Greg Groess's Zion image

[mikemeister_admin]

A fun image Greg - I think it needs a bit of drama, almost getting on for a painting
so the result is completely false with the foreground much too bright, but I could get to like it (yes I know I have strange tastes)
Chris

[ggroess]

Nicely done...Zog.

Here is my swing at it..again by no means the "official" solution.

Here is what I did with the image.
Observations:
1) The shadows are pretty deep and need to be opened.
2) The highlight in the clouds is pretty much blown out.  I want some information in there but may not be able to get it all back.
3) The image is overall flat and needs a contrast boost.
4) Color is also flat. No severe color casts present.

The work flow:
1) Shadow and highlight in Photoshop to get back some information in the highlights and open the shadows.  (I'm really beginning to like this way as a start>
2) Open in CM and set the neutral on the rapids of the river.  I then added a slight lizard tail correction to the highlight and shadow ends of the L curve to further open the shadows and try to retain detail in the highlights.
3) A modified Man from Mars type correction using CM and a K channel mask.  Something we will cover in weeks 5 and 6.  I then adjusted the A and B channels separately to boost the yellow / blue in the B channel and reduce the greens a bit in the A channel.
4) Used a second K channel mask to isolate the sky and adjusted the clouds for a bit more drama.
5) Sharpened in PS using the unsharp mask at 270 / .07 / 0. 

Greg

[mikemeister_admin]

That's nice Greg - so I'll attempt a more serious approach.

I haven't got the shadow/hilight command in PS7, so I simulate it, but it always seem to leave halos - very annoying - I would normally mask them out (but didn't bother foe this quick go)
I started with focusmagic
then in CM played with the rgb channels to get maximum contrast on the rock face, then changed the layer's mode to luminosity
Back into CM for a little more shadow adjustment and a touch of lab colour
The I did my shadow/hilight to bring up the foreground
back into CM for more colour on the rock face - tried Man from Mars with no success
applied my enhance sky action to darken the sky and lighten the greenery (really great quick action)
finally applied a light 'texture' sharping only to the rockface by blendif-ing out the green channel!

I like the yellow sunlight on the rocks (but you were there and yours has more red than yellow) and also the contrast between the green/rockface (on the left) and sky - seems to make it really pop out.

Thanks for putting up this difficult interesting image!
Chris

[ggroess]

Zog,
When I am doing the MFM correction I am backing off to less than 40% on the layer.  It seems to improve the color contrast without the garrish colors.  I muted down the greens a bit after that adjustment they look to neon for my personal tastes.  Your image is very snappy.  I like the sky for contrast but the color is a bit too blue for me...again personal taste.

Try the ACV file attached...I used the A channel to kill off some Green and adjust the redness out of the clouds.

You all can load the ACV file by opening Zogs posted image downloading the acv file to the desktop and opening CM.  Then click on the load button and browse out to the desktop to the acv file.  click on it and choose open.

Greg

[mikemeister_admin]

Thanks Greg - nicely done, you are a gentle curver, I tend to be more violent.

I actually back off MFM to around 10% (!), but unless it splits the colours I am after, I tend to ignore it.

Got a feeling either I need new eyes or a new screen, as I am missing small changes these days.

I've just ordered  George DeWolfe's new book (I know it is B&W), as I am coming more and more round to the idea, that one should curve for contrast COMPLETELY ignoring colour - change the CM layer to luminosity and then play with colour.  In other words make the best B&W version you can before adding the colour back in.  What do you think?

[ggroess]

re: Missing small changes...Driving the color using extremes I tend to use the MFM correction when I see "flat" colors.  the fastest way to know if I want to use it is to crank on the saturation slider.  If I can get over 4 without thinking "ewwww" then I usually apply some version of MFM.  Old eyes...maybe but I'm betting its more taste driven...It has been for me.

re: DeWolf : You know I have been following that discussion as well.  How is the book??  I've heard it is a mixed bag.  I'd love to hear your thoughts on the book.

So far, I have 3 different methods of doing B&W. 
I have seen decent results using de-saturation on a good starting image. 

I have seen great results with splitting channels and curving.

I have also seen great results with channel blending in Monotone mode.

Now DeWolf...I get the impression he is stating older philosophy using new tools.  You know I have always tried to find a way to use the zone system for B&W images. For me that means finding tonality all across the image.  Currently I have not tried correcting that way for color. 

From what I have seen so far and I could be dead wrong... it's the quarter and 3/4 tones that people are having trouble visualizing in color because of simultaneous contrast. Hence, that is the drive to remove color from the equation.  Contrast becomes contrast rather than color linked contrast. I think it reduces so they can see it better.  Adding the color is subjective, so they are more comfortable making a small mistake there but if you have no details in the tonality that shows up pretty fast.

Greg

[mikemeister_admin]

Hi
This is a real testing image as there are blown out highlights and absolute blacks.
So whatever you do to increase the contrast in one area of the image naturally decreases it in other areas.
Therefore it needs to be split up into several zones.
I've attached an example of my normal workflow. It's a bit over the top and I would normally tone it down a bit via the opacity and opacity fill controls.
I assigned it a sRGB profile when I loaded it into Photoshop.
If you have a good quality(wide gamut) LCD monitor and you are viewing in Internet Explorer you will get a overly saturated and red image. Curtsy of Microsoft Window's unwillingnes to properly render ICC profiles.
I've not been able to get anything approaching this image using Curvemeister. And that is why I enrolled in the course.

Dennis.

[mikemeister_admin]

Hi
I screwed that one up didn't I

Here is the image I ment to send.

The previous image, done entirely in CM3 is one where I concentrated on the sky and the cliffs. I was prepared to sacrifice the foreground as the cliff and sky dominate the image.

Dennis

[mikemeister_admin]

Hi Dennis - it is a bit surreal for me, the contrast is too great and feels dark and foreboding, rather than evening sunlight.  Also you have sacrificed the detail in the cloud - the edges are a bit fuzzy.  I find it very hard to remember to look at all areas of an image and normally miss what I have mucked up unintentionally.

This is what I absolutely love about pp-ing, one can change the whole mood of an image and attempt to portray what one saw and felt.

I have had a number of different 'goes' with this image and each time it turns out differently - it is not only the blown out highlights and absolute blacks, but how the tone of the clouds are the same as some of the rock face - a really awkward image (as Greg just loves giving us).

So how about a slight variation, like this?
Chris

[ggroess]

Zog and Roo,

The images I choose are usually ones that have given me fits.  I like to put them out there to give you "real" examples of images that need help.
The best part of the first week is the open ended let it all hang out image processing that is done.  I love the variations.  The mood changes and the different approaches. 

It is the biggest hurdle to get everyone over...The subjective process part of the correction.  When you are doing this just for yourself you get to choose the mood and tonality.  I love it...

Roo...I'm glad you pushed it hard..this is the place to do it.  Over the next few weeks we will be pushing things around quite a bit and many people have a hard time letting go of the things they use successfully.  The approach we take is that your process needs to work for you.  Every image should betaken as far as possible to get the stated goal...Image improvement.  As for "right and wrong" I am pretty liberal so long as you can explain your goals and process.

I'll post some different exposures of this scene tonight and you can add to your play time....

Greg