Category Archives: digital editing

Photo editing tips for dog and cat photos done in Photoshop and Lightroom. Tips on how to make images look better after they come out of the camera. How to edit dog and cat photography, step by step.

Fix me please! How to edit dog photos

Fore more tips on editing pet and dog images in Photoshop and Lightroom, check out the new Beautiful Beasties Blog for pet photographers, filled with photography tips & techniques, editing tips and tricks and more!

http://www.beautifulbeasties.com/blog/

====================================================================

This will be the first in an ongoing series on image processing called ‘fix me please!’, where I feature an image that needs some work, with step by step details of what I would do to it in Photoshop.

In my in-person consultations with photography clients I often find myself editing their images as we sit side-by-side in front of the computer. The feedback I have received from these clients is that it really helps them to see what I would do with THEIR images. It’s pretty fun for me too! Please keep in mind here I edit my images to please my clients, so I keep the owner of that particular pet in mind while editing. :-)

This photo belongs to my dear workshops + portfolio review client Karen Denmark, selected with her permission (thanks Karen!). She took this photo of Millie during our workshop in Austin last year, and I thought it was really cute, but just needed a little bit of ‘tweaking’.

Original. Sweet expression, but too dark, some distracting elements and colors, and not enough detail.

original-web1

The first thing I did was play with curves, to bring the midtones up without blowing out the highlights. I ‘grabbed’ the middle of the curve (the straight line) and pulled it up to the left until it looked good, then adjusted the lower left part of the line (the darks) and the upper right part of the line (the lights). I was then able to tweak the blacks back to a nice rich tone. Lightening and darkening with curves provides a more sophisticated and natural look and nicer contrast than using shadow/highlight or levels. Using curves is actually a lot easier than you’d think. You can read more about it here.

2web

Ok, so now that I’ve got the exposure where I want it, it’s pretty much done, right? Not quite.

There are a few things that are bugging me. The first one is the blue color (I think those are pants legs?) in the background on the left. All of the colors in this shot are warm, and the blue stands out to me. Given that it’s a blurry background element, I don’t want any of the focus on the blue, so it has got to go. Sorry blue, nothin personal!

Here I use my Wacom pen tool (indespensable for editing), and select an area of dark red above and next to the jeans. (Note: if you don’t have a graphics tablet you can still do this with your mouse.) I feathered the selection out to around 6px, then went to ‘edit’ ‘copy’, then ‘paste’ over the blue area. I then adjusted the opacity in the layers palette to make it look more natural. I did this several times, copying and pasting, and flattening layers, and then cloned the area next to the ear with a small soft brush (17px-ish) to complete the removal of the blue. It’s hard to clone areas that have a gradient (where the colors blend from light to dark), which is why I chose the copy/paste route. You can actually still see a teensy line of blue next to her ear, which I would want to fix, cause I’m a perfectionist like that. Oh, I should also note that in this type of situation, it’s really helpful if you are cloning, to lower the opacity of your cloning brush to somewhere between 65%-89%. This gives you a wider margin for error, and produces a more natural look.

3web

Cool. Now the distracting blue is gone. So what else is bugging me? Well, Millie’s ‘white’ fur, which doesn’t look white to me. It looks, I don’t know, green? Grey? I can’t tell. All I know is it looks dingy and I don’t like it. Yucky dingy doggie fur. So what I did below is I used my pen and lasso selection tool and hand selected the white fur on Millie’s face (you can also use the magic wand tool to select the fur). I then went to ‘image’,  ‘adjustments’, ‘hue/saturation’, and greatly saturated my selection, then stared at it for a minute before returning the saturation settings to 0. Doing this enabled me to see exactly what colors I was dealing with. In this case, cyan is the culprit. I was close with my guess of green, right? Oh yeahh baby, whose the man? Wait, I’m a woman. Oh nevermind.

So with my selection still selected, and the ‘hue/saturation’ box still open, I selected ‘cyan’ from the drop-down and desaturated dramatically. While it was definitely better, it still didn’t look quite right to me, so then, while the area I wanted was still selected, I went to ‘image’, ‘adjustments’, and ‘photo filter’. I experimented with the warm photo filters, until I found one I liked. In this case I think I used the 2nd warming filter, the more yellowish one (LBA) and dropped the density way down to around 6%. You can also use this ‘saturate/desaturate/photo filter’ trick on fur that has gone too blue or orange, or tongues or lips & noses that have gone purple.

