Photo Sharing: Ultra Wide Angle

[Jamian]

Mad Tea Party:

 

[JimbobJimbo]

 

[Gdad]

Click for Flickr

 

[WDWFigment]

Any chance you can post a larger version of the 'cheesy water effect' here? It's hard to discern how good it looks medium sized in the comments (although maybe that's your intent).

 

[Gdad]

Any chance you can post a larger version of the 'cheesy water effect' here? It's hard to discern how good it looks medium sized in the comments (although maybe that's your intent).

Sure- I just hide some stuff on Flickr sometimes until it dropps off Page 1. Here is the cheesy insomniac at work version.

 

[WDWFigment]

It actually doesn't look too bad. The fountain in the middle looks really good, actually. When are the rest of those images coming??

 

[Gdad]

It actually doesn't look too bad. The fountain in the middle looks really good, actually. When are the rest of those images coming??

Thanks. I've got a bunch in the can waiting- I'm just trying to learn to pace myself and only post one picture per day.

Anyway- everything I've posted so far from the last jaunt is just the stuff I didn't really think was worth bracketing at the time. The good stuff I'm saving until "Mid-May 2010" to get the 30-day trial and see how I like the new CS5 HDR features. Results will help me to decide if I feel like shelling out the money for the upgrade- since aside from HDR processing I am still happy with CS3.

 

[WDWFigment]

Thanks. I've got a bunch in the can waiting- I'm just trying to learn to pace myself and only post one picture per day.

Anyway- everything I've posted so far from the last jaunt is just the stuff I didn't really think was worth bracketing at the time. The good stuff I'm saving until "Mid-May 2010" to get the 30-day trial and see how I like the new CS5 HDR features. Results will help me to decide if I feel like shelling out the money for the upgrade- since aside from HDR processing I am still happy with CS3.

I like going to the 1-2/per day route as well. It makes me act a little more deliberately with my processing and prevents me from just posting junk (although I still have a decent amount of that). Plus, I think that better facilitates interaction with others in the Flickr community.

That's fairly scary that these shots are the ones you initially perceived as lesser. If it hasn't come across by now, I am the ultra-competitive type. While I love seeing your awesome stuff, a (big) part of me always thinks, "damnit, why didn't I think of that shot?!" Seeing these recent shots of yours has made me itch to get down there even sooner. I guess the silver lining is that maybe I'll be so busy in mid-May that I won't notice you post the really good stuff (doubtful) and by the time I see them in June, I will finally have my own good stuff again. Maybe.

 

[WDWFigment]

Click it for Flickr!

 

[Gdad]

^^ Love the arms Tom- reminds me of my daughter who does not wait for the ride to start to get her arms in the air either.

 

[Gdad]

One for today- last tot shot for a while I promise.

 

[Gdad]

House of Blues

 

[Jamian]

Spaceship Earth Entrance:

 

[WDWFigment]

^Jeff, did you go multi-exposure with that HOB shot? It looks like there is a blue glow around the sign, but the letters aren't all that bright. I'm not asking this to be nitpicky, but I wonder what method you used to do this (if my assumption is even correct). I usually mask, but sometimes the transition from dark/light (this always seems to be bad in these neon signs--Sid's at the Studios is a perfect example) is too much for a realistic mask. You did this phenominally...unless this is one exposure, in which case my praise for that aspect of your PP might be unnecessary.

Here's my shot for the day:

Clicking the image takes you to its Flickr page, where you can view/download a larger version of the image, see my EXIF data, or navigate to other WDW shots.

 

[Gdad]

Jeff, did you go multi-exposure with that HOB shot? It looks like there is a blue glow around the sign, but the letters aren't all that bright. I'm not asking this to be nitpicky, but I wonder what method you used to do this (if my assumption is even correct). I usually mask, but sometimes the transition from dark/light (this always seems to be bad in these neon signs--Sid's at the Studios is a perfect example) is too much for a realistic mask. You did this phenominally...unless this is one exposure, in which case my praise for that aspect of your PP might be unnecessary.

