Any tips for enhancing rainbows?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Ted Nolan <tednolan> on 7 Jul 2010 17:41 In article <j2bkxloqauu0$.dlg(a)mike.curvemeister.com>, Mike Russell <groupsRE(a)MOVEcurvemeister.com> wrote: >On 30 Jun 2010 07:08:42 GMT, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote: > >> I've noticed that whenever I take a picture of a rainbow, it looks much less >> impressive than it did to my naked eye. >> >> For instance this one from yesterday is ok: >> >> http://www.tednolan.net/misc/p1120927.jpg >> >> but looked much better in real life. >> >> Any tips for punching rainbows up in GIMP? > >Here's one I did with curves in Photoshop, using Lab mode and layer >blending: >http://mike.russell-home.net/tmp/rainbow/p1120927-lab1.jpg > >The basic problem is an orange cast, and lack of contrast and saturation. > >This is an interesting example that, only with your permission, I'd like to >make available to my forum for experimentation. >-- >Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com Sure, have at it! And thanks. Ted -- ------ columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
From: Ted Nolan <tednolan> on 7 Jul 2010 17:50 In article <i0ftv8$497$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote: >> In article <dikm26t5tgc0pgm927u0u0nt74088fn49f(a)4ax.com>, >> John Navas <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>> On 30 Jun 2010 07:08:42 GMT, in <8908rqFol3U1(a)mid.individual.net>, >>> ted(a)loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote: >>> >>>> I've noticed that whenever I take a picture of a rainbow, it looks much less >>>> impressive than it did to my naked eye. >>>> >>>> For instance this one from yesterday is ok: >>>> >>>> http://www.tednolan.net/misc/p1120927.jpg >>>> >>>> but looked much better in real life. >>>> >>>> Any tips for punching rainbows up in GIMP? >>> 1. Adjust levels >>> 2. Correct color >>> 3. Increase saturation >>> >>> <http://i48.tinypic.com/2k11fk.jpg> >>> >> >> Oh, very nice! >> >> Thanks > >yes, good on the colors, but how 'bout that stack?? Quite some >distortion, unless it's about to fall down. > >-- >John McWilliams Probably perspective and some lens distortion (the LX3 .rw2 files don't correct for that). *That* I figure I can fix. Ted -- ------ columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
From: Ted Nolan <tednolan> on 7 Jul 2010 18:06 In article <89kajtF4bqU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote: >In article <j2bkxloqauu0$.dlg(a)mike.curvemeister.com>, >Mike Russell <groupsRE(a)MOVEcurvemeister.com> wrote: >>On 30 Jun 2010 07:08:42 GMT, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote: >> >>> I've noticed that whenever I take a picture of a rainbow, it looks much less >>> impressive than it did to my naked eye. >>> >>> For instance this one from yesterday is ok: >>> >>> http://www.tednolan.net/misc/p1120927.jpg >>> >>> but looked much better in real life. >>> >>> Any tips for punching rainbows up in GIMP? >> >>Here's one I did with curves in Photoshop, using Lab mode and layer >>blending: >>http://mike.russell-home.net/tmp/rainbow/p1120927-lab1.jpg >> >>The basic problem is an orange cast, and lack of contrast and saturation. >> >>This is an interesting example that, only with your permission, I'd like to >>make available to my forum for experimentation. >>-- >>Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com > >Sure, have at it! > >And thanks. > > Ted Oh, and here's http://www.tednolan.net/misc/p1120927.rw2 the 'raw' file if that adds anything. Ted -- ------ columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
From: Ted Nolan <tednolan> on 7 Jul 2010 18:27 In article <a4rm26tnrmach3s8015llsktans4m0ktle(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >On 30 Jun 2010 07:08:42 GMT, in <8908rqFol3U1(a)mid.individual.net>, >ted(a)loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote: > >>I've noticed that whenever I take a picture of a rainbow, it looks much less >>impressive than it did to my naked eye. >> >>For instance this one from yesterday is ok: >> >> http://www.tednolan.net/misc/p1120927.jpg >> >>but looked much better in real life. >> >>Any tips for punching rainbows up in GIMP? > >So which one is truest to your memory and/or taste? > >-- >Best regards, >John > That's a hard question. I think every one of them is an improvement on the original. In the end, I think the three best were Robert Spanjaard's, Mike Russell's and SneakyP's. If I had to pick one, I think it would be Mike Russell's p1120927-lab1 for best overall combination of rainbow plus twilight setting. It's a near thing though. Thanks everyone! Ted -- ------ columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
From: LOL! on 7 Jul 2010 18:33
On 7 Jul 2010 22:27:08 GMT, ted(a)loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote: >In article <a4rm26tnrmach3s8015llsktans4m0ktle(a)4ax.com>, >John Navas <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>On 30 Jun 2010 07:08:42 GMT, in <8908rqFol3U1(a)mid.individual.net>, >>ted(a)loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote: >> >>>I've noticed that whenever I take a picture of a rainbow, it looks much less >>>impressive than it did to my naked eye. >>> >>>For instance this one from yesterday is ok: >>> >>> http://www.tednolan.net/misc/p1120927.jpg >>> >>>but looked much better in real life. >>> >>>Any tips for punching rainbows up in GIMP? >> >>So which one is truest to your memory and/or taste? >> >>-- >>Best regards, >>John >> > >That's a hard question. I think every one of them is an improvement on >the original. > >In the end, I think the three best were Robert Spanjaard's, Mike Russell's >and SneakyP's. > >If I had to pick one, I think it would be Mike Russell's p1120927-lab1 >for best overall combination of rainbow plus twilight setting. >It's a near thing though. > >Thanks everyone! > > Ted Thus endeth their lessons of "Beginner's Editing 101". LOL! |