[pramodkumar]

Originally Posted by HellwratH

Some of us are busy working hard losing moments that make it all woth it. Similar scene but one of them takes time out to look towards the blue see and appreciate the beauty or may be even contemplating.

the image is very dark, how do you convert your pics to grayscale?


Pramod

[Torqueguru]

@Hellwrath
Try to include negative space in the direction where your subject/subjects are looking...that way the frame does not look cramped.

Time lapse shot from Fisherman's wharf over look the Alcatraz Island on a cold evening.

YouTube - Alcatraz Evening - Time Lapse

300 photos shot at 15 seconds interval.
Playback at 24 fps.

Regards,
TG.

[shajufx]

HW, nice works, I felt the sunrise pic bit dark to my taste.
TG, that golden water was lovely, I am too young to comment on other technicalities !

Since we have already reached Pondy by now, here comes my sunrise !

[jacs]

Originally Posted by shajufx

HW, nice works, I felt the sunrise pic bit dark to my taste.
TG, that golden water was lovely, I am too young to comment on other technicalities !

Since we have already reached Pondy by now, here comes my sunrise !
Attachment 351576

This looks nice like a wallpapar I had in my first office workstation.

[rjstyles69]

shaju if it was silhouette effect that you were trying to achieve your shot definitely needed a full view of the beach umbrella. Generally one would prefer some kind of background details also in such shots.

Just in case you weren't looking at a silhouette, the object in the foreground needs to be better exposed. An image should definitely convey something , just my 2 cents .

[HellwratH]

Originally Posted by pramodkumar

the image is very dark, how do you convert your pics to grayscale?


Pramod

Thanks for the feedback Pramod. Guess, I have screwed something up on home computer. They all look ok to me. I'll re-edit and post these.

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

@Hellwrath
Try to include negative space in the direction where your subject/subjects are looking...that way the frame does not look cramped.

Time lapse shot from Fisherman's wharf over look the Alcatraz Island on a cold evening.

YouTube - Alcatraz Evening - Time Lapse

300 photos shot at 15 seconds interval.
Playback at 24 fps.

Regards,
TG.

TG,
The negative space was kept on the other side on purpose. Basically, I was trying to create a point of interest outside of the frame and not tell the complete story. Also, wanted to create a bit of tension by including the negative space on the other end .

I'll watch the video at home, don't wanna get caught watching a video at work .

Originally Posted by shajufx

HW, nice works, I felt the sunrise pic bit dark to my taste.
TG, that golden water was lovely, I am too young to comment on other technicalities !

Since we have already reached Pondy by now, here comes my sunrise !
Attachment 351576

Thanks Shaju, I'll fix it and re-post them. I don't want to comment on the color of your shot as my work monitor is screwed up at the moment.

[Torqueguru]

@Hellwrath
I see. Yet, the picture doe not hold compositional value to me. Maybe I am being too harsh here.
But at the end of the day, what matter sis if you are happy with the image or not! If you are, then thats the way to go.


Regards,
TG.

[NomadVagabond]

Hello Guys,

I've not been regular here and failed to comment on the photographs of you guys. Still...I'm sharing some of the shots which I shot last week on a trip to Corbett National Park. There are more shots but right now not with me on this system. Here they are. Hope you guys like them. The pics are a bit noisy due to improper processing. Will be redoing them soon.









Regards,

Anirban.

[Technocrat]

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

@Technocrat
Nice one of the lizard!

Regards,
TG.

Thanks TG, I am glad you liked it

Originally Posted by jacs

That makes me . Very good image stabilization if it gives such a handheld shot in full zoom.

Yeah it seems the IS actually works in SX20 IS

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by amitk26

Flatten the image before saving it as jpeg , Same workflow can be used in Photoshop as well.

I find that it is always better to use "Save for Web" option in PS for getting an upload version of the image. It will have optimum file size and can offer you good quality pictures at quality levels hovering around 90. You can notice that the "Save As" option will produce an image with same quality and bigger file size. You can omit any camera data when you use 'Save for Web'. In addition, I can convert my AdobeRGB pictures into sRGB without any notable differences in color tones.

You have to flatten the image to 'save it as' jpeg, but you don't have to flatten the image if you are using 'save for Web' option.

@shaju: The yellow look too unnatural in your sunrise shot
@TG: Took that from a Jet? Why don't you pull up the curve a little bit in this image

[shajufx]

Originally Posted by rjstyles69

shaju if it was silhouette effect that you were trying to achieve your shot definitely needed a full view of the beach umbrella.

Thanks for the tip, it was not a silhouette attempt because if I moved even 6 inches from my spot, the sun would have hit my lens and spoiled the whole pic, so I was left with no choice but click few of the same, not knowing what it would convey to the viewer ! I will post the full view of the beach umbrella below, but its a different message and another angle.

Originally Posted by clevermax

@shaju: The yellow look too unnatural in your sunrise shot

Its almost close to what I actually saw, not much PP is done on it than bit of contrast increase. Anyway we missed the sunrise at Pondy as it was very cloudy. We saw the sun when it was already up.

Life is a Beach !!

