Photos of swimming pools
David
children in our pool, but the harsh light is more than the camera can
cope with. Naturally I expose for the faces, but the water gets burned
out, just plain white. Can anyone suggest a way of getting at least
some colour back? I've tried Level without success, and the
Paintbucket tool, but that just produces an un-textured blue expanse.
Thanks
David
Your-Nice
but might help.
Rob
"David" <rhinds_...@cwnet.com> wrote in message
news:rnblg0pp6gr44lvcj...@4ax.com...
David
second shot to exposure the water correctly could I use that image as
a layer then make the layer transparent where the kids are. I'm not
sure exactly how to do this, but is it worth persuing?
David
V1nc3nt
There's a pretty nice new feature in Photoshop CS which is called
Shadow/Highlight (Image>Adjustments>Shadow/Highlight) that may be helpful to
you in this case. But you need PS CS for that. Otherwise, try playing with
Curves, and maybe try to colorize the water.
HTH
Arty Phacting
1 - open the primary image (one with people and highlights)
2 - open a secondary image (can be any pool shot provided the water looks
good)
3 - use the clone tool at different levels of opacity to clone bits from the
secondary image into the primary image
If you do this carefully the final image may blow your socks off!
The idea with clone tool in this mode is to try and avoid cloning obvious
patterns into the destination image.
When opacity is set at 100% it will clone over. The trick is to use opacity
selectively say at 80%, 60% 40%, ... to fill in highlights
Have phun - I am sure that this will work :-)
Arts
ps - let us know what technique worked best for you and how you got on
A
"David" <rhinds_...@cwnet.com> wrote in message
news:hcelg0p4lhtvlunet...@4ax.com...
Mike Russell
You can get a hint of blue by adding a layer of color, and using layer blend
modes to add just a touch of blue to the water.
Masking in a well-exposed water shot, as you suggest in a later post, may be
worth a try. My guess is it will have a distracting unnatural look to it.
When making the exposure, you can improve things by:
1) use a powerful flash with as high a shutter speed as possible
2) wait until later in the day and try to get the sun more behind you. This
will lighten the faces, and darken the pool water.
--
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com
www.geigy.2y.net
OceanView
news:rnblg0pp6gr44lvcj...@4ax.com:
I did this with backlit sunset picture:
1. Select the "hot" areas using the magic wand, then feather
the selection 5-10 pixels
2. use Equalize, then "Fade" it back to a decent level.
3. Fill in with burn and dodge or clone tools.
Every case is different, so take this as a suggestion to try,
not a solution!
You might already know, but for future reference, a polorizing
filter on the camera can prevent a lot of the reflected
glare.
--
---------------
Restore your photos
www.secondchancemedia.com
Jesper
if it's a slr 35mm cam, buy a polarized lens filter and your problems will
be solved.
ZONED!
wrote:
Buy a circular polarizer filter for your camera
Carrie
even try suggesting anything.
But this reminds me of a problem I've had. I have an auto focus/setting
camera. When I aim it at the sky- bright blue sky, huge clouds, sun
streaking through, etc. it closes down and what's below the sky (mountains,
fiields, a lake, etc) gets very dark.
If I aim DOWN to get the details of what's below the sky, the sky washes
out to nothing.
I've been experimenting with a tutorial I read about "painting shadow".
Create new layer, set layer to multiply choose a medium dark color with
airbrush, what you paint with this (in this case) darkens when it's set back
to one layer. The way I've used it is the reverse, using a LIGHT color to
paint what I want to lighten up.
In the case of the pool, it might work to take the pictures on the dark
side (to get the water) then lighten up the kids in it?
Or, maybe try taking pictures on a more overcast day?
We have a small (above ground) pool and I've taken pictures of my
grandaughter in it (jumping and splashing) with my auto set camera and
they've come out fine.
Seems like using a flash would reflect off the water.
Anyway, I just found this ng and except for asking questions now and
then, I think first of all I'll read over it and see what I can learn.
~ Carrie
"David" <rhinds_...@cwnet.com> wrote in message
news:rnblg0pp6gr44lvcj...@4ax.com...
The Doormouse
> With summer children take to water. I've been trying to get photos of
> children in our pool, but the harsh light is more than the camera can
> cope with.
Use a polarizing filter and/or adjust the shutter speed and/or the film
speed and/or the position from where you are taking the photos ...
photoshop can work miracles, but why work so hard?
:)
The Doormouse
--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
David
promising
David
Revista Cânhamo
will filter the overexposure that you talk about and your photos will turn
much better
Nelson Patriarca
Portugal
"David" <rhinds_...@cwnet.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:rnblg0pp6gr44lvcj...@4ax.com...
