Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 47

Thread: Photo critique please.

  1. #31
    user
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Algarve, Portugal
    Posts
    3,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelF View Post
    Photoshop (I'm assuming that's what you're asking!)
    Is it the full "Photoshop CS" (now on version 4) or "Photoshop Elements" (latest version is 7 for a PC, 6 for a Mac)?

    Colin

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,410

    Default

    Is it the full "Photoshop CS" (now on version 4) or "Photoshop Elements" (latest version is 7 for a PC, 6 for a Mac)?
    Sorry, no idea! Ah, looked, it is "Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0"

  3. #33
    Senior Member michael23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    derbyshire uk
    Age
    31
    Posts
    784

    Default

    does neat image work with any of the elements series?

  4. #34
    user
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Algarve, Portugal
    Posts
    3,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michael23 View Post
    does neat image work with any of the elements series?
    Yes, it does. I never had PS Elements 5, I went from v4 to v6. I think that you would find the new features of v7 (available for PC but not Mac) are a great improvement on v5; I am nor sure whether you can buy an "upgrade" (via download) or if you have to but the whole package again. The Adobe site should tell you.

    Colin

  5. #35
    user
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Algarve, Portugal
    Posts
    3,384

    Default

    Michael,

    Neat Image is not the only NR program available. The other two front runners are "Noiseware" and "Noise Ninja" (Google them). Noiseware gets very good reviews but I found it was not fully compatible with a Mac. All of these have a free trial download if you visit their websites.

    Colin

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Andover, Hampshire
    Posts
    116

    Default



    hi Colin

    first time I've tried this insert lark so if it doesnt work its a Robin in my album! I tried to follow your suggestions on my Redshank in PSE7 the only thing missing is NR software. I hope you dont mind but I have sent to you the NEF of this so as you have something to compare it to! look forward to your comments
    cheers
    Paul

  7. #37
    user
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Algarve, Portugal
    Posts
    3,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anseralbifrons View Post


    hi Colin

    first time I've tried this insert lark so if it doesnt work its a Robin in my album! I tried to follow your suggestions on my Redshank in PSE7 the only thing missing is NR software. I hope you dont mind but I have sent to you the NEF of this so as you have something to compare it to! look forward to your comments
    cheers
    Paul
    Hello Paul,

    Received the RAW image O.K. via email.

    To insert an image into a post you need to have it uploaded to a photo-hosting website such as Photobucket, Flickr, etc (I use Photobucket and PBase - hate Flickr) which will assign your image a unique URL (Uniform Resource Locator), a string of words, codes and numbers which identify your image on the Web. You then copy & paste that URL into the drop-down box which appears when you click the image icon (postcard of mountain with stamp) in the second line of the header. BUT, you must ensure that the URL ends with "-------.jpg". Some URL allocators do this, some don't.

    When you do upload an image I would suggest that the image size is no greater than 850 pixels on the longest edge (unless it is a "pano" when you could go to 1200) but at maximum file-size (i.e. image quality).

    Your shot of the Robin is very good but I felt that: 1. It is too small in the overall picture and a lot of the twigs and foliage are distracting, and 2. The fact that it is a back-lit "contra jour" shot leaves little room for manipulation.

    So, I have heavily cropped the image, adjusted "highlights & shadows" to lift more detail from less well-lit parts of the bird, increased colour saturation, brightness and contrast, applied noise reduction with Neat Image, and sharpened with "unsharp-mask" as much as I could to make the image "crisp" without introducing JPEG artifacts (false bright pixels at edges of high contrast). I then reduced the image dimensions and applied another pass of "adjust sharpness" (not as vicious as "unsharp mask") before saving as a maximum quality JPEG.

    This processing (in PS Elements 6 on a Mac) took me less than 30 seconds because I missed out my usual interim step of converting to a TIFF file (it is Saturday and my Mrs. has other things for me to do!!. If I get time I might have another "bash" at it. If you look at the few areas which are well-lit you can see a fair bit of detail, but the areas in shadow (the bird's breast) are rather bland - there is no solution for this.



    It is also on my PBase site with a frame and against a black background which improves the appearance:

    http://www.pbase.com/accentor/image/110683306

    Colin

  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Andover, Hampshire
    Posts
    116

    Default

    looks great, I really appreciate your giving me your time. I'll get one of the hosts you suggest. Thanks again learning slowly!!
    regards
    Paul

  9. #39
    user
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Algarve, Portugal
    Posts
    3,384

    Default

    Paul,

    I had intended having another go at this but realised that my RAW converter (Canon's Digital Photography Professional) will not work on Nikon files to convert them to an 8-bit TIFF. It is the TIFF file that I do all the post-processing on before converting to a JPEG for web publication (by the way, never use the "save for web" option as it compresses the file too much and undoes a lot of the processing - always use "save as" and choose JPEG, Maximum Quality).

    The important thing is that if you shoot in RAW format you always have the original "lossless" file to go back and work on when you get better software and your skills improve - that is not the case if you shoot in JPEG (which already has some irreversible in-camera processing done to the images).

    As a web-hosting site Photobucket is very good, and free. If you want to start creating your own professional-looking galleries then I would suggest PBase or Zenfolio (there is an annual charge for both, but not very much - I think I pay $23 US for my PBase site). I have been looking at Zenfolio and took out the trial version - it has some advantages over PBase, but not quite so easy to use. Or, if you have 25 hours a day to spare you might consider creating your own website! - I am considering doing so.

    Cheers,

    Colin

  10. #40
    Senior Member Joe stockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Andover
    Posts
    531

    Default



    had a 40D for a bit now, higher ISO is so much easier to use with this

    ISO 800, F8, 1/1000 usual treatment
    Joe

Similar Threads

  1. Buzzard for critique.
    By michael23 in forum Photo Critique
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: April 27th, 2010, 07:39 PM
  2. post processing critique
    By exeter_uk in forum Photo Critique
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 1st, 2009, 07:35 PM
  3. Photo critique?
    By Colin Key in forum Photo Critique
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: April 10th, 2009, 08:29 PM
  4. Photo critique?
    By Colin Key in forum Surfbirds Help
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: March 22nd, 2009, 10:26 PM
  5. Photo Critique please
    By Stephen R in forum Photography, Digiscoping, DSLR and Video
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: February 21st, 2008, 07:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •