Orquid "Phoenix"

Orquid "Phoenix"

by ceinmart

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

5

These are not bad IMO. The color is a bit over saturated and dark, but I didn't see any objectionable grain on my calibrated display. Remember, if they print these, the effective resolution may not be the same as viewing them full screen on a large display, so what you see in a blown up image may be invisible in the print. If, at the print size, you don't ...


4

This is noise and the rule with photos is the same as most things, crap in, crap out. You can't magically generate information for an image that isn't present in the first place. You can reduce the quality, either through reducing resolution or averaging pixels (which effectively reduces resolution). This averaging tends to make random noise go down ...


2

First, that's not a 360° panorama, but a 180° one. However, that doesn't change how this was done. This image was made by stiching together several more narrow-angle images. This process is generally called making a panorama. Some camaras have panorama capability built in. You take a few picture in succession and the clever firmware finds the ...


2

I would agree they are not bad... They are some things in post that she could do to take them to the next level but before you do anything you need to calibrate all of your monitors. In post for example there are quite a few pictures that I would adjust the brightness (increase) and saturation (lower) of the red, yellow, and orange channels. As far as grain ...


2

If your image is 240px * 240px at 240dpi, and you change the resolution in photoshop to 72dpi, the image is still 240px * 240px and the quality isn't changed. It is just a reference for if the image is to be printed. If you're using an image onscreen you can ignore the dpi, it will only ever display the number of pixels. I've found the best way to export ...


2

Not really any magical secret other than to reshoot. Generally this type of photo is taken with a white background where the lighting makes it so the background doesn't have to be removed as it blends with the white of the background. Your best bet is likely going to be to use a tablet and the quick selection tool to get the outlines quickly. At least ...


2

Lightroom can't do any background deletion (so that this area gets transparent). If pure white is sufficient, you have the following ways to achieve this: Push up the whites on the whole image Use an adjustment-brush and push up the higlights / exposure until it gets white enough Use the spot removal tool and copy some white from another area Each of ...


2

You can export the data using exiftool and then write that into the modified picture - this is the easiest way. I can refer you to the man page of exiftool, section "COPYING EXAMPLES". There are many ways to do this actually. One simple way is to create a backup of the original picture (orig.jpg) create a modified version (modif.jpg) and just use: exiftool ...


1

You do not say how you obtained this image at this pixel size or how it was generated. If you know you should say as it has a marked effect on the answer. The answer is "no, because..." but the "because" varies with the above answer. This is NOT noise in the sense that it is usually meant. As presented the 'noisiness' of the image has been caused by ...


1

Whether this is better or not is highly subjective. It definitelly looks blurred compared to original, but we also have to be aware that sharp noise on top of a slightly blurred image makes the latter sharper. This is what I've done: Copied image layer and applied High pass (1.0) on it Inverted the grey layer and then set it to overlay Copied the same ...


1

Do you really have to assign blame? Those are the photos you have. You can delete them and forget the fiasco entirely or keep them as a reminder of one or more of the following: High ISO image-noise. Poor performance of the camera at high ISO. Inadequate choice by the photographer to increase ISO instead of something else such as a brighter aperture or ...


1

it looks to me like you shot direct to jpeg and has high iso NR on, or applied some NR in post and stored in jpeg with too much compression on. Yes, it is caused by noise on the dark areas (black suits look the worst, but you could have avoided the funny texture if you shot raw and didnt do NR and stores in high quality jpegs (80-100%). it would look noisy ...


1

You can try layer via cut instead of copy If you have an image which has a large distance range in it (e.g. close distance shots instead of panoramas) you can imitate the distance function by first duplicating the background and blurring it. After blurring the duplicate, you should add layer mask and change the layer mask to a gradient in the direction of ...


1

Although the color information loss is clearly not avoidable in this kind of 8-bit transformation, you can have a better behaving image if you accept a bit of a loss in sharpness... I do not know in other programs, but in darktable you can use t he module "dithering": I tried the same trick on a small jpeg image, and this is the result: before: and ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible