Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: JessM
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 next>>
Jan 24, 2019 06:44:07   #
Gene51 wrote:
CS6 has extremely primitive selection tools. Photoshop CC is current, and way way better when it comes to selection and refining the selection. But the easiest tools I have seen are in On1 - which provides multiple ways to make selections based on tone, color edges, etc. And the best I have seen when it comes to selecting hair against a busy background.

If all you have used is CS6, you are really missing something.

If you are using Photoshop, an old trick is to use channels to allow contrast to aid in making selections and masks. But that takes commitment to gain the expertise.
CS6 has extremely primitive selection tools. Photo... (show quote)


Thanks, Gene. I used On One years ago, when it was known by that name. I might try it again. Thanks also for the mention of channels. I've just been reading about selection masks as well -- not enough to be conversant about them, but I hope to remedy that. I'll start here today:
http://www.adobepress.com/articles/article.asp?p=1950633&seqNum=3

73.... ~jess
Go to
Jan 23, 2019 17:02:07   #
rmalarz wrote:
Jess, first off, I agree with you on the examples most post on youtube. A blind person could cut out hair photographed on a solid background. I've found the background eraser tool to be most efficient. It's in the eraser flyout. Though, I'm not sure if it's available in CS6.

Here's an example in which I used that tool. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-573508-1.html . The first photo was the 'for real' one. Scroll down to where I did a smart ass reply regarding the background. I will admit to doing that one very quickly.
--Bob
Jess, first off, I agree with you on the examples ... (show quote)


Bob, what I like about your backgrounds is that both look natural enough to be originals, i.e., not composites at all.
BTW, I'll play a bit with the bkgrd eraser;it does exist in PS-CS6. Thanks for mentioning it.
73... ~jess
Go to
Jan 23, 2019 16:52:30   #
speters wrote:
I did try Fluid Mask for a little while and was not impressed, I find it a lot easier and more precise to use PS for it, to me that's the best program to do that!


Thanks, speters. I must agree on Fluid Mask, but I'd hoped that there might be a "magic" app out there that I'd not heard of.
Go to
Jan 23, 2019 11:42:09   #
Linda From Maine wrote:
PS Elements has several different tools. Following Bob's question, it would be helpful to know what you currently use for the rest of your editing.


Linda, my only editing software, except for the FluidMask trial, are Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom v.5.7 64 bit. I failed to make it clear that PS6 works fine for selecting the main image and its edges, except for the finest extensions of edges, e.g., flyaway hair, especially with deceptive backgrounds. Further, I'm not interested in returning to Elements. What I was hoping for were recommendations of software dedicated to selection, like Fluid Mask, only, hopefully, better. Have you any experience with apps like that? thanks... ~jess
Go to
Jan 23, 2019 10:59:42   #
mdpathjp, thanks, I've used all those from time-to-time. Also, lately, I've used the pen tool ( plus Channels)-- it's fairly powerful in a steady hand. So far, the biggest problems are flyaway hair and the like.... 73... ~jess
Go to
Jan 23, 2019 10:40:59   #
Bob, I use 2 "primaries:" Lightroom for routine/simple processing, and Photoshop CS6 for the more challenging stuff. I've had both for about 14 years, but I still consider myself a tyro. Thanks.... ~jess
Go to
Jan 23, 2019 10:10:07   #
I've tried several progs for selection; the first was Photoshop CS6 (incl Refine Edge); the latest is Fluid Mask, which is an entirely different animal.
For me, selecting parts of images can range in difficulty from easy to impossible. The easy ones arrive when the well-lit, well groomed subject stands against a green or white screen. The impossible ones, for example, involve subjects, human or animal, with flyaway hair or fur, standing against "busy" backgrounds that are just about the same color and value as the subjects themselves. I'm not a studio photographer, so my selections usually involve the latter.
I'm about ready to give up on Fluid Mask, which I've found difficult to learn, hard to apply, and not much better (in my hands) than PS CS6.
I'm willing to try another app, and I'd be grateful for any advice.
Regards and Happy New Year!
Go to
Dec 22, 2018 06:33:21   #
Our 2018 eCard. Not a macro in it, but every one of the 8 layers derives from my photos -- all taken on WA's Olympic Peninsula..... ~jessM


Go to
Dec 22, 2018 06:23:49   #
augieg27 wrote:
I'am considering Tamron SF 90.mm 2.8 vs. Nikon 105mm 2.8mm (used)
What would you be your advice?
Should I consider others?
Thank you.