Hey Tom- you are right on track with your thoughts on the House of Blues shot. I bracketed the shot but in the frame that the water tower was best exposed the blue neon sign was completely blown out- in fact the entire front face of the sign was pretty much an overexposed blue/white blur. I experimented with another frame a couple stops less exposed which the sign looked good- but of course everything else was too dark and pushing the fill light would just make it noisy- loose contrast, etc. So what I did was take the dark frame and push the raw file to look as close to the other exposure as possible while keeping the blue neon the way I wanted it. Then I layered it behind the first frame and selectively erased the blown out front face of the sign. Below is another example of the same type processing used to salvage the completely blown out water.

I'm not sure if this is really the right or wrong way to do this kind of thing. I never seem to have good luck with merging files to make an actual HDR and find that my 'selective repair' works better for me. For erasing I just do what works best for the image. Since the HOB sign was a nice geometric shape I just used the straight-line-lasso-tool thingy in CS3 to select it, feather it slightly, and then erased with a soft brush until I liked the look. The shot below I just erased by hand since it's such a random area. By pushing the bottom dark image before hand to get a similar overall exposure it's not a big deal if you color outside the lins a bit. Hope this makes sense-

 

[WDWFigment]

Hey Tom- you are right on track with your thoughts on the House of Blues shot. I bracketed the shot but in the frame that the water tower was best exposed the blue neon sign was completely blown out- in fact the entire front face of the sign was pretty much an overexposed blue/white blur. I experimented with another frame a couple stops less exposed which the sign looked good- but of course everything else was too dark and pushing the fill light would just make it noisy- loose contrast, etc. So what I did was take the dark frame and push the raw file to look as close to the other exposure as possible while keeping the blue neon the way I wanted it. Then I layered it behind the first frame and selectively erased the blown out front face of the sign. Below is another example of the same type processing used to salvage the completely blown out water.

I'm not sure if this is really the right or wrong way to do this kind of thing. I never seem to have good luck with merging files to make an actual HDR and find that my 'selective repair' works better for me. For erasing I just do what works best for the image. Since the HOB sign was a nice geometric shape I just used the straight-line-lasso-tool thingy in CS3 to select it, feather it slightly, and then erased with a soft brush until I liked the look. The shot below I just erased by hand since it's such a random area. By pushing the bottom dark image before hand to get a similar overall exposure it's not a big deal if you color outside the lins a bit. Hope this makes sense-

Well, that's essentially what I do (I asked because I have a Sid's shot that has been giving me difficulties when I try to process it), but for some reason I have never tried the lasso tool! That is a great idea. Just out of curiosity, why don't you use layer masks as opposed to the eraser? I know they pretty much work the same functionally, but it seems that type of 'destructive' editing is a big 'no-no' among the PS elite.

Oh, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who can never accomplish anything with Photoshop's built in merge to HDR. With CS3, I almost always just get an overly flat image that has roughly the same dynamic range (maybe a bit more) than the 0 image!

 

[Gdad]

Well, that's essentially what I do (I asked because I have a Sid's shot that has been giving me difficulties when I try to process it), but for some reason I have never tried the lasso tool! That is a great idea. Just out of curiosity, why don't you use layer masks as opposed to the eraser? I know they pretty much work the same functionally, but it seems that type of 'destructive' editing is a big 'no-no' among the PS elite.

Oh, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who can never accomplish anything with Photoshop's built in merge to HDR. With CS3, I almost always just get an overly flat image that has roughly the same dynamic range (maybe a bit more) than the 0 image!

I have never stopped to learn how masks work. My non-elite Photoshop skills are marginal at best.

 

[RBennett]

House of Blues

Seriously?? I would like to just watch over your shoulder for one weekend to see how you come up with some of these shots!

 

[WDWFigment]

I have never stopped to learn how masks work. My non-elite Photoshop skills are marginal at best.

I'm really surprised by that--they are are pretty simple element of PS and will make editing easier. I use adjustment layers (they're a 'sort of' mask with an edit attached) a lot in place of more complicated editing techniques and they are really simple, too. I'm sure you could pick it up in about 2 minutes (seriously) after checking out a tutorial online.

 

[RBennett]

I'm really surprised by that--they are are pretty simple element of PS and will make editing easier. I use adjustment layers (they're a 'sort of' mask with an edit attached) a lot in place of more complicated editing techniques and they are really simple, too. I'm sure you could pick it up in about 2 minutes (seriously) after checking out a tutorial online.

Can I ask where you normally go to check out your tutorials at?