«

Ok.

Recently bought Elements and now having a play.

I used to use Canon's DPP and scale with the Gimp.

I thought I'd take a fresh look at some old photos.

http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...ary/Crane/Gimp

I thought that looked sort of OK.

Had another go at making it "nicer" in PSE.

http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...brary/Crane/PS

So, which is "best"?

Or should I just take up knitting?


--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
http://paulc.es/

On 6/03/2013 11:10 PM, Pablo wrote:
> Ok.
>
> Recently bought Elements and now having a play.
>
> I used to use Canon's DPP and scale with the Gimp.
>
> I thought I'd take a fresh look at some old photos.
>
> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...ary/Crane/Gimp
>
> I thought that looked sort of OK.
>
> Had another go at making it "nicer" in PSE.
>
> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...brary/Crane/PS
>
> So, which is "best"?
>
> Or should I just take up knitting?
>
>


The closer one needs straightening

Rob wrote:

> On 6/03/2013 11:10 PM, Pablo wrote:

>> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...ary/Crane/Gimp
>>
>> I thought that looked sort of OK.
>>
>> Had another go at making it "nicer" in PSE.
>>
>> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...brary/Crane/PS
>>
>> So, which is "best"?
>>
>> Or should I just take up knitting?
>>
>>
>
>
> The closer one needs straightening

Yes, I straightened it in PSE, but I'm convinced it lost some resolution in
the act.

--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
http://paulc.es/

Savageduck wrote:

> Hi Paul, we haven't heard from you in a while.

Haven't been taking piccies lately. Partly busy with a house I've bought and
partly the weather has been shite of late. Haven't cycled either.

> "Best" is kind of subjective

Heh. That's why I put it in quotes

> given that the work flow you are
> accustomed to is the one you have been using with DPP + GIMP. I am sure
> that the ACR + PSE is different for you and there is much to learn
> regarding the tools now available to you.

I've revisited a few old snaps and after half an hour of implementing what
I've read/watched in the tutorials, I have something no more pleasing to my
eye than the original.

> Remember there are two parts to this frustrating hobby, photography.
> The first being the capture and whatever composition you achieve
> in-camera. Then there is post processing and using whatever tools you
> have available, and learning to use them efectively.

My composure remains awful. I just don't seem to have acquired "the eye"
yet.

> With PSE you have a pretty good set of post processing tools with a
> learning curve not quite as steep as that with GIMP or Photoshop CS. I
> would be a little more selective with your selection of shot to
> revisit. I seem to remember some of your oak, village, bar and
> restaurant shots which had promise. However do not think that PSE or
> GIMP are going to fix some of the basic issues such as exposure, focus,
> and/or in-camera composition that some of those images had.

I'm going to start getting out again. Start from scratch. I even have a
wedding to shoot next month in Gibraltar. Youngest daughter getting hitched.


> However I think you should revisit some of your capture sites up in the
> mountains

Actually, I did just recently.

> at the coast and generally capture some fresh images to work
> with with some goals in mind for them. One thing to remember, if you
> are going to do a fair amount of work in post try and give yourself
> some room around your subject when framing in your viewfinder, check
> your background for distractions, and especially in that harsh
> Mediterranean light try to shoot well before midday and in the late
> afternoon.

Taken on board. I think I'm going to have to face the fact that my stuff
will always require pretty heavy editing.

> A circular polarizing filter would be a useful accessory for shots such
> as your trout capture.

Yes. It was in the bag. I forgot to attach it. I have filters for all my
lenses, and rarely remember to fit the bloomin' things.

> Then there are masses of tutorials available online on Youtube etc.

I've followed some stuff on AdobeTV etc.

I just added a dog photo (to my flickr) from just over a year ago.

I quite like it, but just can't seem to tone down the dog's body without
losing facial detail.

Ah, I can hear somebody saying "mask".

Next time.

Cheers.


--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
http://paulc.es/

On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 06:14:08 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>
>I would also suggest getting a book on PSE ( I am making the assumption
>that you have PSE 11) and my suggestion is the Scott Kelby, Matt
>Kloskowski, "Photoshop Elements 11 for the Digital Photographer" it is
>available via Amazon at lower prices than from Kelby Training.
><
>http://kelbytraining.com/product/the...photographers/
>>
>
>Then there are masses of tutorials available online on Youtube etc.
>
I'm off books on any Adobe product. I have a shelf full of books on
various versions of Adobe products, and that represents a rather large
financial output. No more books will go on that shelf.

