Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 4, 2003, 3:40 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
UrbanPhotos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 382
Default

Wow! Local contrast enhancement is the coolest thing I've learned in a while! It really helps some of my pictures. I often find my landscape shots lacking in contrast, but increasing the contrast brightens the sky and brings out noise. This method darkens the dark parts of the photo without adversely affecting the blue sky.
UrbanPhotos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2003, 4:30 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 54
Default Thanks for all the help!!

Great input from everyone. Really appreciate it.
NNDman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2003, 4:41 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 54
Default Thanks for all the help!!

Great input from everyone. Really appreciate it.
NNDman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2003, 10:27 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

Slipe wrote

http://But I donít see any reason 16... unsharp mask.

Not sure either buddy, but I notice a huge difference in unsharp sensitivity from the high res jpeg files in the OLY C730 I was shooting in and the 6 MP Cannon 300D. Perhaps its a factor of the pixel size??
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2003, 10:54 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fporch
I notice a huge difference in unsharp sensitivity from the high res jpeg files in the OLY C730 I was shooting in and the 6 MP Cannon 300D. Perhaps its a factor of the pixel size??
I donít doubt your observations. But I have no idea why it would work that way.

It must be a factor other than the 16 bit. I just opened a 16 bit image in Photoshop and sharpened it a bit more than I usually do as a test with UM. I took a snapshot, went back to the original and converted to 8 bit. I applied the same UM and could see no difference at all switching back and forth between the same blown up area of both.

Iíve always reduced my radius starting point for lower pixels to get the same effect. If I started with a radius of 3 for a 6Mp image I would start with 1.5 for a 3Mp. I raise the threshold a little for the higher pixels and the amount varies with what I need, but I think the same amount gives about the same result.
slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2003, 11:13 PM   #16
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default In theory

16bit should include some more image detail...like hues & tints. If you are saving an image at RGB or CMYK, I really don't see how 16bit images could be of value. I may be wrong (it's happened before).
  Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2003, 1:04 AM   #17
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Eric, you, and others, have been the most helpful to me on this site. THANKS!!!!! What are some of your favorite links?
  Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2003, 6:18 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9
Default

I've noticed one constant - for downsizing photos for web. Assumimg your photo is in pretty good focus, the magic number is:

.2 pixels (.3 way too much!), and anywhere from 50 - 300 %, with 0 levels.

- Mike
Mike Hoffland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2003, 8:39 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Honey,

Haven't seen you here in awhile. I hope you are out having fun!

Favorite links for what purpose? I've so many links stored up it isn't even funny. For forums its:

www.stevesforums.com (of course!) www.naturephotographers.net/rf.html (I post there too)www.dpreview.com
www.robgalbraith.com
www.fredmiranda.com

Those last three I just wander too every week or two. Just poke around and see if any topics catch my eye. I don't go there every day (like I do here and NPN.)

This site has great landscape picture on it, along with great information. The articles can be fun to read just to see what pictures are posted there:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/
It's a little canon biased at times, but there is so much info on such a variety of subjects (as can be seen by the PS USM articles I gave above) that some times I just go there to look at the articles (i.e. skip for an interesting topic.)

and I have lens sites (I have an DSLR, so the lenses are a separate expense), flash photography sites, links about tripods and heads, tons of links to people's web pages that caught my eye, photography technique, macro, and on and on....

I've though about exporting my links and putting them on my web page. I get asked about my links on occasion.

Eric

ps. If you haven't guessed, I don't have kids. No parent would have this much time. I do get to play with my nieces, though. 2 1/2 is a fun age to go play with.
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2003, 2:59 PM   #20
Member
 
The Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 78
Default

Here's an interesting technique. Try using the High Pass Filter on an adjustment layer. Try a setting of about 15. Then change the layer blending mode to overlay or soft light. In fact try all the light settings. Then you can always adjust the opacity. You won't get the halo effect from using the unsharp mask.
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:54 AM.