:

Organize photos into directories
Create Master Backup on Offline storage (USB Hard Drive)
Open in ViewNX

Set ratings and codes, and trash the junk.
Batch process the things ViewNX can handle (I'm still learning here, it's new)
open photos in CaptureNX for additional editing
CaptureNX

Specific photo edits like setting B&W points, color correction, etc.
If no noise or additional work needed, versioning and sharpening

Certain things may be done differently in different versions, and with NX, you can not only undo anything that's been done to a photo, but you can also create versions, so you can have one version for direct print and another for web, another for computer screen, another for 8" LCD displayPrinting/Posting of final versions
Save versions needing noise or PSP work to TIFF

Noise Ninja

Supposedly, I can do NN work with the Photoshop plugin in Paint Shop Pro, but I haven't got that working quite right yet, so I do NN next, and save again as TIFF or JPG (if final)
Paint Shop Pro X2

Special feature editing
final sharpening
saving to final file type
printing/posting

There are a few steps missing, but you get the idea.

[D Thompson]

I've been using photoshop for about 3 years now, was just curious if alot of people used its capabilities alot like I do :P

I've used PS4, PS5, PS7, CS2, and am now on CS3. Like AdamW, I only shoot RAW so some sort of processing is necessary. I've used a few of the other RAW converters, but I like the results I get with ACR, and especially with ACR4.1. I'm even liking Bridge CS3.

[TheObiJuan]

I just started using Lightroom today.
I really enjoy it.

[aperture]

photoshop is such a powerful tool, for example...

http://desi.thriceshy.com/viewer.php?id=7970the_gandering_strangerori.jpg

to

http://shivergfx.deviantart.com/art/The-Gandering-Stranger-60202372

[erichlund]

photoshop is such a powerful tool, for example...

http://desi.thriceshy.com/viewer.php?id=7970the_gandering_strangerori.jpg

to

http://shivergfx.deviantart.com/art/The-Gandering-Stranger-60202372

I'm not seeing the power in that example. I can do that in one step in CaptureNX (about -2EV). Of course, in the same single step, I could have set a white control point in the overexposed areas and and recovered those, while not driving the shaded areas to underexposure.

Mind you, I'm not saying that Photoshop is not a powerful tool. I'm just saying this is not a good example.

Now, if Photoshop could have done something for the motion blur of the oriental woman in the center of the photo (main subject...ie gandering stranger???), that would have been something.

[aperture]

sorry I jus dont believe you could do anything like that in 1 step and dare you to try it

[erichlund]

sorry I jus dont believe you could do anything like that in 1 step and dare you to try it

If you're talking about the little quote, you're right, that would take something like Paint Shop Pro, since CaptureNX doesn't have that.

As far as the image, setting white and black points is the work of seconds. I can name three tools in CaptureNX that can do so, just off the top of my head: U-Point Technology control points, Levels and Curves and D-Lighting.

Also, I'm not that familiar with Photoshop, but I'm sure they have a levels and curves tool that is equally adept at setting white and black points.

However, the point I was trying to make was that while the highlights in the image were restored, the shadow regions of the photo were equally adjusted, resulting in significant underexposure and loss of detail in the shadows. This was not necessary, and could have been prevented by setting a floor for the black point.

[aperture]

that isnt exactly 1 step is it :rolleyes:

the whole point in the image [as i know the photographer and his style] is a over shadow, by isolating the shadows to pure black and adding levels to boost it. as well as this, the tones and mood is harder to change than it looks, believe me, I've seen all the steps.

MY point was how powerful PS can be changing a 'snapshot' type photo into something visually appealing

[TheObiJuan]

I could make a macro to do that in one step.
But that's not the point. :p

[Turn]

I could make a macro to do that in one step.
But that's not the point. :p

sometimes we don't have the time to change the settings to what we want..

photoshop is such a powerful tool, for example...

http://desi.thriceshy.com/viewer.php?id=7970the_gandering_strangerori.jpg

to

http://shivergfx.deviantart.com/art/The-Gandering-Stranger-60202372

a good example yes, although there are other examples that make you go wow!


for me its all about layers. (Been using photoshop for 2years, I've read many many tutorials and books and I can say that its all about layers!)

(I make a new layer for each edit, I seriously recommend it do it now)
Gradient Map -->change layer blending to soft light
Curves-->usually push the Blue down so I get a stronger yellow
What I've been trying to do is to nail cross processing, shooting in RAW definitely helps a lot.

[Bynx]

MY point was how powerful PS can be changing a 'snapshot' type photo into something visually appealing

I cant agree more with this statement aperture. I keep ruffling peoples feathers here trying to point this out.

[Turn]

I cant agree more with this statement aperture. I keep ruffling peoples feathers here trying to point this out.

:)

Original
http://beachrockz4eva.deviantart.com/art/Aenocrypolis-Original-33791492
Edit
http://beachrockz4eva.deviantart.com/art/Forsaken-33791026

back in my earlier photoshop days
I no longer sharpen or do anything that drastic.

[erichlund]

that isnt exactly 1 step is it :rolleyes:

the whole point in the image [as i know the photographer and his style] is a over shadow, by isolating the shadows to pure black and adding levels to boost it. as well as this, the tones and mood is harder to change than it looks, believe me, I've seen all the steps.

MY point was how powerful PS can be changing a 'snapshot' type photo into something visually appealing

Well, I spent about 5 minutes at home playing with the original jpg. It was easy to match the exposure, but on my calibrated monitor, I was able to tell you did something with color also (My monitor at work isn't so good with color). That I did not have time to play with. So, you are right. Not one step.

After I made my adjustments and was pretty close to the same black and white points as your photo, I looked at the histogram. Wow. Perhaps that's why the photo doesn't appeal to me (which is merely a matter of taste and not a criticism).

I'm usually trying to maximize the dynamic range of my photos, and the levels I had to set to match your photo left a LOT of DR on the cutting room floor. That may be the wrong term, but there was lots of room on the right side of the histogram that's not being used. Still, like I said, that's a choice, and I have to respect the fact that the choice matches what you were trying to achieve with the photo.