I recommend buying a second monitor and using online tutorials. I put
the tutorial up on one screen and try the technique on the main
screen. It's a one-time expense compared to the continuing expense of
buying books. I bought a used NEC monitor for $45 from a store that
sells computer stuff from companies that have gone out of business or
upgraded. My last Kelby book was almost that much.

I've learned a great deal from books by Kelby, Koslowski, Evening,
etc, but all they do is add a few new chapters on new features and pad
the book with the basics from their old books.

There is no feature in any Adobe product that is not explained in an
online tutorial. Usually, there are several versions so the reader
can pick the one that is most understandable to them.

Earlier this week I followed the Snapfactory
http://blog.snapfactory.com
tutorial on black and white http://blog.snapfactory.com/?p=1833
and picked up a few pointers on conversion techniques. This is just
one of hundreds of online tutorials.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 14:42:48 +0100, Pablo <> wrote:
: Rob wrote:
:
: > On 6/03/2013 11:10 PM, Pablo wrote:
:
: >> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...ary/Crane/Gimp
: >>
: >> I thought that looked sort of OK.
: >>
: >> Had another go at making it "nicer" in PSE.
: >>
: >> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...brary/Crane/PS
: >>
: >> So, which is "best"?
: >>
: >> Or should I just take up knitting?
: >>
: >>
: >
: >
: > The closer one needs straightening
:
: Yes, I straightened it in PSE, but I'm convinced it lost some resolution
: in the act.

You can't straighten without loss of fidelity. Whether that translates into
loss of resolution is in the eye of the beholder. By which I don't mean it
isn't real. I just mean that some people will see it; others won't.

Bob

Savageduck wrote:

> On 2013-03-06 18:09:49 -0800, Robert Coe <> said:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 14:42:48 +0100, Pablo <> wrote:
>> : Rob wrote:
>> :
>> : > On 6/03/2013 11:10 PM, Pablo wrote:
>> :
>> : >> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...ary/Crane/Gimp
>> : >>
>> : >> I thought that looked sort of OK.
>> : >>
>> : >> Had another go at making it "nicer" in PSE.
>> : >>
>> : >> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...brary/Crane/PS
>> : >>
>> : >> So, which is "best"?
>> : >>
>> : >> Or should I just take up knitting?
>> : >>
>> : >>
>> : >
>> : >
>> : > The closer one needs straightening
>> :
>> : Yes, I straightened it in PSE, but I'm convinced it lost some
>> : resolution in the act.
>>
>> You can't straighten without loss of fidelity. Whether that translates
>> into loss of resolution is in the eye of the beholder. By which I don't
>> mean it isn't real. I just mean that some people will see it; others
>> won't.
>>
>> Bob
>
> Just another good reason to work in 16-bit RAW (You can straighten in
> ACR) until that final "Save as" to an 8-bit JPEG.
>

Oh. I hadn't realised that.

--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
http://paulc.es/

Savageduck wrote:

> Here is what my CS5 ACR window looks like, with tools annotated. You
> might, or might not have the same tool set, but you should have most.
> < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...-window-ew.jpg >
>

http://paulc.es/tmp/raw.jpg

--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
http://paulc.es/

On Mar 6, 6:10*am, Pablo <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> Ok.
>
> Recently bought Elements and now having a play.
>
> I used to use Canon's DPP and scale with the Gimp.
>
> I thought I'd take a fresh look at some old photos.
>
> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...ary/Crane/Gimp
>
> I thought that looked sort of OK.
>
> Had another go at making it "nicer" in PSE.
>
> http://s787.beta.photobucket.com/use...brary/Crane/PS
>
> So, which is "best"?
>
> Or should I just take up knitting?
>
> --
> Pablo
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbley...tp://paulc.es/

Blue skies are overrated. Do you have a RAW file we can play with?
Or even a large JPEG?

otter wrote:


> Blue skies are overrated. Do you have a RAW file we can play with?
> Or even a large JPEG?

Be my guest, but my upload speed is only about 800k from here, and the file
is 9MB.

http://paulc.es/tmp/IMG_6083.CR2

--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
http://paulc.es/