kenievans Loc: Dallas

I took this shot on our cow milking adventure yesterday and I shot in RAW for the first time. I believe this goes on top of a barn for air circulation. We were on a tour so i didn’t have a lot of time to “work the shot”. I didn’t feel like I had a lot of depth in the original so I cropped it, flipped it, then adjusted the perspective to give more depth to the right side of the shot, trying not to distort the barn topper too much. I added a little grain to bring out the texture in the rusty metal. I still don’t feel satisfied with it. Should I have cropped it more on the right? Is it really just too boring of a shot? Did I do it backwards?

Thinking about it now I should have shot lower and more on an angle to the fence rather than head on. I didn’t want to go crazy with the effects either, I just wanted to improve it.

Your downloads and suggestions are appreciated.

(Download)

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Considering how busy the background is, I think it would have been better if you had not shot the image with aperture set at f/11, but at f/5.6 or so, to more effectively separate the main subject from the background.

With that said, what you could do to improve the image is to treat the subject and background separately in editing, rather than applying adjustments uniformly over the entire image. Sharpen only the subject, not the background. Add grain only to the subject; the background does not need it. Less contrast boosting on the background than the subject. Etc. Whatever it takes to achieve a better separation... to allow the subject visually stand out against the busy background.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

If your intention was to make a main feature out of the roof vent then ideally the space round it - including what we see in the background - would be relatively clear and free from distractions.

That's a composition consideration, and if this is your only shot then you'll have to optimise what you've got. Increasing contrast will add depth and will also make the different shapes more vivid and distinct (as will Clarity). However, adding contrast will also accentuate the highlights and shadows, and in your image those are already quite pronounced. The answer is to use Whites, Highlights, Brightness, Shadows and Blacks to adjust the light levels to more suitable levels. You've probably already noticed that lifting the Shadows and Blacks tends to remove overall contrast, as does lowering the Whites and Highlights. So it becomes a balancing act of adding contrast and then mitigating the negative effects (darks becoming too dark and lights becoming too light). You want the positive aspects of added contrast without the negative aspects. Most times it's a balancing act and it's up to you to decide what the optimum compromise is. That is one of the skills of mitigation that was mentioned elsewhere. In extreme cases you may have to select problem areas to give them extra, local adjustments (as opposed to trying to do it all with global adjustments).

The effect that Clarity has depends very much on how the brightness is distributed on the luminosity spectrum (the levels of brightness from dark to bright). Clarity affects mainly the mid tones.

Another factor that's going against you here is the fact that bright objects/areas attract the eye more than dark objects/areas. (Having said that, dark objects/areas can also be eye-catching, but they would typically have to be large and very dark before they would compete with the bright objects/areas). The side of the roof vent that we can see is mostly in shadow while much of the background round the vent is brightly lit. It will help if you can go some way towards reversing that - which may mean having to make selections (again it depends on how extreme it is). As a very general rule, extreme problem areas are usually best dealt with by selecting them and giving them extra adjustments.

It's also true that warm colours advance whereas cool colours retreat. Bright, sunlit areas tend to be yellow or orange (i.e. warm) whereas shadows tend to be blue (i.e. cool). Much of the time that's not a factor that's worth worrying about much, but in your image the background is warm and brightly lit, whereas much of the intended main subject is darker and in shadow. Cooling the colours of the background and warming the colours of the vent (possibly using WB and/or Tint) may or may not be worthwhile - you'd have to decide in the course of the edit.

One of the main factors in depth perception is vividness. Close things will be vivid whereas more distant things will be softer (that applies not just to contrast but also to colour strength and sharpness). If you specifically want to accentuate depth (not always necessary or even desirable), you can work on the foreground and background separately by adding extra contrast and saturation adjustments. Where sharpness is concerned you can use sharpening for foreground objects/areas whereas you can add extra denoise to the background to soften it. Often a multi-pronged approach using moderate adjustments is more effective than trying to do it all by adjusting just one parameter such as contrast.

Having said all that, it's only in specific circumstances that you need to go to all of these lengths (or even just some of them). You wouldn't want to make it all part of your regular workflow. But learning how to do all of these things is time well spent. And much of the time extreme adjustments aren't needed, especially where colours are concerned (that includes WB and Tint adjustments). Learning not to overcook is one of the most important lessons to learn.

kenievans Loc: Dallas

Wow RG thank you so much for taking the time and effort to explain that in sich detail. I have been reading about composition but it's always in relation to getting it right in the camera not how to fix it in pp. That is a lot to absorb but I think the essence of it is less is more. One could also apply the KISS theory (keep it simple stupid).

Things were a lot more simple with jpg but I am not giving up. I will learn to make better and more informed choices. A big virtual hug to you for all your help!

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Edits following rook2c4's emphasis of "Whatever it takes to achieve a better separation"(comments above R.G.'s), I lowered the saturation in yellow only (I learned on UHH that most greens are actually mostly yellow ) - and you could do this selectively if you want to keep the sunny yellow-green in some areas, then I darkened selective areas, did tiny selective blur of all but the subject, rather than sharpen the subject. Then added one more element to help direct our eye: a filter in Nik Color Efex called "darken edges/lighten center." Works similar to a vignette, but with more control.

(Download)

kenievans Loc: Dallas

Linda I think that is a great improvement. It does focus the eye on the subject and makes the background more quiet. A point taken from RGs lesson.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Virtual hug much appreciated. That was a lot of info in one go, mainly because your query raised several issues. Rook2C4's approach is probably more appropriate for somebody just starting out. Anything you learn about how to deal with patchy light (including avoiding it) won't go amiss, and dealing with foreground and background separately is something you'll probably want to do fairly often, but 3D visual cues should probably be classified as a more advanced topic (as I said, it's not something you'll have to worry about in every edit).

Learning how to adjust then mitigate is basic editing, especially where contrast and light levels is concerned. For a future subject, learning how to saturate then mitigate using the HSL tool is another powerful skill to have. And once you've learned how to balance sharpening and denoise, you've just about covered basic editing. Most of the other stuff you'll need only occasionally.

kenievans Loc: Dallas

In the past I was going overboard in the other direction and not getting good depth of field. I definitely need to work on what to apply and when instead of a one size fits all approach. Thank you for your response.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

R.G.'s comments are valuable principles. I would use them as he suggests, that is, mitigating for the compromise that fits your vision, with perhaps special attention to difficult areas.
As for your shot, the general compositional principle is that a visualy heavier left is okay, as the eyes tend to return to lower left center. I would like that orientation (flip) in this shot because it clearly identifies the object as a farm discard, leaving the eye to wander to the eventual return to nature, and, law of attraction, back to the vent.

kenievans Loc: Dallas

Thank you Bob. I think I am going to go back to the original and keeping in mind these suggestions see if I can rework it. If I am tempted to tinker with all the setting I will say "Get the behind me Satan."