How would you PP this?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fozzybear

Fozzybear

Suspended / Banned
Messages
312
Name
Kev
Edit My Images
Yes
Firstly, I presume it's OK to link to a NEF download on Dropbox? Let me know if it isn't.

What would you do (cropping, exposure etc) with the following NEF (other than deleting)? It's ike all the wrongs of photography wrapped up into one photo! Unfortunately I was limited with lens and location.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ghaqq34dgk6lg3k/DSC_0190.NEF?dl=0

I ended up cropping it closely and making a few changes in Lightroom. I didn't know when to stop though and ended up making a bit of a mess of things. My aim was to try and make the horse 'pop' and to try and take some distraction away from the busy background.

Recorder by Kevin Foster, on Flickr

Again, let me know if the Dropbox link isn't allowed.
 
I would be tempted to try and "cut out" the main subject and blur the background a bit, possibly motion blur to add "speed" to the horse, it could be a bit fiddly though.
 
swanseamale47 said:
I would be tempted to try and "cut out" the main subject and blur the background a bit, possibly motion blur to add "speed" to the horse, it could be a bit fiddly though.
Click to expand...

A quick 5 minute job and I've got this. It was a rush job before I go to bed so there are some rough edges. I'll have a proper try tomorrow.

It always looks unnatural to me though. I was using the quick selection tool in Photoshop. Is there any other more accurate way of selecting the horse?



Thanks for the idea.
 
Last edited:
Fozzybear said:
A quick 5 minute job and I've got this. It was a rush job before I go to bed so there are some rough edges. I'll have a proper try tomorrow.

It always looks unnatural to me though. I was using the quick selection tool in Photoshop. Is there any other more accurate way of selecting the horse?



Thanks for the idea.
Click to expand...

That looks pretty good for a quick play Kev.
 
Only kidding obviously :)

image.jpg


I think your opening photo is fine though.

Gaz
 
Last edited:
12808-1440167280-7b9e0730ef1891e7164c32816910a670.jpg

:)
Rhodese.
 
Last edited:
I like that cargo.

Did you just use the quick selection tool and copy and paste onto a new layer (and background image)?
 
Last edited:
Once you have the selection cut out - which you'd need for the blurring - you can instantly swapto anything you want behind if the lighting is something close
 
Hey thats great you folks liked this. Yes you got it correct I used the quick selection tool and pasted to new layer.Then off memory made the horse n rider a selection inversed and pasted into a background. Transformed it to fit and place as you can move it around behind the horse(with paste into command). Then faffed about with blur tools/levels to make it look something like.
Took about 30 mins. Thats faffing as I am not an expert at this but can use pshop to a level.
There is a link to the psd here if I did it correctly. https://www.dropbox.com/s/xpnbsmrzwoe0adr/10.psd?dl=0

Gaz
 
Last edited:
I've had another go trying to be a bit more accurate using the quick selection tool. Unfortunately there's always going to be a 'halo' effect on the layer underneath. Cutting it rather than copying would probably help.

I used the motion blur option this time but don't it looks much different than my 1st attempt.

 
cargo said:
Hey thats great you folks liked this. Yes you got it correct I used the quick selection tool and pasted to new layer.Then off memory made the horse n rider a selection inversed and pasted into a background. Transformed it to fit and place as you can move it around behind the horse(with paste into command). Then faffed about with blur tools/levels to make it look something like.
Took about 30 mins. Thats faffing as I am not an expert at this but can use pshop to a level.
There is a link to the psd here if I did it correctly. https://www.dropbox.com/s/xpnbsmrzwoe0adr/10.psd?dl=0

Gaz
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing Gaz, I'm
Gonna have a try at that with some of my own images tomorrow I think.
 
Have finally settled on this one. I took a bit more time with it.



I cropped it a bit more.
Used the quick selection tool around the horse and jockey. I zoomed right in and reduced brush size/hardness.
Copy and then paste onto a new layer.
Used motion blur on the bottom (background) layer.

A definite improvement on the one in my OP.

 
Last edited:
Cool job on the last/final edit.

Gaz
 
Now you've had some fun and wasted huge amounts of time, perhaps you would like to consider using this as a photography lesson instead of a PP lesson?




Use a longer shutter speed next time and you'll not need to waste time sitting on your arse at a computer.
 
Thanks cargo and PB.

Pookeyhead said:
Now you've had some fun and wasted huge amounts of time, perhaps you would like to consider using this as a photography lesson instead of a PP lesson?




Use a longer shutter speed next time and you'll not need to waste time sitting on your arse at a computer.
Click to expand...

Ah well, at least it possibly helped others as well as me with their Photoshop skills.

It was such a friendly helpful thread until you showed your face.

(Where's the 'Nescafe handshake' emoticon when you need it?)
 
Last edited:
Fine.... Spend time processing your mistakes out instead of learning from them.. No skin off my nose. As usual being nice is more important than actually learning stuff.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Fine.... Spend time processing your mistakes out instead of learning from them.. No skin off my nose. As usual being nice is more important than actually learning stuff.
Click to expand...

It's your confrontational style of posting that I take exception to.

I was reading a thread elsewhere on here yesterday and noticed you could start an argument in a telephone box. A few manners wouldn't go amiss.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Now you've had some fun and wasted huge amounts of time, perhaps you would like to consider using this as a photography lesson instead of a PP lesson?




Use a longer shutter speed next time and you'll not need to waste time sitting on your arse at a computer.
Click to expand...

If you done that the main subject would be blurred unless panning wouldn't it?
 
Fozzybear said:
It's your confrontational style of posting that I take exception to.

I was reading a thread elsewhere on here yesterday and noticed you could start an argument in a telephone box. A few manners wouldn't go amiss.
Click to expand...

