Don I tried your trick

[sparkie1263]

Don I tried your trick and don't see any change. Here are the two what do you think??

Original

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2049/2465880099_578f03fd61.jpg


Fixed

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/2465880515_86abbc6f94.jpg

[DonSchap]

Okay ... here's your original
35781

My technique
35782

My technique on steroids
35783

My technique on steroids w sharpening
35784

Then some real out there filtration
35785

[sparkie1263]

They look good. So I messed it up. I will try again later.

[DonSchap]

It takes time ... experiment. :D

[sparkie1263]

After you invert and apply the filter you just have to invert it back again right???

[DonSchap]

Uh, no ... you're done after the inverse correction is made.

The invert is just to capture all the area outside the subject you've outlined ... to the border. Then you give that area the gaussian blur effect.

It should be done on the background layer, not an "adjustment" layer. If you do try to do it on an adjustment layer, it will have no effect.

Then SAVE the file to something other than the original filename.

[sparkie1263]

After I allpied the filter the image still looked inversed so I changed it back. I will try later.
Thanks Frank

[DonSchap]

Frank,

Just to be clear about this ...

"Inverse" is a selection option:
Under the Select Menu

All
Deselect
...
Inverse <---

Reviewing my earlier posted instruction:

You select the subject with the "Polygonal Lasso Tool." This is a delicate operation and should not be hurried, in order to make precise outlines.
You carefully outline your subject (keep it as close as 200% (maybe 300%) will get you.) and then, when you have that subject plane entirely outlined ...
Go to the "Select" menu item
Choose "Inverse"
You then go to the "Filter" menu item ... "Blur" - "Gaussian Blur" - radius: 2.0 (vary for intensity) - and "OK".


Suddenly, the background is now bokeh'd.

[sparkie1263]

I will give it a try again.
Thanks
Frank

[DonSchap]

Hey, I'm not doing anything magical, here ...

35814

it just looks that way.

[sparkie1263]

Don I tried it again but I don't see any difference do you. I tried to bump up the blur to 80 percent and I seen it change but I cannot see the change at 2.5 percent.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2175/2468409737_a014e9cbf5.jpg

Edit: I tried it again and bumped it up to 10 percent and it worked.
Thanks Don

[DonSchap]

Welcome to the world of "pseudo-photography." That is ... you have gotten a relatively decent image to work with. Now, your digital darkroom must get to work ... LOL :D

[sparkie1263]

Just think of all the cash I can save by not having to buy a good piece of glass. LOL

[DonSchap]

One thing to consider is the real element. As much as we like bokeh ... sensor noise keeps us honest. An f/4 lens is STILL an f/4 lens. You simply cannot get the light that you can from an f/2.8 or better, at lower ISOs ... hence, the noise monster gets you indoors.

As long as you keep shooting outdoors ... then, yeah ... you can probably sneek "enhanced" bokeh (shallow DOF) past them ... if you are good about where the subject is standing and that you take into consideration the focus plane of the subject, if they come in contact with the floor or the wall. Something like: You cannot have a hand in focus and the wall they're touching sudden blurred out. It's unnatural.

Same thing goes for the grass they are standing on ... shoes in focus, blades of surrounding grass not? You have to remember the focal plane and account for it, to maintain the illusion of a better lens.

Remember: there is nothing like critically sharp focus. You can always dumb it down ... but, you cannot improve it. Crappy focus from the get go ... the image is always crappy. So ... shooting f/8 (when you can) is a "forgiving shot", due to the wide depth of field (DOF) ... and then you can bokeh out everything you want out of focus to make it look like an f/2.8 lens. Best part ... more of the original shot is in focus and allows you to be a little "sloppier."

Try some shots at f/8 and do the technique. It really makes you appreciate digital even more.

[sparkie1263]

Nobody but you would even notice.LOL I just went to KEH Site and found a Minotla 100 F2.8 MACRO for 350.00. How is that price?

[DonSchap]

I just went to KEH Site and found a Minotla 100 F2.8 MACRO for 350.00. How is that price?

The original price was $500 ... but, that is really the least of your concerns. Has the lens been dropped? That's the real issue. Price is secondary. You need some assurances, like if when you receive it and you find that it has been damaged or just works poorly (gets stuck or binds during focus) ... it goes back. :(

[sparkie1263]

I hate buying used things. I will wait and go with one of your suggestions.

[DonSchap]

When, if you know your seller ... that makes a lot of difference. Also, if you get a hellaciously good price, a lot can be forgiven ... and even submitted for repair, as my Minolta AF 50mm f/1.4 was. I got it for a reasonable tag, even with the repair, but at $300 ... it's too close. Like I said, guaranteed return ... like to a camera store ... is the best way to do it. The old "try it/buy it" sale.

[sparkie1263]

Second try. How did I do teach? LOL

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2096/2469918918_842d1c480a.jpg

[DonSchap]

:cool:Second try. How did I do teach? LOL

You have the technique down, but once again ... remember the plane of focus. That one pedal, sticking out, under the buggie's butt ... has to be sharp, too. It cannot be blurred, because it is at the same distance from the lens as the bug itself. So you isolate it - as well as the bug ... BEFORE you do the technique ... to allow it to remain sharp, also.

That's the only part of the flower that needs that kind of attention.

[sparkie1263]

Don You have some eye because I still don't see the difference. I will keep trying.
I think I said this a few times You Are The Man LOL
Thanks Frank

[DonSchap]

Well ... I was messing with an image I came across of the "Sideshow Iron Man Comiquette" ... and Photoshop certainly provided the ability to merge some "background" to give it some life.


35872


I figured in light of the current theatrical release ... it prints up nice for the kids.

I used this dramatic cloud shot I got last year, right overhead, at the college ... handy background, I think.
35864

Frank, you'll be happy to know I took this with the SONY A100 & an older Tokina AF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 lens. This is a color image, too! :eek:

I took five of these dramatic cloud formations, but posted only three. The rest of them are at this link (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=209360&postcount=163) on the forum

[sparkie1263]

Nice job as usual Don. I just got an invite to this new site it seems nice thought you might want to check it out.

http://photographyatnewenglandmoments.com/index.php

[DonSchap]

Nice place ... good idea. I posted some of my recent HDR work there ... to add a little more color to the sight. LOL.