On 9/17/2011 8:57 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> CS5 has a new refine edge box that bears digging into. The edge detection and
> smart radius box is damn near worth the price of the upgrade. Especially if
> you do a lot of compositing.
Hmmm, edge detection and/or smart radius may make selection of foliage better
for making a sky mask, as I was just
describing.
> I only say "damn near" because the "content-aware fill" _is_ worth the price
> of the upgrade.<g> I've beeb revisiting a few images from a ways back, and
> I've found instances where content-aware fill has done in a few seconds what
> I spent much more time carefully cloning.
Often sheer magic, sometimes frustrating. When it goes bad, fixating on some
inappropriate source, I still sometimes
can't find a solution.
The two tools work together well. I often use Refine Edge=>Shift edge and
=>Feather to expand and blend the edge of a
selection for Content Aware Fill.
With the Smart Healing Brush Tool, Content Aware and Proximity Match each have
their place, depending on the content.
> Just curious, but I wonder how much of this halo thing is a non-issue when it
> comes to prints? Obviously, the kind of halo surrounding the lighthouse in
> the Pounding picture is a problem that really shouldn't be shrugged off if
> one expects to sell expensive prints. It is noticeable in a print. That said,
> the halos you focused on in the New Harbor picture are utterly undetectable
> in a 7x11 test print. Maybe if I took it up to 20x30, they might show, but
> I'm not likely to do that.
The opportunity to test that will naturally arise in an image you really want
to make a large print of. No need to push
the river.
> BTW, the halo that Marc and I were talking about is the softer and wider glow
> above the roof and trees on the left side.
Yup, that became apparent to me as the thread went on. I and a couple of others
were noticing and talking about one
phenomenon. You, Marc and others were talking about another. That's why I did
the examples, to separate that sort of
naturally occurring halo from the artifacts I'm now calling borders, which are
also present.
> Cellular-level examination leads me to conclude that it's a result of light
> sky, dark silhouette coupled with a 10-stop ND filter and a long exposure
> that blurred cloud, salt spray and any other movements out there. I'll know
> more about that when I do more ND work of that type.
Could be. To the viewer who wasn't there, and doesn't know the place, it could
just as easily be natural, as in not a
result of photo technique. Sky brightness varies before sunrise and after
sunset, man made light can lighten sky. All
can be enhanced by local mist in a valley or along the water. I can't imagine
any viewer would imagine that that subtly
lighter area is unnatural.
Nature Versus Artifice Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|