#29 Theme and variations....

divamum

I decided to pursue the Rusalka "Song to the Moon" text, and see what I could come up with for that "little bit more" for my moon shot.

Rusalka is a watersprite, hence why I went this route...

Thoughts?

DsrtVW

Very nice and dreamy. I will have to look up the song. Was that a 200mm f4 or f2 you acquired did a nice job on the moon

Katmitchell

Whoa... a little on the dark side there Diva. I would pump it up with some levels and then push some of the darkness back in with curves.

That aside.. It is absolutely gorgeous.... I love it..

I am going to have to look up the song, never heard of that one..

Kat

divamum

Here it is sung by Anna Netrebko, opera's current Eye-Candy soprano

Too dark? Hmm... I seem to recall you don't have a calibrated monitor - how does it look to others? On my computer it looked great in PS, but then not so good when I exported it and viewed in Picasa, so I'm confused now Anybody else care to chime in on that...?

Chris, it's the 200 2.8 - VERY pleased with it.

Katmitchell

Yes, your correct.. Mine is only calibrated online with software, not manually with an at home calibrator... will have to see what others say..

Love the song.. for some reason while I watched it, I can just image how you do house work, I bet your daughter hears you singing opera while vacuuming and doing dishes....hehehe..

Kat

KevXman

I like the concept. Really nice image. The brightnrss/darkness is fine on my monitor. There seems to be a lot of noise/banding in the sky though. I think you're on the way to another winner.
— Kevin

divamum

KevXman wrote:

I like the concept. Really nice image. The brightnrss/darkness is fine on my monitor. There seems to be a lot of noise/banding in the sky though. I think you're on the way to another winner.
— Kevin

Thanks Kevin. I see the banding too (wanted to see if anybody else spotted it before I pointed it out ) but I can't figure out what it's from. Given this shot was actually taken in broad daylight, I have no doubt it's something to do with my manipulation.....!!! Could a gradient fill layer do that and, if so, how would I go about preventing it?

richtersl

I don't see any banding here.

BTW I love this!

It is a little dark, though. Try experimenting with curves and levels as was suggested. Also, try some dodging on the treetops where the moonlight is hitting them. Not too much -- just enough to bring out what's already there.

JAG

The overall darkeness is ok for night....although with the moon being so big and full I would dodge in some highlights a little more in the trees...not too much but just enough to show up the lighted side of the trees. Or maybe just bump your contrast some to harden up the darks and brights. Second is that the moon is not reflecting at all in the lake...that makes it look unrealistic...there should be some sort of shimmer right?

The house in the very background is too dark also to give a three dimentional look. Again the dogde tool might come in handy.

I do see the bands in the sky too.

These are my thoughts...but the image is definately worth it! Very pretty.

nightpixels

Hi Diva,

I too do see some serious banding problems in the sky to a point that it is quite distracting. As a matter of fact it is all over the sky. My monitor is a 30" Apple Cinema so I'm pretty sure it is not the lack of quality of the monitor or my video card.

I think you are right that the (extreme?) post processing must have caused this.

Overall it is a very nice image, but the banding/noise is a serious problem in my eyes.

Snowgirl

My monitor is calibrated (Spyder) and I find it quite dark, too.'

Love the concept, though.

billtaichi

I also see the image as very dark. But I love the pic overall fix the banding and darkness and I think you have a winner.

richtersl

I'm looking at this from my monitor at work and other than your image appearing darker than on my home monitor, I still see no banding.

Anyone know why this is happening with some monitors and not others ? It's a pretty scary thing to know a photo looks OK on one monitor and not another.

KevXman

divamum wrote:

Given this shot was actually taken in broad daylight, I have no doubt it's something to do with my manipulation.....!!! Could a gradient fill layer do that and, if so, how would I go about preventing it?

Here something that you might try.
Add a "Photo Filter" adjustment layer.



Check color instead of filter and uncheck Preserve Luminosity. You'll need to run the Density up pretty high.

Pick your color by clicking on the color square to get this window.



You'll probably want to work in the deep blue to purple range. Also get your color from the area where it is almost black.

After all of this you will propably need to tweak the exposure of the actual image a little, but be sure to put that layer between the image layer and the photo filter layer.



Once you have everything in place it should just be a matter of playing with the different numbers to get the right combination. (Hue, Filter Density, Exposure, Transparency of individual layers and so on.) You might even need to use your layer masks so that the moon itself doesn't get too dark. And as Joyce said, don't forget the shimmer on the water. Good luck! I'm sure you will pull this off.
— Kevin

Kinkajou

Hoorah! A Czech song! I was thinking of doing one, but I haven't decided which, or whether I should go with something southern since I live in the land of live oaks and spanish moss.

