I was on the way home and snapped this. Before & After
Interesting comparison, certainly the second shot has brought out details hidden in the first, but I am not certain that there was such a wide dynamic range in the first pic to need an HDR shot. But whatever the case the second pic is definitely more appealing than the first. Your decision to clone out the two signs and the wires was, IMO completely correct. The removal of the two signs has worked well, however I do not believe that the removal of the wires has been successful as there is a clearly obvious series of repeated patterns in the sky. For me the criterion for any cloning is that it must be invisible and undetectable. Often the easily useable tools such as the PS cloning tool/content aware are not good enough to be able to achieve this, but a combination of careful layer masks and the puppet warp feature can, though it is time consuming. Sorry if this sounds a little negative, its not meant to be but looking at a number of your posts you seem to me to be someone who does strive to reach a high standard. And ensuring that cloning is absolutely undetectable is very important in achieving that standard.
Hope this helps.
Peter
conkerwood wrote:
Interesting comparison, certainly the second shot has brought out details hidden in the first, but I am not certain that there was such a wide dynamic range in the first pic to need an HDR shot. But whatever the case the second pic is definitely more appealing than the first. Your decision to clone out the two signs and the wires was, IMO completely correct. The removal of the two signs has worked well, however I do not believe that the removal of the wires has been successful as there is a clearly obvious series of repeated patterns in the sky. For me the criterion for any cloning is that it must be invisible and undetectable. Often the easily useable tools such as the PS cloning tool/content aware are not good enough to be able to achieve this, but a combination of careful layer masks and the puppet warp feature can, though it is time consuming. Sorry if this sounds a little negative, its not meant to be but looking at a number of your posts you seem to me to be someone who does strive to reach a high standard. And ensuring that cloning is absolutely undetectable is very important in achieving that standard.
Hope this helps.
Peter
Interesting comparison, certainly the second shot ... (
show quote)
Thanks. I wasn't really satisfied with the cloning of the sky the first time either. I have since worked on it
This is what it is all about, good critique by Peter, and use there of. I would have liked you to have checked the original box when you uploaded the HDR rendition.
What a difference. Beautiful sky and the colors are so strong.
SoHillGuy wrote:
This is what it is all about, good critique by Peter, and use there of. I would have liked you to have checked the original box when you uploaded the HDR rendition.
Here's a version with some tweaking.
The problem that Peter related to regarding duplication of clouds is still prevalent. I hadn't notice it during my last post, but it definitely shows on enlargement.
I hope you will be able to work it out, even if it is just for your own satisfaction.
SoHillGuy wrote:
The problem that Peter related to regarding duplication of clouds is still prevalent. I hadn't notice it during my last post, but it definitely shows on enlargement.
I hope you will be able to work it out, even if it is just for your own satisfaction.
I will work it on it a bit more. The client as approved the one I sent for printing to canvas for their offices.
Hey...a happy client is money in the bank. ;-) Nice shot and good PP.
I have not seen it mentioned by the experts so wanted to hear others take on the sky. It is a beautiful sky, and I seem to be drawn to it in the picture. What appears distracting to me though, something again not yet mentioned, is what appears to be a halo affect around the bow of the boats from the third or so boat down the line. I am no expert so was hoping others would comment on this.
1. Is this a nit and not worth bothering with?
2. What in the work flow is causing it? It does not seem to appear in the original.
3. How would you avoid or fix it if needed?
Regards,
Rick
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.