via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

There is some discussion in the general section about the new sky replacement tool in Ps. I used it this morning to quickly replace a couple of skies using the Ps images. You can use your own image, which I do have a lot of since I take random sky shots, but wanted to see how their images worked. I have to say, it is waaayyyy too easy, no skill needed for this task now. I used to do this using layers in Ps, but now the program does all the layering on its own. There may be a bit of cleanup required, and those tools are included, but I did not use them on these three images as they were only for reference. A nice tool that can be used to improve a shot if you can get around any anguish over the degree of processing you are doing. I'm not sure how I'll use it yet, but with all of these new techniques it does seem that some identifier should be included, even when a filter of any kind is added. I don't think this is a composite so much as an "enhanced" image or "multiple images," or maybe a "filtered image." I think all of this angst over processing will die down at some point as it all becomes the "norm." Composites have been around since the start of photography but were mostly, not sure about always, identifiable since they were part of the Pictorialist's genre and their idea was to replicate a scene using multiple negatives. Today much of what we do in processing is not identifiable.

I've posted here for discussion since I wanted to include images. I don't routinely add images to the posts of others as the rules indicate we are not to do that, although it does seem to be common place anyway for some to do that.

(Download)




(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Connie, I'm interested in your comment, "I think all of this angst over processing will die down at some point ." Since I mostly hang out on UHH, I'm wondering if there are other sites where negative opinions about pp are as widespread as here.

On Facebook's Create 52 Photography Group, there are folks who shoot jpg and/or with their cell phones, and many images look unedited, or minimally edited. There are others whose creativity with post-processing is awe-inspiring. We all co-exist quite peacefully and enjoy the variety. The result is what matters, not the gear or amount of pp.

In your experience, is UHH's main discussion forum unique among internet forums in the amount of negativity and resistance towards processing?

EDIT - this topic (by a brand-new user) was just posted to main discussion:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-670646-1.html

The hostility and closed-mindedness is certainly depressing.

Ourspolair

The examples you have shown seem to be tastefully done. I think the "problem" with sky replacement is largely that people do not pay attention to the Sun's direction in the clouds, or sometimes the clouds are out of proportion to the scene. You have shown that it can be easily done and in my opinion have done a great job with this. I would count this as a successful use of the application. Please stay well and keep up the good work.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

First, I would guess the post you noted was done in fun...he appears to be being facetious, poking fun for comments, at least that's my take. I've never been able to figure out why people are so adamant that things should be done only their way and that opinion does seem to be more prevalent on this site than say, for example, the backcountrygallery.com forum. But, there is resistance there, too, of course but the comments about it do not seem so adamant or uninformed. There does appear to be a larger group of "point and shoot" people on this forum in my opinion based on what I read and also based on the images I've seen.

Photography has been in turmoil since its inception and it continues to be. In the 1930s Ansel Adams, Edward Weston and others pushed hard to change the perception of photography, on both the west and east coast, from that of the "fuzzy wuzzy's," which is where the common thought of the day was regarding photography, i.e., pictorialism (after only seeing it in the beginning as a way to document subjects) to that of "pure" or "straight" photography, a term that many people today do not actually understand...the term meant to get the shot as sharp as you can, i.e., f/64, but it never meant do not process a shot; all of the photographers involved in this movement processed their shots, i.e., developed, to the best of their ability and it was very important to most of them (except for Dorothea Lange and Ansel often processed her work because he could not abide by the fact that she had no clue how to do it well).

Perhaps the angst won't die down but it won't really matter as photography as we know it today...digital...will march on. I think if someone is so opposed to the changes taking place in photography today they should simply pick up their old film camera and use it, then none of the changes will bother them.

Ansel and his group pushed hard to get photography to be seen as an "art" in its own right and today it is seen as that, an art, and it has a place in our art galleries and museums because of all the hard work that the photographers before us have put into it. Change is inevitable, you can rail against it or figure out how to work with it. I try to work with it and have creating and each of us gets to make that decision. I have no problem at all with people who want to use their cameras for "point and shoot" or "happy snapping."

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Thanks so much for your thoughtful reply and information based on your background and studies.

You might be right about that user's topic being made "in fun." As you know, I tend to be overly serious about stuff like this 😉 My mindset is based on both past experience on UHH and life itself 😋

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Connie - I think the gnashing of teeth and angst will die down over time. The genie is out of the bottle, and all the hand wringing in the world will do nothing to put it back. As an aside, I have no idea why I would let other people's preferences place limitations on what I do.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

Its looking good - just want PSP to come out with a sky replacement now.

captivecookie Loc: Washington state

Linda, which are the originals? Personally I like clouds in a sky.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Hi, Linda did not post the images, I did. The plain blue sky is the original, the cloud images are the images where the sky was replaced using the images provided by Ps with the new Sky Replacement option.