India Point Park

India Point Park
by matt-ball                

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

New answers tagged

0

I'm betting on this being constructed in Photoshop. Slow sync flash can get you so far, but the lit subjects are too crisp (particularly the second subject to the right) for me to believe this was done in camera. Nice image though :-)


0

You can try to stack the photographs, It would then place every image on it's own layer - crop it as a document and then save each layer as an image (via an action). File > Scripts > Load files into stack Only cons to this would be file size if you have 100's. Hope this helps


5

It is obvious there is a strong light source illuminating the subject, possibly a flash shining through a medium sized modifier above and to the right of the camera. A moderately wide aperture was used, probably somewhere around f/4 or so. If f/2.8 or wider had been used, the background would have been much blurrier. And I would guess the shutter speed was ...


1

There is bright light from flash or lamp (notice, that the person is hiding his eyes from it). This allows to use much shorter shutter speed than 1/15th. Background blur suggests wide aperture. The light in this club is rather pink than white, so I would suspect that white balance would need to be adjusted.


0

Raw files are basically digital negative of an image. At the same time jpeg is optimized output created by camera. jpeg cannot contain so much data that a raw file can, so its impossible to convert a jpeg image to raw.


3

There exist methods to do this, but as Alex. S also points out in his answer, there are no standard tools that I'm aware of that will do it for you. In principle, it's a straightforward problem. While there are a vast number of mathematically possible raw files that are consistent with the given JPEG file, the vast majority of those are not likely to be the ...


4

You cannot (should not) produce a raw from a jpeg. Theoretically it would be possible as compressed NEF is based on a TIFF container and a "wide" JPEG/JFIF variant IIRC. And all is not lost as, having run these kinds of competitions, I can say that you may still be able to enter depending on what type of competition it is and why they want raw files... ...


27

In addition to the points Alex S made, you need to consider why they want RAW. There are several possible reasons: Bit depth as Alex S said. JPG suffers from compression artefacts which RAW doesn't. Blown up to exhibtion size these can jump out and ruin a print. Having the RAW file is often used as a proxy for having taken the photo, as RAWs aren't ...


27

RAW is not (or minimally) processed image data from camera sensor. JPEG is processed image data. Typically, raw-files from modern cameras have 12-14-bit per pixel which means up to 16384 values (for more details see Michael Clark's comment). JPEG can have only 256 luminance values per RGB channel. This means that jpeg contains much less data than a ...


2

Black clipping has by no means to be a defect. For example an image that just shows the silhouette of a motive uses black clipping as a graphical effect. However, usually one tries to avoid black clipping because of the fear of losing details in the shadows. This quickly becomes a habit one stops to think about although deep blacks can also be beneficial ...


1

CMM stands for "color management module", and the ProfileCMMType tag apparently indicates the kind of color management profile used. I've seen values like lino, adbe, and appl. n/a could mean that the tag wasn't included in the EXIF data. I looked briefly but wasn't able to find a list of valid or common values.


1

It is called local contrast and micro-contrast enhancement, and many software tools call it "Clarity" or "Detail". E.g. see the Topaz Clarity showcase.


2

The questions are: Are you losing detail in the black region that affects the quality of your photo? E.g. if you have some dark texture there, clipping at black would kind of make the photo more sterile, although it is much harder to notice that in black areas. Also, black areas usually suffer from noise, and a heavy clipping at black will remove that. ...


4

This is a modern example of doubly (or multiply) -exposed photos, when the same negative film frame was exposed multiple times with different scenes. This used to be done in-camera, or in the darkroom by stacking multiple negatives and exposing them onto the same photo paper. With Photoshop, you want to use the Screen Blend mode. It's easiest to use source ...


1

I'm don't know what post-processing software you use, but I use the Clarity slider in Adobe Camera Raw to achieve the contrasty, gritty look you show. The more you slide to the right, the heavier the effect.


1

This is not an artifact of the Sony file format, but is related to your lens. All lenses have some amount of optical imperfections/distortion, but camera manufacturers now are compensating for these imperfections through the use of software-based "lens correction". As the earlier answer explains, one software is displaying the image with the lens correction ...


4

When you are opening the images with FastStone, you are likely seeing the JPEG preview generated in-camera and attached to the raw file. If your camera is set to apply lens correction or distortion correction then it is likely being applied to the image when the JPEG preview is generated. Lightroom generally ignores in-camera settings for things such as ...


1

What you are describing is called Dodging (to lighten) and Burning (to darken) in Photograph, techniques that come all the way from shooting and developing film. Photoshop have specific tools for doing this, but the way I like to do it is non-destructively - try using this as a guide: http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/dodge-burn/


2

A quick Google search led me to a tool in GIMP called the "Resynthesizer Tool," which is apparently GIMP's version of Photoshop's Content-Aware Fill. Here's a video tutorial on using the Resynthesizer Tool. Hope that helps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEV0X5WNRVY


1

In the past, I have used ImageMagick to perform all sorts of complex distortions of images to straighten, de-skew, etc. Unfortunately, the tool is command-line oriented (it's not a GUI tool), but it provides you a lot of control over what you want to do. Your case is covered in the Circular and Radial Distortion Methods of the online user guide.


2

Camera Raw filter only works with 8/16-bit RGB images. Even if you're intending to print the image, I suggest you do your edits in RGB, then convert to CMYK in the final stages of editing. CMYK has a smaller colour space than RGB, so you'll have more colours out of gamut and shadows can be rather blocky. Switch the image to RGB with Image > Mode > ...


2

Although quite laborious, one way to get to where you want to go would be to edit the raw file globally in Lightroom and export a separate version of the entire photo edited specifically for each of the areas you wish to develop differently. Then combine them using masking and layering in photoshop.


3

As far as I know, the only values that can be brushed are the ones shown in the brush. I would guess that Adobe feels the others are out of the scope of lightroom, which is "only" a image editing tool, not an image creating tool like photoshop. So maybe you'd need photoshop and use the RAW file from there.


0

I used to fix using Shake Reduction Filter under Filter -> Sharpen menu. This filter is available in Photoshop CC, not sure if it is available in other versions. You should use it effectively to succeed.



Top 50 recent answers are included