Sorry if the PP has gone bad. I had to remove 2 men, 1 huge water bottle and a portion of the building from it. Sharp eyes can spot them.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by clevermax

I find that it is always better to use "Save for Web" option in PS for getting an upload version of the image. It will have optimum file size and can offer you good quality pictures at quality levels hovering around 90. You can notice that the "Save As" option will produce an image with same quality and bigger file size. You can omit any camera data when you use 'Save for Web'. In addition, I can convert my AdobeRGB pictures into sRGB without any notable differences in color tones.

You have to flatten the image to 'save it as' jpeg, but you don't have to flatten the image if you are using 'save for Web' option.

Well Clavermax I may be wrong here as I am not much in to image editing but

1. Flatten the image has nothing to do with quality and size.

In a layer base system such as GIMP or Photoshop instead of applying modifications on source file you can create layer and use various options to apply masks , curves , blending etc. Advantage of using layer is that you can go back and forth between the layers and save a lot of time to undo-redo which you would have done if you were working on original layer.

Flatten just means that in final image only the final picture is saved and layer information and history is not preserved. Yes this may reduce size as well but objective is to remove the intermediate working data which is redundant.

2. To reduce the image size for uploading on web , there is a better option ,

Go to Image size tab and choose the size you want , click for lock aspect ratio, for example choose 1024 and software will pick other axis size automatically depending on aspect ratio

Now in the interpolation option choose "bicubic"

Bicubic interpolation preserves the image sharpness which is lost if you are saving it otherwise. This is more evident if you are preserving for very small size such as thumbnail.

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by amitk26

1. Flatten the image has nothing to do with quality and size.

In a layer base system such as GIMP or Photoshop instead of applying modifications on source file you can create layer and use various options to apply masks , curves , blending etc. Advantage of using layer is that you can go back and forth between the layers and save a lot of time to undo-redo which you would have done if you were working on original layer.

Flatten just means that in final image only the final picture is saved and layer information and history is not preserved. Yes this may reduce size as well but objective is to remove the intermediate working data which is redundant.

2. To reduce the image size for uploading on web , there is a better option ,

Go to Image size tab and choose the size you want , click for lock aspect ratio, for example choose 1024 and software will pick other axis size automatically depending on aspect ratio

Now in the interpolation option choose "bicubic"

Bicubic interpolation preserves the image sharpness which is lost if you are saving it otherwise. This is more evident if you are preserving for very small size such as thumbnail.

I did not say that flattening has something to do with image quality. I am well aware of all the details which you wrote. I agree, and in fact, doing your editing using layers is not destructive compared to doing the editing in the image itself directly. Too many such operations can leave the image in a bad shape, for example, it can cause more posterization than same image whose editing is done in layers + flattening at the end.

I do Save for Web because I get to keep my picture with all layers so that I can still continue my editing in future. I save it as psd, while I have another smaller image to upload. I know very well about the image size operation you told, please check all my images posted here, all are in the range of 1000x800. The original image size is bigger as it is coming from a 10MP cam.

The point was that if you use Save for Web with very high quality, you can get an image which is smaller in size than an image which you "saved as" - both having the same image size.

Example: Open a high res image (orig.jpeg)
resize it to haev a width of 1000 and Save As another jpeg. (A.jpeg) Let the quality be 11 (out of 12).
Now, Use option 'Save for Web' on orig.jpeg, and save a web version with same image size as that of A.jpeg, say B.jpeg. Set quality to 92 (Out of 100)
In most cases, B.jpg will have less file size than A.jpg, but both will look same in terms of image quality.

Well, bicubic is the default one in 'Save for Web'. You can choose 'Bicubic Sharper' to have a sharper image, but I use bicubic only.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by clevermax

I know very well about the image size operation you told,

Extremely sorry for a moment I overlooked to whom I am responding.

The display image reminded you are the lens surgeon :-)

Originally Posted by clevermax

That was not my point. The point was that if you use Save for Web with very high quality, you can get an image which is smaller in size than an image which you "saved as" - both having the same image size.

Well, bicubic is the default one in 'Save for Web'. You can choose 'Bicubic Sharper' to have a sharper image, but I use bicubic only.

I am not sure If I understood the point properly will try this out and check size , Usually while using Save as I choose the Jpeg quality little lower then max and keep an eye on the image size , I think save for web puts a default value for jpeg quality.

bicubic does not appear by default in GIMP 2.6 for me also have not noticed bicubic sharper either so will search for it.

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by amitk26

Usually while using Save as I choose the Jpeg quality little lower then max and keep an eye on the image size , I think save for web puts a default value for jpeg quality.

Thats where you get the advantage when you use Save for Web, the file sizes will be lesser for the same quality you select, so that you don't have to compromise too much on the quality to get your file size less than 1MB.

I remember making making my wife's 150x200 passport size photo jpg last day, for uploading in an online application. They want the image to be within 20KB in size.

I did all the editing and finally tried to 'Save As' and I was unable to get a decent image quality within 20K. I had to reduce the quality to 3 or 2 and even there the sizes were like 40KB. The image looked very bad with that low quality setting. (Camera data itself takes some size and it is useless in this case)

Then I used save for web, and voila! I got an image with 90 out of 100 quality setting and file size was 18KB. (90 /100 is like setting 11/12 in 'Save as')