Hecate
wrote:
>With summer children take to water. I've been trying to get photos of
Yes. Use a polarizer on the lens when you take the picture and save
yourself an awful lot of work.
--
Hecate - The Real One
Hec...@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
~Doc
> Thanks for that. Another thought has just struck me... If I take a
> second shot to exposure the water correctly could I use that image as
> a layer then make the layer transparent where the kids are. I'm not
> sure exactly how to do this, but is it worth persuing?
Yes, definitely persue it. You may run into an issue with the turbulence of
the water not matching the actions of the subjects but this not necessarily
a bad thing if it's subtle. For instance I've done stills, first shot
exposed for a dark room, second shot exposed for the bright sunlight in the
doorway or window combined to create a shot impossible to capture with the
camera alone. I've then deliberately fudged the exposures so that it looks
just not quite right (often oversaturating the outside scene or even masking
off a doorway and enlarging the scene slightly) with impressive results.
People seem to be drawn to that which looks correct but just quite isn't.
~Doc
Arty Phacting
This is a very very good ng
Arts
"Carrie" <star...@kingcon.com> wrote in message
news:ceen7v$2...@library1.airnews.net...
Arty Phacting
Once you are comfortable with the results obtained try using the different
effects
What do I mean?
Well, you will have the original image with blown highlights and the
repaired or amended image
You can use these as source and destination images with the clone tool yet
again. This time add complexity to your results by cloning between layers
using Normal, lighten, burn, .... options seeking finesse of final result
Happy cloning! :-)
Arts
"David" <rhinds_...@cwnet.com> wrote in message
news:k2rlg019an9nbbhr4...@4ax.com...
David
>
>Yes. Use a polarizer on the lens when you take the picture and save
>yourself an awful lot of work.
>
digital cameras?
What I have found so far:-
Took a shot of the pool and children, followed by a shot from more or
less the same spot without them.
Opened the one with the children, copied the background to a new
layer.
Opened the one of the water and pasted it behind the copied
background.
Used the Erasor working around the figures to remove the copied layer
and show the water.
This worked better than cloning in my opion because:
The images were exactly the same size before any cropping,
The changes in water colour where the bottom of the pool met the
sides, and where the water was deeper, were correctly aligned.
There were no discontinuities in the lines of the ripples and light,
something I couldn't achieve even with 2 images side by side on a 20"
monitor. Doesn't sound like it should be noticeable in the chaotic
surface of the water, but the eye picks up on this immediately.
I was also able to tweak the colour of the water without effecting the
figures. However, I think there must be a better way of erazing large
areas.
David
Arty Phacting
ah well - I tried anyway :-)
Arts
"David" <rhinds_...@cwnet.com> wrote in message
news:brtng0l3kadhgkd5m...@4ax.com...
Hecate
wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 02:19:46 +0100, Hecate <hec...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>Yes. Use a polarizer on the lens when you take the picture and save
>>yourself an awful lot of work.
>>
>I'm using a Canon G1 digital camera, do polarizing filters work with
>digital cameras?
>
No reason why they shouldn't.
ZONED!
wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 02:19:46 +0100, Hecate <hec...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>Yes. Use a polarizer on the lens when you take the picture and save
>>yourself an awful lot of work.
>>
>I'm using a Canon G1 digital camera, do polarizing filters work with
>digital cameras?
Yes I have used them on 35mm, medium and BOTH in digital. I have used
them for about 20 years, polarizers are the best for what you asked
about. Hence my earlier post. Once you use one you will never be
without.
David
Thanks for all the input.
David
ZONED!
wrote:
>Will get one today.
>
>Thanks for all the input.
>
>David
Don't forget to get a circular polarizer if you use AF
Hecate
wrote:
Can you still buy anything but circular? I haven't seen a non-circular
for ages.
ZONED!
Dunno, never looked myself, for the last....(enter long period of time
here). But according to Murphy, if I didn't mention it, someone would
find the last linear one on the planet ;o)
Hecate
wrote:
>
>>Can you still buy anything but circular? I haven't seen a non-circular
>>for ages.
>>
>Dunno, never looked myself, for the last....(enter long period of time
>here). But according to Murphy, if I didn't mention it, someone would
>find the last linear one on the planet ;o)
LOL!
SamMan
> >
> >Yes. Use a polarizer on the lens when you take the picture and save
> >yourself an awful lot of work.
> >
> I'm using a Canon G1 digital camera, do polarizing filters work with
> digital cameras?
>
I have a G2. For this model, you can buy a filter adapter. Not sure if you
can with the G1.
--
SamMan
Rip it to reply