Dan Margulis has an interesting technique for getting rid of halos in his
book on Modern Photoshop Color Workflow which I am still working my way
through. For the technique: "Sample the color of the sky outside of the
halo. Set the paintbrush to the width of the halo, choose Mode - Darker
Color, opacity 60% and paint the halo away." It works better than anything
else I've tried!
Tina
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I don't know who to pick out, so I'll pick out several folks.
>
> I know not only LR causes this, but with the recent discussions of LR vs.
> PS and the many recent posts of otherwise
> lovely images with various versions of the same problem, well ...
>
> Generally, our images here are not of angels, at least not the sort
> wearing halos. And yet, halos abound, on trees,
> buildings, hills, and so on in our images.
>
> Let me define what I'm talking about. USM, in it's many guises, including
> LCE, in its various forms, including the
> Clarity slider in LR, works by enhancing contrast at contrasty edges. When
> overdone, it leaves visible light halos
> around darker objects and, less often visibly, dark halos around light
> objects. Other tools, that don't obviously use
> USM still leave halo tracks; the Shadow/Highlight tool in PS is one that
> tends to leave large, soft, feathered halos.
>
> A very few things that we photograph have a halo from strong light behind
> silhouetted subjects. This may be some
> combination of actual subjects and lens flare, but is not what I am
> talking about. And yet, here and all over the web,
> there are endless images of things with halos. Is it the coming of a new
> age of Angels? ;-)
>
> Since I already did this example, and Bob W is so in Hog Heaven that he
> won't mind being picked out again, here's what I
> hope is a clear example. <
> http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Whitmire/w-NewHarbor_ND.htm>
>
> I particularly like this example because the halos along the house/tree
> line, upper left are small, but clear, those
> around around the sign are so very obvious and because it has a good
> example of a dark halo. Look at Enlarged Sample 2.
> The sign is what is most obvious, but look at the edge of the rock. This
> very dark line is a more subtle, insidious sort
> of halo. Not always visible at normal size, it may nevertheless add an
> odd, hard to define sense of unreality to parts
> of an image.
>
> So here's a rather random, very incomplete set of examples, a very minor
> Angelic Hall of Fame.
>
> Chris' landscape sunrise is quite lovely, but there is a pixel+ wide line
> of white and lighter gray along the tree line.
> $ to donuts that's not on the original. <
> http://chriscrawfordphoto.com/chris-details.php?product=1642>
>
> Phillipe's slightly eerie building lit from below has a similar, harder
> line.
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/282051-1/Kaunas+-+Lituanie-00267-5.jpg>
>
> Here, Bob A. has captured magical light, only to detract from it, at least
> to my eye, with a large halo of artifact
> light around the building and tree competing with the natural light.
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/rgacpa_HI/L1005768-Edit.jpg.html>
>
> Yes, there are plenty of others, both from some of the above and others,
> but I hope I've made my point - and I'm too
> lazy to track down a bunch more.
>
> I tend to think it's a result of people getting comfortable with the
> Clarity slider in LR, liking the overall effect as
> they crank it up some more and ignoring the details. I think you'd find,
> if you went back over recent years here that
> the overall 'pop' of images we've posted has gone up. People who were
> leery of enhanced contrast and saturation have
> become more comfortable with it.
>
> It seems to me that an interesting thing has happened with images posted
> here over that time. It used to be Moose who
> was most often on the cutting, or bleeding, edge of post processing, and
> rightly called on it often enough.
>
> Now, he has largely learned to temper his effects, while a new contingent
> of post happy folks are leading the artifact
> parade.
>
> In PS, it's fairly easy to use masks to control this problem in many color
> images to the point where it not there, or at
> least isn't obvious. In many cases, selecting the sky in a layer prior to
> the tool causing the effect, making a masked
> layer from that selection and putting it above the affected layers simply
> makes the problem disappear.
>
> B&W is trickier, as selection is harder without color differences.
> However, other tools are more effective for B&W
> contrast adjustment than for color.
>
> I know effects may be brushed in, rather than global, in LR4, but I
> suspect clean edges aren't part of that process, at
> least without lots of time and effort.
>
> Masked Avengel Moose
>
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
>
--
Tina Manley
http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