I asked a question: Would you rather waste time on your arse at a computer, or take better photographs that require less time sitting on your arse at a computer?

What's made you angry, is that all the other posts are pandering to your needs.. paying attention to your image, and making you feel nice and warm inside. Mine made you realise that you're spending more time on your arse retouching images than getting out there correcting your image's problems with a camera - becoming a batter photographer. That made you feel bad, and now you want the nasty man to go away... yeah, I get it.


OK.... Let's try again....

Hey!.. great efforts on trying to blur that background... it really gives the image more power a real impression of speed!!! Good job!!!! :) :) :) Who wants to spend ages practising their panning technique when we can do it on a computer, right?
 
Last edited:
Fozzy, Like what you've done with the image. The final touch for me would be a little noise reduction (Luminance) in Camera Raw

gxurvzV.jpg
 
Pookeyhead said:
I asked a question: Would you rather waste time on your arse at a computer, or take better photographs that require less time sitting on your arse at a computer?

What's made you angry, is that all the other posts are pandering to your needs.. paying attention to your image, and making you feel nice and warm inside. Mine made you realise that you're spending more time on your arse retouching images than getting out there correcting your image's problems with a camera - becoming a batter photographer. That made you feel bad, and now you want the nasty man to go away... yeah, I get it.


OK.... Let's try again....

Hey!.. great efforts on trying to blur that background... it really gives the image more power a real impression of speed!!! Good job!!!! :) :) :) Who wants to spend ages practising their panning technique when we can do it on a computer, right?
Click to expand...


You really need to calm down mate and watch how you reply to people on these forums, every time I see you in a thread I tend to dodge it, you are very confrontational and seriously have no need for it on a forum.
 
LBJNBA said:
You really need to calm down mate and watch how you reply to people on these forums, every time I see you in a thread I tend to dodge it, you are very confrontational and seriously have no need for it on a forum.
Click to expand...


I'm perfectly calm, and I don't care whether you read my posts or not. There's nothing confrontational in my posts... I'm just giving some plain truths: Sitting on you arse retouching out mistakes caused by poor photography does not make you a better photographer.

If you think that's confrontational... tough.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
I'm perfectly calm, and I don't care whether you read my posts or not. There's nothing confrontational in my posts... I'm just giving some plain truths: Sitting on you arse retouching out mistakes caused by poor photography does not make you a better photographer.

If you think that's confrontational... tough.
Click to expand...
Bet you were one of those die hards who have only just switched from film. Whether you like it or not post processing is a significant element of digital photography/images now. Why come onto a thread and go out of your way to cause an arguement? Your post does come across confrontational.
 
For me looks as if you are going around in circles and have produced an image in post #17 that is over sharpened and over saturated and has had the vibrance increased somewhat

the edges around the jockeys back and head are strange, halos? and distract as they are straight in front of the viewers "eye"

noise has been introduced, (exaggerated), all over the horse, thru processing

Can you post the original image as it must be better than all the image edits above

I'd start again

IMHO
 
Last edited:
An interesting discussion.


I must admit that I did a very quick edit at the outset of this thread that I didn't post and decided that if it were me I would re-shoot it. Some interesting edits but I still go with my gut feeling.
 
BillN_33 said:
the edges around the jockeys back and head are strange, halos? and distract as they are straight in front of the viewers "eye"
Click to expand...
The halos are probably produced when the background was blurred. If the jockey was not cloned out of the background, he would be included in the blurring effect and "creep" out from behind himself in the sharp version. Using a totally different background, however, would not give this effect.

The next thing to do is to add the winning post.
 
Last edited:
alsos said:
Bet you were one of those die hards who have only just switched from film. Whether you like it or not post processing is a significant element of digital photography/images now. Why come onto a thread and go out of your way to cause an arguement? Your post does come across confrontational.
Click to expand...

I don't particularly want to defend Pookey as he is more than capable of doing this himself. I would say though that he probably knows more about PP and Photoshop (and photography film and digital) than most on this forum.
He is also extremely helpful if you bother to ask.
 
ianp5a said:
The halos are probably produced when the background was blurred.
Click to expand...

True, but could also be due to oversharpening which can cause damage to pixels, a colour fringe or halo effect. A certain amount of noise reduction will help but wont remove the halo. For me, making major changes to a photo is a nonstarter. I only use camera raw for pp work, if it needs more than that I think it's best to reshoot the image.
 
DerekL said:
I don't particularly want to defend Pookey as he is more than capable of doing this himself. I would say though that he probably knows more about PP and Photoshop (and photography film and digital) than most on this forum.
He is also extremely helpful if you bother to ask.
Click to expand...
Personally don't know him or have had the opportunity to ask, I was just telling it how I saw it, he has no need to defend himself it wasn't an attack.
 
I can not see any reason to spend so much time on an obvious discard, except as an exercise in PP.
The jockey is extremely poorly lit, and the background we already know about. No amount of PP is going to lift it above its present level.

There would be a lot to gain thinking about how to approach a similar shooting opportunity in the future.
camera position, shutter speed, aperture, drive setting and panning technique come directly to mind.

As does researching how other photographers have handled similar situations in this sport, and what a Good, racing shot actually needs to succeed
 
alsos said:
Bet you were one of those die hards who have only just switched from film.
Click to expand...

Started shooting digital in 2002.. and I still shoot film.


alsos said:
Whether you like it or not post processing is a significant element of digital photography/images now.
Click to expand...

Using it to correct for mistakes caused by poor camera craft is, and should not be though. No excuse for that.


alsos said:
Why come onto a thread and go out of your way to cause an arguement? Your post does come across confrontational.
Click to expand...

I didn't "go out of my way". I'm regularly in here expressing this opinion whenever I see threads where processing is being touted as the way to correct poor photography.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top