need help with this photo

[fortheluvofpooh]

I would love to have the wires removed from it but don't know how to do that. Can anyone help. What editing do you use?

 

[DaT5]

The best photo editing software, hands down, is photoshop.

It is expensive though and not really that user friendly.

 

[jann1033]

for the average photographer who just wants to remove wires( ) photoshop elements is plenty fine for that...it's around 80 i think now. it differs from the $$$$$ photoshop by not having the ability to save a series of changes and then later apply them to what ever photo you want plus there isn't a good raw batch processor in elements( at least not in 5) but any program with a healing tool or something similar would work though for the wires. i know gimp is free but hard to use to me, you can always download the free trials corel and photoshop have and play around and see what is easiest for you.

the sky part would be pretty easy, you could just use a spot healing tool or copy and move a part of the clear sky over the wires.... the tricker part would be with the brick area cause they would have to line up... which i totally stink at....don't you just hate it when the electric /phone guys hang wires with no regard to photo ops?

 

[Master Mason]

I can be done, the ones in the sky would be very easy as it is pretty blown out, so basically your just going to have to clone them out with other white.

The ones in the building are a little tougher because you need to keep the the lines of the bricks and windows, but can certainly be done.

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

This is just a quick and dirty but you can get the idea

I used Photoshop CS3 which is probably overkill but you gotta use what you got I guess. You can still see a little of the wire outline in the bricks but with some more healing brush finessing you could probably get rid of that too.

 

[jann1033]

This is just a quick and dirty but you can get the idea

I used Photoshop CS3 which is probably overkill but you gotta use what you got I guess. You can still see a little of the wire outline in the bricks but with some more healing brush finessing you could probably get rid of that too.

show off! actually that looks great..i can never get lines to not look uh...deformed shall we say... when i try to heal them

 

[PoohJen]

That's a really great job, Jazzy!

 

[fortheluvofpooh]

oh my gosh, that is so sweet of you. This building is our church. It is a historical site. Do you mind if I print out a picture with out the wires? I would love to have it on our bulletin board at church. I would give credit where credit is due and have editing done by AZJazzy.
thank you

 

[fortheluvofpooh]

OH BTW, AZJazzy, what do you mean by the sky is "blown"? how do I get it to not be white? We were a cloudy white sky day that day. Is there a way to make it different with metering and such?

 

[JR6ooo4]

OH BTW, AZJazzy, what do you mean by the sky is "blown"? how do I get it to not be white? We were a cloudy white sky day that day. Is there a way to make it different with metering and such?

The sky is just too bright compared to the stones and darker objects of the rest of the photo. It also looks as thought the light was behind the church.

If going for a reshoot the time of day is critical. If that side of the church faces east then shoot in the morning. The sky will not be as bright and the building will be "lit" better. If that side faces west then shoot towards an evening time. If it is facing north or south you could shoot morning or evening depending on the tilt of the sun/earth... (time of year)

If you do not have the luxury of choosing the time you are there then:
Shoot with a tripod and expose one shot for the building and another exposed for the sky. THen combine in post processing.

Mikeeee

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

OH BTW, AZJazzy, what do you mean by the sky is "blown"? how do I get it to not be white? We were a cloudy white sky day that day. Is there a way to make it different with metering and such?

I think it was Master Mason who commented on the "blown out" sky. Basically the issue is that a digital sensor only has so much latitude. In order to get the proper exposure in the dark stone work meant that the light areas would suffer. Blown out basically means that there is little or no data for that tonal range so it is shown as white without detail. If you had metered on the sky you would have lost the tones in the dark areas and the stone building would have held little detail. I think you made the right choice as the church is the focal point of the photo and where you want to focus on having the appropriate level of detail.

There is an advanced technique called HDR which stands for High Dynamic Range. This basically takes a series of photographs from the exact location metered on the various parts of the scene (i.e., shoot one for the sky and highlights, one for mid-tones, and one for dark areas). These shots are then overlaid using software such as Adobe Photoshop and a composite is made which takes the tones from each and allows the picture to have detail at both the high and low ends. Some of the members here do this type of photo rendering and are quite good at it. It's one of those things on my list of photography techniques I should mess with but haven't yet had the time. My knowledge of the subject is strictly theory without practical experience. I shoot mostly action and sports so this technique has limited application but for something like architectural or still life it would definitely be applicable.

You are more than welcome to use the cleaned up photo, I'm just happy to help. I know how frustrating it can be to have a great photo except for just that one little detail. The edits were relatively simple and I did this in about 2 minutes. The key was using the healing brush and working at 600% magnification. I just tried to find areas on the building that didn't have wires but were tonal similar. To have a natural look and not draw the eye to the edits you should try to not take the healing sample from a linear source otherwise you are maintaining the line of the wire but in a different color. I try to be a little random as I select samples. It may not be as accurate tonally but it deceives the eye and makes the edit look less pronounced. My edits weren't quite so random due to me being in a hurry last night (Trina was standing at the door waiting to go to dinner so I was a little rushed) so if you look closely it gives the impression that a line is on the building just not colored as a wire. This is one of those things where you can do it fairly quickly but then when you start messing with the details to get it "just right" you look at the clock and realize you've been messing with it for several hours. I tend to get geeked up at stuff like this. I've had to start convincing myself that digital touch-up needs a similar philosophy to when I used to paint in oils, you need to learn when enough is enough and stop messing with things.

The building has a lot of character and looks like a location where you could spend a lifetime taking pictures and never run out of great images. It would be a great place to do a "day in the life" series where you show the subject at different times of the day or different days of the year to see how the seasons change the scene.

 

[JR6ooo4]

This is just a quick and dirty but you can get the idea

same as this, quick and dirty, hehehehe

If you post a link to the original file someone will "shop" the wires and branches out of the picture and can fix the sky. I just painted it with the bucket tool, heheheehee.

But the file available in the OP is small and not worth spending much time editing. But the photo is! I could see it with some majestic clouds up in the sky to make a nice image for printing.

If you email me the file I will work on it. No charge, of course, its good practice.

I am still learning techniques. (that I need for the other thread with the lady and baby, hehehehee)

Mikeeee

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I am still learning techniques. (that I need for the other thread with the lady and baby, hehehehee)

It would be interesting to see the differences of using the Extract filter versus using the background eraser tool versus using a clipping path to see which one most cleanly allows removal of the sky (I presume that is your goal is to remove the sky so that you can insert something different). Each of the 3 techniques should produce the right results but with slight differences and it's a great exercise in learning new Photoshop techniques.

Personally I think the relatively clear sky is acceptable for this photo. Introducing too much color or clouds may detract from the subject or could change the tonal balance that the eye perceives. Depending on the use of the photo, the image in the original post may be fine. For a church bulletin which are typically not that large or high resolution the photo posted would be acceptable. If on the other hand you are looking to make this an 8x10 or 11x14 then you would want to work from a larger file size. (just my opinion of course.)