Thanks for your explaination, Moose.
As the re-touch picture, I think the contrast is very high at the
foreground buildings.
--
Michael
Palm, Linux, Olympus, Mac user
2007/4/16, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Michael Wong wrote:
> > I think everyone know the air quality is not good in Hong Kong :( Such as
> > the following pictures, the hill at opposite side of the sea is not sharp &
> > a haze cover the hill. A great difference from near side. How do I edit the
> > picture to show the hill at opposite side same as near side in PS?
> >
> > http://palmboy.palmcyber.net/gallery/albums/album87/IMG2151.sized.jpg
> >
> How's this? http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/MWong/Haze.htm
>
> First, I agree with others that you might have been better off with a
> filter in the first place. The reason I say 'might', rather than 'would'
> is that you are at sea level, which is a different problem than high
> altitude. At high altitude, bluish color and haziness is often caused
> largely by excessive UV, to which the eye is not sensitive, but the
> film/sensor is. The only good solution to that is a filter, and for
> images to be post processed, a bit too much filter is better than too
> little.
>
> In this case, the blue cast is a result of scattering of blue light more
> than the other parts of the visible light by the moisture in the air.
> The same effect that makes the sky blue, but here putting "blue sky"
> between you and the distant features. This also has the effect of
> lowering contrast in distant objects, which makes detail less obvious.
>
> To the extent that there is particulate matter, dust, diesel soot, etc.
> in the air, there may be scattering of other colors of light, depending
> on the amount and nature of the suspended matter and the angle of the
> sun. This is the cause of sunset/sunrise colors. If there is enough, it
> also simply blocks some of the light and also causes detail loss.
>
> Also, there is s lot of movement in air at a local level, called cells,
> within which air moves due to convection currents. In effect, there are
> a whole bunch of parts of the air between the camera and the distant
> subject that are moving in various different directions and contain
> subtly different indexes of diffraction, so they all very slightly act
> as lenses. Again, a cause of loss of contrast and sharpness. This effect
> is worse where the air is warmer and where it is more humid. in a shot
> like this, with lots of dark green foliage close in at the bottom, there
> will be strong rising air currents right in front of the camera.
>
> To the extent that these effects reduce resolution, there is no cure in
> software. To the extent that the effect is due to reduced contrast,
> software can do a pretty good job of recovery.
>
> The use of a filter at sea level will reduce the amount of scattered
> blue light and often enhance resolution/sharpness in distant objects.
> The problem is that it will also change the color balance of near
> objects. So people look for a filter that helps, but isn't too strong.
> That's about all you can do with slides to be viewed directly. For
> images that are going to be scanned, you may use a stronger filter, like
> an 81A, or even 81B, and shoot a reference shot with a color reference
> target in the frame. I use a WhiBal, but there are lots of different
> ones around.
>
> If this were an important shot and I were working with a tripod, I would
> take duplicate shots with and without filter, I doubt that a Skylight 1B
> would do much good. I'd go with one of the 81 series.
>
> With a color reference, it's a snap to correct for the filtering the
> nearer parts of the subject to look natural, then using less correction
> for the distant parts. This requires a gradient layer or separate layers
> for different parts of the image, but so does correcting without a filter.
>
> As to what I did to you image, well.... I split it into three layers,
> foreground, water and distant shore.
>
> I did little to the foreground. The water had some LCE, Curves and
> Levels applied. The distant mountain had lost of LCE, some Curves, some
> 81 photo filter applied, and a bit of color adjustment beyond that.
> Doing color correction on a distant subject with haze and no color
> neutral object to work from is tricky and more a matter of taste than
> accuracy, especially for someone who wasn't there. So don't pay too much
> attention to color.
>
> Moose
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