4web

I knew from the beginning that I wanted the focus to be on Millie’s eyes in this shot. I mean, look how cute she is. But first, I wanted to sharpen the overall image just a teeny bit. So I went to ‘filter’, ‘sharpen’, ‘smart sharpen’. (I have used every sharpening trick in the book, including the most popular sharpening actions- you know the ones, and also know how to do high-pass sharpening, and even have a high-pass sharpen action of my own I designed, and always come back to smart sharpen). The settings I generally use are radius 1.5px, then amount is anywhere between around 24 up to 135 for a very strong effect. It’s usually in the 45-85px range. Here it was light, around 27-35px. Reason being is that I’m not personally a fan of super sharp images. They feel weirdly intimate to me, like I’m looking into a scene that I shouldn’t be looking at. Like, ‘too’ real. Like the opposite of film. They make me feel like a voyeur. And sometimes I think they might just end up looking ‘trendy’. But that’s my problem. If you like sharp- sharpen away! 😉

Ok, so I used this sharpening overall. THEN, for the piece-de-resistance, my favorite part, I selected Millie’s eyes and nose with my lasso, and went back to ‘smart sharpen’. Only this time I used it backwards. For radius I chose 30px, and amount I chose 20px. Doing this really made her eyes pop and deepen her nose. I should note here that doing this also adds a bit of sharpening at the same time, so I usually do this *before* sharpening the rest of the photo (I did overall sharpening here first because I already knew what the ‘blend’ would look like). The result is what you see here below. Also, keep in mind that the best sharpening is done with the output in mind (web, print at 100dpi, print at 300dpi, etc). You can read more about sharpening here.

5web

And voila, the best part- the before and after! Some simple tricks you can use to take your images from ‘tossers’ to ‘keepers’. This is why I teach to focus on expressions over technical perfection in the beginning (ultimately with more practice and skill you want to nail both). Expressions can’t be faked, but you can create a lovely saleable photo in photoshop that your client will adore. And in the end, when you are a professional photographer and selling photography for a living, when it comes to editing/processing, the clients are all that matter!

What would you have done differently? What fun quick tips and tricks do you have that you’d like to share?

originalafter

View full post »

the power of lightroom (and photoshop)

most of the editing on this image was done in LR2, with the exception of some touch-up cloning and adjustment layer masks in PSCS3 to bring the catchlights in the eyes up. Otherwise, major cloning, color, cropping, contrast and everything else was all Lightroom, which is pretty impressive, because anyone who has tried to clone blue sky knows it’s nearly impossible. It’s pretty amazing what software can do.

bronco-bear-62-web

View full post »

revealing the lie

One thing that I think is a great misnomer among photographers just starting out, is that those amazing shots they see on the uber-talented really well known photographer’s blogs come out of the camera looking like that.

While yes, the really talented folks can nail exposure shot after shot after shot, the amazing clarity, contrast and sharpness often has just as much to do with post-processing (work in Lightroom and Photoshop) as it does with the original digital image.

And for those photogs who shoot in RAW (as many pros do- not a value judgement here! just saying that many do, ok? no arguments, please) they pretty much have to process their images otherwise they are left looking muddy. I have talked before on this blog about the ‘grey film’ that appears to coat each digital image that comes from the camera, and how it’s necessary to rid oneself of the film lest one have images that all look like they are suffering from a bad hangover.

Before my new lover (Lightroom2) was introduced into my life, I was pretty much wholeheartedly against processing images. I felt like it was cheating, and in a way, I still believe that. Although now that Lightroom has blown my brain wide open, I really don’t care if it’s cheating or not.

I do it, my pet photog friends do it, wedding photographers do it, we all do it. And the really good ones that want you to believe that they are just amazing photographers and that their shots are born looking phenomenal, yet give half-assed answers to questions about processing? Well, they’re full of something my dog eliminates every day.

Want proof? Here it is:

revealingthelie

I forgot to mention above that the shot was taken with the 24-70mm f/2.8L lens, which, sadly for me, is a fairly soft copy (and getting softer over time). I guess $1300 doesn’t get you very much these days. 😛

Now, not everyone may like this processing technique in terms of looks, but it’s pretty hard to argue that there isn’t a big difference between the before and after.

If you are a photographer just starting out, and you are hard on yourself believing that the pros have some secret magical formula that you don’t and never will, just stop it right now. Those who have images with amazing clarity and sharpness and contrast aren’t any better, they just have more tricks up their sleeve.

I just decided to come out with my naked RAW truth and reveal my own. :-)

Comments, criticism, linkbacks welcome! What do YOU think about processing??

View full post »