I like the shot, but I'd go for a tighter crop on the moon and lake and definitely add in the dodging that others are suggesting to really demonstrate the light emanating from it.

Now for your Czech trivia of the day: Czech is full of diminutives, so "měsičku" isn't just "moon" (which is "měsic"), but a diminutive form. We don't have a direct translation in English, but měsičku is a more affectionate form of the word - something like "little moony-moon". People use it about 75% of the time. Same with "sluničko" and "slunce" for the sun.

divamum

Kinkajou wrote:

Now for your Czech trivia of the day: Czech is full of diminutives, so "měsičku" isn't just "moon" (which is "měsic"), but a diminutive form. We don't have a direct translation in English, but měsičku is a more affectionate form of the word - something like "little moony-moon". People use it about 75% of the time. Same with "sluničko" and "slunce" for the sun.

Presumably kind of like the German -chen (or the Swiss-German -li)? I LOVE singing in Czech - I would kiilllllll to do Jeziba in Rusalka, although unfortunately the opera isn't done that often and when it does, it's usually The Big International Houses and the mezzo role goes to a superstar rather than "A. N. Other Working Singer" like me. Ah well! I'm happy that I had the chance to work on two of the roles in Jenufa a couple of years ago, and I really REALLY hope I get the chance to do "Cunning Little Vixen" at some point too (I adore Janacek).

/digression

Thanks for all the feedback, folks. I'm having weird problems with colour management at the moment - this has NEVER happened on this 'puter before, but currently when I save a file as a jpeg in PS, it shows up in Picasa (where I do my uploading and file management) MUCH MUCH darker, and with altered colour. I still haven't figured out which is right since I haven't changed any settings in either program that I'm aware of (where would I find colour-management settings in PS so I can check to make sure I didn't inadvertently catch a buried key command at some point?). I'm hoping that it will magically resolve itself as mysteriously as it started, cuz it's a PAIN

In the meantime, I've gone back and reshot the lake with a CLEAR blue sky today - we'll see if that makes it easier to get what I want. Yesterday we had puffy clouds, and i suspect cloning those out was part of the reason for the artefacting in the sky (hmmm... that sounds like it SHOULD be a song title, 'Artifacts in the Sky" )

Here's the SOOC shot I was working with yesterday:


Ok, back to work..... watch this space!

(Oh, and Kevin - THANK YOU! Never occurred to me to use the photo filters - that's brilliant, and i will definitely experiment with it! )

Katmitchell

Looks much better Diva, I like the enhanced reflections on the water with this new shoot..I am assuming you are going to integrate your moon and night effect onto this one?

Here is a thread of picasa users discussing the same problem your having, might help..

http://groups.google.com/group/picasa3/browse_thread/thread/94134f238da1817a

Kat

divamum

Katmitchell wrote:

Looks much better Diva, I like the enhanced reflections on the water with this new shoot..I am assuming you are going to integrate your moon and night effect onto this one?

Here is a thread of picasa users discussing the same problem your having, might help..

http://groups.google.com/group/picasa3/browse_thread/thread/94134f238da1817a

Kat

Wow, Kat, your monitor must display REALLY dark - that's not a new shot, but the SOOC, high noon, daylight shot that was used as the basis for the one posted last night. It's the same one that's been causing all the problems

Thanks for the Picasa link - I'll have a look at that. Honestly, at the moment I'm ready to give the idea up and go do something else I'm getting so frustrated with it!!

KevXman

Here is a tutorial that looks like it would be fun to try.

http://www.digitalartsonline.co.uk/tutorials/index.cfm?featureID=1420

Katmitchell

I dunnoooooooooooscratchscratch

Maybe it does, looks like a lot of others agree on the darkness too..

Ya know as Linda said, these monitor differentials can be frustrating.. I guess it would be prudent to ask on our threads how it looks as far as light/dark. I need to remember to do that myself. Here I am thinking my entry may look OK and what if it looks like cacca? huh... I ran into this a lot back when I designed myspaces and flash sites, only then it was more of an issue of cross internet browsers. Talk about a headache, try pleasing both firefox and internet explorer with CSS, pain in the butt.. Now with the photography it is the monitor. Why they can't find a happy medium is beyond me... The part that "really bites" is even if you have a calibrated monitor, that does not mean the judges and voters do.. haha...:D

I cannot foresee any other solution than a majority vote...


