Sunrise, "Oh, was I supposed to put

ginger_55

something in the foregroud?" There wasn't anything, or anybody there, but, hey, it is an ocean sunrise. I love the way the sun kind of squishes down into the water, then hangs on, before it finally breaks free to rise.

ginger (sorry about the foreground, pretend it is one of those cool shots that are all about color and shape. I am trying to think of it that way.:D )



Above ISO 400, F 16, 1/640 sec, EV 0 shot 10/20/2005

Below ISO 400, F 16, 1/80 sec, EV 0 same

I don't know why those figures were done that way, the result was the bottom one was lighter in RAW. I just worked it up to compare w the above one, since Andy asked for the Exif, there is usually a reason for that, so I did work it up. I also tried Pathfinder's noise reduction, there are some questions I would have on that, though I see no noise. I do wonder if the red is enough on the top of the sun in this new below. Also, I hope I got all the dust bunnies, but they do tend to crop up later. ginger Crumb, I changed the composition, darn!




Another version below, same exif as above, worked up a bit differently. Just a sec, Andy, I know, I will get the orig to you. Gosh, I am hungry!

StevenV

"Supposed to?"

Bah!

This is a creative art.

Angelo

why? it's great as-is.

gus

Perfect ginger Odd thing is that i was thinking of that same shot last night but with a full moon.

rsi1986

I like it. So what about the foreground! It's pretty, and that's all that counts.

pathfinder

Very lovely, interesting image Ginger.

I think it might be even better with a trip to LAB for the red tones of the sky - subject the A and B channels to a little Gaussian blur or a Surface Blur, and the noise in the sky will diminish and give a smoother tonality to the overall image. I like the simplicity of the graphic image, and think the noise in the sky detracts from what can be an even better image. Try it, and see if I'm right or wrong.

ginger_55

Thanks, Pathfinder.

I tried just using the noise reduction thing on the red channel in CS2. I don't know how to do the G blur thing in LAB. I am not following along, not that closely, and I never bought the book.

If it didn't work, what I did, could you explain a bit more.

ginger

gubbs

Rules are supposed to be broken

Beautifull shot ginger!

mwgrice

Great shot!

About the foreground: simple is often best. I'm not sure it would have been any better if you'd managed to put (for example) a well-placed boat or a large bird to the right of the sun.

pathfinder

ginger_55 wrote:

Thanks, Pathfinder.

I tried just using the noise reduction thing on the red channel in CS2. I don't know how to do the G blur thing in LAB. I am not following along, not that closely, and I never bought the book.

If it didn't work, what I did, could you explain a bit more.

ginger

Ginger, start by duping the background layer with CTRL-J. Then select the upper layer and type Image>Mode>LAB. Now go to the Channels palette ( You may have to click View on the tool bar if you don't have the Channels palette docked with your Layers palette ). Now click on the A Channel and do A Gaussian blur - maybe 6 pixels - just kind of eyeball the greyscale image until the noise just disappears, then do the same thing to the B channel. Maybe add little USM to the L channel . Now, this was on the upper layer, so use the blending slider to adjust to taste. Bingo - go back to RGB and you're done.

Let me know if you don't see a significant reduction in color noise in the image.

I like this image and I like the simple effective composition.

Andy

exif, ginger?
(lovely very nice)

you have a spot on your sensor again...time to clean

ginger_55

andy wrote:

exif, ginger?
(lovely very nice)

you have a spot on your sensor again...time to clean

Thanks, Andy,

One spot is good, considering...............
There are a gazillion spots on it, and I have heard about every one of them. After that trip to the beach there were more. I try to get them all, but they hatch overnight. I should get them all again two days later.

See another landscape post for discussion of said dust spots.

I will look at the exif: I had just arrived at the beach, one of first shots of the sunrise, I decided that it was too dark and changed it, but here, at home, I changed my mind again:

ISO 400, 1/640 sec, f 16, EV 0

10/20/2005

ginger:D

ginger_55

I just noticed all these responses and Pathfinder's wonderful information re LAB, the blur and the noise reduction.

Thank you, Andy (already thanked), Gubbs, Grice and Pathfinder, I will try the noise reduction thing.

I don't see the noise, but perhaps I will notice it when it is not there.

Andy, I don't see the sensor spot, maybe I will see that when I am getting rid of the noise LAB style.

Will do later,

thanks, all,

ginger

Andy

ginger_55 wrote:

I just noticed all these responses and Pathfinder's wonderful information re LAB, the blur and the noise reduction.

Thank you, Andy (already thanked), Gubbs, Grice and Pathfinder, I will try the noise reduction thing.

I don't see the noise, but perhaps I will notice it when it is not there.

Andy, I don't see the sensor spot, maybe I will see that when I am getting rid of the noise LAB style.

Will do later,

thanks, all,

ginger

can i play, have a link to an orig - pm it if you like... just convert natural from raw pls... no adjustments.

ginger_55

Andy, et al, that is the link to a special gallery called beginnings. It is public, the two photos are in there with the originals available. I put all the RAW settings back to the orig settings, as I know them.

Please let me know when you are through picking these up, or whatever, and I will make this gallery private again. I might leave it this way at least over the weekend.

Thanks, Andy,
and anyone else, if you want to play, or not,

ginger:D

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/gallery/903248/1/41057969

ginger_55

Blended from two RAW versions of same one


OK, I have never gone to all this work before, but when I was telling someone else how a moon and trees could be done and talked about blending, I thought that it was too late to eat lunch anyway, so..........

I took the darker of the two different photos. I took it to photoshop dark and made a psd file, then I lightened it in RAW, and made another psd file. So, I guess I had one for the hi lights and one for the dark areas. Then I got out a book and followed the instructions on blending the two together as PF told me last week how to get the sliders apart. There is so much to know, it takes awhile when people like me are learning to piece together the information.

I then worked it up in curves, a slight S curve, saturation to 15, in Selective colors I raised the red a tad and the yellow. I did the noise reduction that PF told me about in LAB, I checked the whole thing for the gamut and reduced the saturation a bit until the gamut warning was only in one (not large) place.

I saved them.

ginger (I don't know what else I could do. It is the same composition as the first one I did, exactly.)

ginger_55

Does the pink on this last shot bleed too much?

I am not obsessed: should the blue be lighter. This one, I am aware that the water is the sharpest of any I have done. I must have blended them perfectly.

So I want to keep with that, but from there, I am not sure on the colors, exactly. I did do some cloning on the sun, just a bit, to keep the hole in the sun yellow, not white. I worry about that.

Now, this morning I look, and I am still wondering re the color at the bottom of the sun. Does it appear to bleed? If so, is that good or bad?

(I am doing my own nit picking now!) And with only so much time right now, I can only let my husband use the PC) But I am hoping to know if I should do more......

ginger

ginger_55

I just can't get it exactly right, may be closer, gotta go

gus

Ginger what works for me is to process it...keep the original & just walk away from it for quite a while (im re-doing a lot of yosemite shots from may at the moment)

I find i become almost intoxicated over some shots but when i come back to them i find the answer quickly.