How do you get this effect?

Kryptix

Kryptix

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,730
Edit My Images
Yes
http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/1378/giggsykp6.jpg

That image is only an example. I'm aware it was done in Photoshop but I see so many pictures on here how people manage to get this effect with no image editing (I believe?).

How do you do it?

I have a 450D and I've looked through all the settings and I can't figure out how to capture only a certain colour. I also can't figure out how to shoot in grey scale. :thinking:

Is it possible with no image editing?
 
Kryptix said:
Is it possible with no image editing?
Click to expand...

Nope

Take colour pic.
Open in photoshop
duplicate layer
convert to black and white
select eraser tool
erase Giggs (Oh how I wish....)
Hey presto, he's in colour and the rest of the world remains grey

/edit - that's the short version and may have been a bit abrupt. If you need any help, PM me and I can put together a quick walkthrough for you. Its easy enough once you know what's involved.
 
Ah I see.

I'm kind of upset that I can't do it without any editing but I'm happy that I'll be able to do it in the future.

Every photo I saw with it done I used to think 'Wow', but now I see it as kind-of tacky. :shake:

Thanks a lot for your reply. :)
 
Tacky?

Huh. Well, yeah. This is in my top 20 on flickr



Maybe so.

MV
 
It looks really good 'n all but it now means less to me knowing it's edited on the computer. Subtle changes like you've done is fine, but any more and it starts to drift away from being a good picture and becomes more of a good edit using software. :(

All in my opinion, of course -- I still think it looks great and I'll be trying a few in the near future! :clap:
 
Kryptix said:
It looks really good 'n all but it now means less to me knowing it's edited on the computer.
Click to expand...

So in your eyes the shot would be better simply because the camera edited for you :thinking:

Its nice to have all these little tricks in camera but in reality the results are never quite as good as editing on a computer using Photoshop for example.

Thats why most people who want a Black & White shot will shoot in colour and convert later as opposed to simply selecting B&W on their camera.
 
I don't think you should think less of a photograph because it is been edited. It's all part of photography and always has been. It wasn't invented with digital. If you could do it in camera, what would the difference be? It would just be another computer editing the photo.

Selective colouring can indeed look tacky and, IMHO of course, only really works well when the colouring is quite is bold (MV's leopards work very well).
 
Guys, you've been working with SLR's too long! lol

Yes you can do it in camera, but not on the Canon SLR's.

Sony have it as a feature on the DSC's and Canon have it up to the S5.

For us "more serious" togs (I say that with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek) it's back to photoshop I'm afraid.
 
Kryptix said:
http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/1378/giggsykp6.jpg

That image is only an example. I'm aware it was done in Photoshop but I see so many pictures on here how people manage to get this effect with no image editing (I believe?).

How do you do it?

I have a 450D and I've looked through all the settings and I can't figure out how to capture only a certain colour. I also can't figure out how to shoot in grey scale. :thinking:

Is it possible with no image editing?
Click to expand...
If you do a search on Google for something like 'Selective Colouring' or words to that effect, you will come across dozens of tutorials that will explain various methods of accomplishing this effect.
 
They are Cheetahs, not Leopards....do get it right!
 
Kryptix said:
Every photo I saw with it done I used to think 'Wow', but now I see it as kind-of tacky. :shake:
Click to expand...


Tacky??

So your not taking into account any skill or knowledge required to do this but think its ok if you can just press a button and let the camera do it for you?:eek:

Selective colouring can be and often is overdone, but with the correct subject and if done sparingly can enhance and improve a photograph.

Below are two photos one of which I have converted to BW leaving the phone box red – admittedly this is only my personal choice but I think the shot is far better than the original colour picture?

Tacky? I don’t think so

edited pic

600bw.jpg


Original Colour photo

600colour.jpg
 
Kryptix said:
I'm kind of upset that I can't do it without any editing but I'm happy that I'll be able to do it in the future.
Click to expand...

I'm curious as to how you thought this could be done without editing?
 
Taken on my Canon IXUS 75 and not PP'd:

86aa8d99.jpg


Camera does all the work! Its a feature on some Canon P&S cameras, and works really well considering how easy it is to use.

Edit: Quick bit of PP in photoshop just to remove colour from the fence (done using the 2 layer method) and increased the contrast slightly:

49ad354e.jpg
 
welly said:
I'm curious as to how you thought this could be done without editing?
Click to expand...

Read my post above welly, it can be done on several manufacturers compact cameras but thankfully does not appear on DSLR's. :D:naughty:
 
AliB said:
Read my post above welly, it can be done on several manufacturers compact cameras but thankfully does not appear on DSLR's. :D:naughty:
Click to expand...

Yes but its still edited by the camera.

I think that was the point he was trying to make :thumbs:
 
Kryptix said:
I also can't figure out how to shoot in grey scale. :thinking:
Click to expand...
Page 68 and 69 of the manual will give you the answer to shooting in black and white if that's what you mean by grey scale
 
Alright guys... You don't need to jump on me.

I remember about 3 years ago when I only had a digital camera. I was so very jealous of more expensive cameras being able to blur the background when focusing on something else. Nothing I tried would enable me to do it on my rubbish digital camera.

...so, I decided to use Photoshop and blur the areas that would have blurred on a better camera. It looked very realistic as my friend had a D-SLR and took a pic in the same place and I just copied his blurring. It was faultless.