I understand your frustration with the shoot. I have started over 3 times so far and still do not have anything. I love your idea and think you have some nice shots here, but you may consider stepping into the English world with the rest of us less sophisticated folk. It is difficult to tie the title and meaning of the song with the capture, and make a quick connect...perhaps step back and simplify.., Just a thought.. and after all you are the Diva of music :D:D your bound to have some ideas...

Think highschool...... Just my ramblings as usual...

Kat

divamum

Oh, I agree that the processed one is displaying too dark and I have to figure out what's up with my PS colour-profiling (because I think that's where the problem is), but do you really see the unprocessed sooc shot as a night-time look to it? It was taken around 1pm yesterday, with exposure based on the sky (to capture the clouds). Here they are side by side:

First one I posted



SOOC unprocessed, uncropped raw



And a recent attempt to lighten it and lose the banding (not sure it's worked, but fwiw). On my monitor colour and contrast are better, but I'm still seeing artifacting.



:bash :deadhorse :bash

Katmitchell

Ok, I see why you said that.. .. Yes, I really thought it was a night shot.. The first one looks like dark night, the second one looks like daytime and the last one looks like nighttime, but moonlit..

I can't give you a definite answer on the banding, I saw it in the original post, but this new worked over one is too small, and I cannot decipher between the two.

Perhaps when you get some time later, post a URL to a bigger size capture of it..:D

Kat

nightpixels

Hi Diva,

Banding/noise has definitely been reduced but it is still there quite a bit. Funny thing is I cannot see it on my work computer (30" Dell) but I do see it on my home computer (30" Apple Cinema). I think my work computer is calibrated so that it shows images a bit darker than they actually are which is why it is hiding the banding problem in your image.

richtersl

OK Divamum -- take a deep breath. There's still plenty of time to get this right.

Have you thought of just taking a night shot and adding that moon to it?

This is a lot like music, though, isn't it? I mean, you can work and work on a particular phrase to get it just right and no matter what you do in that practice session it's just not coming together. I don't know about you, but I tend to just go on to something else and return to it later in those cases. Usually when I return to it later, things go more smoothly.

I think you have some good material to work with and you'll be able to pull this off very successfully.

divamum

Thanks Allen and Linda. Really helps to know how it's appearing elsewhere. I have access to three monitors, but only one is calibrated, so it's a bit of a crapshoot on this one which is obviously displaying markedly differently depending on how it's viewed.

richtersl wrote:

This is a lot like music, though, isn't it? I mean, you can work and work on a particular phrase to get it just right and no matter what you do in that practice session it's just not coming together. I don't know about you, but I tend to just go on to something else and return to it later in those cases. Usually when I return to it later, things go more smoothly.

Funny you should mention that - that's exactly what I told myself last night... (I was thinking dressmaking rather than practicing actually, but same idea - sometimes it just WILL NOT bend to your will, and you have to step away from it before you can make it work)

I think the banding is because the only way I can really get the sky colour I want is by using hue/saturation on "colorize" (photo filter and other options just didn't give me the depth or the darkness), but there obviously just isn't enough dynamic range there to do what's wanted.

Actually, typing that has just given me another idea to try.... hmmmmmmmmm

Halite

divamum wrote:

I think the banding is because the only way I can really get the sky colour I want is by using hue/saturation on "colorize" (photo filter and other options just didn't give me the depth or the darkness), but there obviously just isn't enough dynamic range there to do what's wanted.

Actually, typing that has just given me another idea to try.... hmmmmmmmmm

This could be a job for LAB mode. Convert your image to LAB mode and apply a curves layer that only affects the Lightness channel. Any banding that shows up could then be removed by blurring and/or adding noise to the Lightness channel. The color can then be tweaked separately in additional curve layers applied only to the A or B channels.

divamum

Halite wrote:

This could be a job for LAB mode. Convert your image to LAB mode and apply a curves layer that only affects the Lightness channel. Any banding that shows up could then be removed by blurring and/or adding noise to the Lightness channel. The color can then be tweaked separately in additional curve layers applied only to the A or B channels.

You know, sometimes my own ability to miss the forest for the trees (pun intended ) amazes me. I didn't even THINK of going to LAB (despite the fact I regularly use it for certain adjustments)

Thank you for the reminder!!!!

divamum

Today's attempt ....

karlabbott

This is looking quite nice! I really like this edit of the image. What strikes me most is how the tops of the trees seem to fade away into the black. The reflection of the moon is also nicely done.

Katmitchell

Wow Diva, that looks beautiful. You really pulled it off nicely..

One question though.. Why the black shading on the water up front? It is not bad, I am just trying to place in my mind where the shadow is coming from.

I love the trees, they look like velvet.. Wonderful process...clap

Kat

KevXman

Really nice! Knew you'd pull it off.