Photography post processing..

Plug your music, photography, graphics, shows of any kind or other creative works.

Moderated By: mods

User avatar
DanHeron
.
.
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 7:48 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Photography post processing..

Post by DanHeron »

I was looking at this guys photos earlier: http://www.samhurdphotography.com/
► Show Spoiler
His photos are all digital but through post processing have a great analog feel to them, without looking like the cheesy iPhone app stuff.
Usually I like to do as little processing as possible but sometimes they come out of the camera looking really crap so I'm trying to improve my processing skills.

This is one I just did:
Image
Bigger (click it):
► Show Spoiler
It was taken out of a window (mountain train!) so there are reflections which are a bit annoying, but I think it looks cool. A million times better.
A bit of detail lost in the lowest clouds. Right now its a bit of a random process, using the curves and color balance. And a bit of grain. hmm. Hopefully it will become a more controlled process.

Anyone like using Photoshop and stuff with there photos? Got any before/after images?
User avatar
gaybear
Inventor of the Blues
Posts: 9697
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:52 pm
Location: hard corvallis, oregon
Contact:

Post by gaybear »

ii hardly notice the reflection in the second pic, and probably wouldn't if i hadn't had the first as reference
plopswagon wrote: Drunk and disorderly conduct is the cradle of democracy.
User avatar
DanHeron
.
.
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 7:48 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Post by DanHeron »

Yeah it's not too noticable. I didn't try removing it at all. Maybe with the clone tool in photoshop i could get rid of it.
User avatar
Ankhanu
.
.
Posts: 2995
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:51 pm
Location: Nova Scotia
Contact:

Re: Photography post processing..

Post by Ankhanu »

DanHeron wrote: Usually I like to do as little processing as possible but sometimes they come out of the camera looking really crap so I'm trying to improve my processing skills.
That's where I am... though less on the trying to improve my skills part.

We've got an informal camera club thing goin on in my area that I attend from time to time. Last time I was there we set up a little task for the next meeting: we randomly chose other members to send an unprocessed photo to, then we'd do the post on whoever's shot we received, print it out and talk about them at the next meeting. Should give me a little more experience with post once I get my shot to manipulate.
ekwatts wrote:That's American cinema, that is. Fucking sparkles.
Donate to Ankhanu Press
User avatar
cobascis
.
.
Posts: 3831
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 4:31 pm

Post by cobascis »

I have Photoshop and Lightroom.

Hardly know how to use either of them -- ha. Just got a DSLR and have it shooting RAW so would very much like to know more about post processing.
User avatar
cobascis
.
.
Posts: 3831
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 4:31 pm

Post by cobascis »

Image
Image
User avatar
Lucamo
.
.
Posts: 1689
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:29 pm
Location: Peterborough, Ontario

Post by Lucamo »

Basically I am useless at post-processing.\

But I still use film.

And Film does two things. Either A) raises contrast artificially, or B) Lowers contrast and introduces grain.

Both look so much better then digital.
theshadowofseattle wrote: Maybe it's not the shemale porn in your post that matters. Maybe it's the shemale porn in your heart.
User avatar
DanHeron
.
.
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 7:48 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Post by DanHeron »

cobascis wrote:
► Show Spoiler
These look cool.
Personally I think a bit too much contrast, but it's a big imrovement over the original image.

It's weird when you make changes to a photo then look back at the original and realise how low the saturation was and stuff.
Lucamo wrote:Basically I am useless at post-processing.\

But I still use film.

And Film does two things. Either A) raises contrast artificially, or B) Lowers contrast and introduces grain.

Both look so much better then digital.
Yeah, I still use film. Both for the image results and the cameras. They are more fun to use than digital cameras, and you can get some amazing second hand bargains with film cameras. I recently got an Olympus 35 RC - a 35mm compact rangefinder. Almost as small as a point and shoot digi cam, and came with a flash and leather case. All for like £50.

The only problem is I've noticed developing/printing getting a lot more expensive.
User avatar
cobascis
.
.
Posts: 3831
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 4:31 pm

Post by cobascis »

Original are hidden*
► Show Spoiler
Image

Very subtle but I added some film like grain/noise in photoshop.
► Show Spoiler
Image

Very over the top gimmicky, but it was fun!
User avatar
DanHeron
.
.
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 7:48 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Post by DanHeron »

Last one is cool! Works well with that image.
User avatar
cur
.
.
Posts: 7298
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 8:58 pm

Post by cur »

Took a pic with my cell phone at a concert the other night. Crappy phone pic, but wanted to print the pic due to it's content. So did a little water color filter and tinkering to my liking and came up with this.

Image

That is Rob Schneider of Apples in Stereo playing my brothers Apples in Stereo painted Danelectro guitar through my amp. So I was able to get a nice 16" by 20" print to give to my brother out of the deal. Printed up nice.


Image

Image
Image