Anyway, I posted it on a forum and received good comments, and then someone spotted that I owned an old digital camera that really wouldn't get that type of effect, and instantly everyone jumped on me saying it's very tacky and real photographers wouldn't edit the photo to get their effects (and so on).

But where is the limit? Why couldn't you take an awful, over-exposed image and then use Photoshop to lighten it, and manually draw over it and highlight certain areas to make it look like filters were used and generally completely change the photo, and claim that you're a good photographer?

As I said, I really like the effect and I thought there'd be an option on my camera that was only sensitive to certain colours. I would see that as more appealing then completely editing the image on Photoshop.

Maybe it's just me...
 
badgerbaiter said:
how come just lately nearly every thread has a post in it that someone decides to take personally?
Click to expand...

I think it's the nature of forums. People generally aren't very confrontational in person, but with their made up online persona it allows them to take some of the anger they have about not saying things to people and divert it to other online personas via the internet.
I know because I'm a culprit of this too. After I've said something I look back and think, "What the hell was I thinking?!"

It's a friendly forum used for getting help, chatting with people with a similar interest, and pretty much talking about photography till your heart's content, and I think that with the growth of a forum, it initiates the sort of responses we all look at and think :thinking::nono:, and sometimes it's us who are the ones who made it.

Just now on a separate topic, I told someone to stop being facetious, and that no one was impressed. A completely hostile comment, with a perfectly reasonable backing behind it, but just spoken in completely the wrong tone of voice (tone of text? :thinking:).
Thankfully they took it well, and I feel guilty about it now, but we live and learn.

Back to the topic at hand!

I think selective colour can be used for wonderful effect. Cyb, that photo is stunning, and just has little impact in full colour - a perfect example of the use of this technique. However, there is no denying that in some shots it can look a little naff.
 
badgerbaiter said:
how come just lately nearly every thread has a post in it that someone decides to take personally?
Click to expand...

You picking on me again :suspect::suspect::suspect:





:lol:

But yes, tempers are fraying in the cold weather aren't they :(

DD
 
Kryptix said:
Why couldn't you take an awful, over-exposed image and then use Photoshop to lighten it, and manually draw over it and highlight certain areas to make it look like filters were used and generally completely change the photo, and claim that you're a good photographer?
Click to expand...

When I first got my DSLR I was against the idea of using software to make alterations to my photos.
I suppose I was harping back to the good old days of using film cameras.
Once I realised I could use software to correct things such as WB, vignetting and barrel distortion I started to realised the benefits.
I'm still not too keen on using apps like Photoshop to manipulate my photos but I say good luck to those who do.
The problem I have is when I look at a photo and it's blatant that Photoshop has been used I can't help but think it's just 'digital manipulation' rather than thinking about looking at a photo.
I suppose I can’t help but think of photos of famous people that we all know they have been ‘Photoshopped’
Each to their own and I am not against anyone doing this at all it’s just something I do try to avoid myself.
 
Kryptix said:
It looks really good 'n all but it now means less to me knowing it's edited on the computer. Subtle changes like you've done is fine, but any more and it starts to drift away from being a good picture and becomes more of a good edit using software. :(

All in my opinion, of course -- I still think it looks great and I'll be trying a few in the near future! :clap:
Click to expand...

As far as I am concerned, it's another skill to use in photography! And one that I am glad i'm learning. There are so many ***!!:nuts:


I have a photographic memory that was never developed
 
hashcake said:
The problem I have is when I look at a photo and it's blatant that Photoshop has been used I can't help but think it's just 'digital manipulation' rather than thinking about looking at a photo.
Click to expand...



Whilst I see your point some of us do look at it from the other direction.

For example my B/W snow picture above is what I had in mind when I shot the colour picture. I had already decided to convert it to black & white leaving the phone box in red –it’s what I visualised when I took the original picture.

Maybe this is not quite the way to look at things but if you were able to stand next to Constable while he was painting the Hay Waggon and you took a photo and he had to manually create a picture –who would be cheating?
I think perhaps back then the camera may have been seen as ‘tacky’?

Now I’m most certainly not trying to compare my or anyone else images to such great artists, but I (and many others) often take pictures knowing how and what I’m going to do the get what I feel I can see but cannot do without some image manipulation.I look to do things with my photo that I can’t do with just a camera. Perhaps I could do it with a studio set up, filters, lighting, etc and a lot of others stuff that I simply cannot afford but can create on my pc

We often read on here it’s not the camera it’s the eye behind the lens and I believe that can apply to using various ‘off camera’ editing programmes too.
 
Hi I removed the colour on this one except the front wing and number '1'.

It was used on a stand at the Autosport show in Germany a couple of years ago because the company thought it was a bit different from the normal F1 pictures :shrug:

img_1704.jpg
 
It's been said many times and just for the record, I'll say it again. The use of photoshop just replaces the use of darkroon techniques used in the developing process. Like dodge and burn, sharpening, compensating for exposure, cropping. There was nothing wrong with using them in the good old days and I see nothing wrong with using them now. It's the final image that matters and the fact that it pleases the person taking the shot.

Did the use of CGI make Jurassic Park a tacky film?
 
I don't think it looks tacky; it can give a new dimension to a previously mediocure image...

n502157922_1266645_5873.jpg


n502157922_1271963_4567.jpg


n502157922_1271966_6096.jpg


I do think however selective colouring is very much down to personal taste, like some other editing techniques that are quite controversial!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top