I have the Nikon micro nikkor 105 mm and a Tamron 180 mm. Both produce outstanding, sharp images. The 180 mm gives max image size at greater focus distance, which I prefer for shooting skittish critters. You'd be happy with either, I think. Enjoy! …. and take architect's advice -- it's the only way to find Carnegie Hall... :-)
Go to
Oct 30, 2018 18:45:48   #
Nikonian72 wrote:
You need to be aware that
MFD (minimum Focusing Distance) is measured from the camera sensor to subject, whereas
MWD (Minimum Working Distance) is measured from lens front element to subject.

In macro-photography, MWD is much more important that MFD.


I am so aware. And I agree. Thanks.... ~jessM
Go to
Oct 28, 2018 06:12:12   #
abc1234 wrote:
Never use this rule. It is totally obsolete. And how would you use it at night? Spot meter the moon. All you care about is how bright the moon itself is. You will be surprised how bright it is.


Another "rule" is the "moony 11" https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/29654249
Worked pretty well for me on the Olympic Peninsula. I need to try it here in Central FL -- sometimes the air here is so clear, it's scary. …. 73... ~jessM
Go to
Oct 27, 2018 16:51:13   #
Yep, he was ---I miss him greatly. But don't get me started on Clyde Snow stories, or they'll kick us off the group... :-)
Go to
Oct 27, 2018 15:05:09   #
Mark Sturtevant wrote:
A nice picture! And interesting conversation to boot.


Thanks, Mark. I'll bet Bill sends his thanks as well... :-)
Go to
Oct 27, 2018 15:02:19   #
newtoyou wrote:
… Did a study of the diversity of body styles. Only PhD thesis to get an x rating since Masters and Johnson, or so I heard. ...
Bill


Interesting, Bill. You're either a gross (no pun intended) anatomist, or a physical anthropologist. My good friend, the late Clyde Collins Snow, claimed the only way he could tell the sexes apart was to view their bones. He was very good at it too. The Dallas Medical Examiner's bunch once sent him some bones to theorize on, and he immediately reached into the mess and picked out the os penis of a raccoon. His report to the ME was a hoot. But when the judge asked to see it, the ME called and begged Clyde to 'revise and amend' the report. Of course he did. …. 73, ~jessM
Go to
Oct 27, 2018 09:40:31   #
John Gerlach wrote:
I spent nine weeks mostly alone, though sometimes a companion would join me for awhile, photographing in the desert southwest during March and April of 2016. I learned to really appreciate what southern Utah and Northern Arizona have to offer, and learned to use my GPS device quite well as I constantly hiked miles into the wilderness. I was always careful as I know bad things can happen to an old geezer like me who spends so much time in remote territory. Even a broken ankle could be life-threatening while alone and out of touch with the world. Here is a tiny sample of what I photographed. ……
I spent nine weeks mostly alone, though sometimes ... (show quote)


Magical stuff, John, and top quality, from choice of subject to composition and all the other requisites. Interesting comments on stopping down, although I think most macro shooters are still going for f/20. As to stack number, it seems that many macro folks -- and landscapers too -- now stick to 3 or fewer, whereas in the old days we thought 20 or more was the needed count. Maybe it's the hardware -- I think there are DSLRs today that can be programmed to step through the exposures --and through the focus changes. Not my camera of course, but I hear it's possible to tether to laptops holding software that can do the same.

One final note: I have a good friend who lives near Escalante. His advice: If you return to the area, and you see a small plane landing and being met by an automobile, do NOT walk out to see if they need help -- they won't, but you may.... :-( Thanks for the gorgeous shots... ~jessM
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.