How do you do this....

[agwright]

This photo ( http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1266528 ) is stunning :D but how do you do it?

1 Take a good photo and :?:

[Scottes]

One way would be using Levels. Set the Black point to about 1/3 in, the White point about 1/3 in, and leave the Midtone in the middle. That should come close, and then play from there a bit.

Basically the person clipped everything so there are no true blacks and no true whites. There's other ways, of course, but playing with Levels is easy and quick.

I'd also guess that they softened the image a bit. Duplicate the background layer, Gaussian blur it (Radius 20 for full-size, 8-12 for web-size) and then reduce Opacity until it looks good.

Oh, of course a good B&W conversion to start...

[stopbath]

My guess is that they used curves and merely brought up the black starting point up a few stops. (This would then start black as a grey, not black) There are no blacks, but there are still whites in the image.

If using levels, doesn't that just move the starting point of BLACK. Thus if the user moved the black slider up to 1/3 the way through, the blacks would then start in the deep shadows of the image, still keeping the blacks of the eyes, black. (I may be wrong, as I have not used Levels an extensive amount and usually use it to correct exposure.)

Perhaps if using levels, you could take the mid point slider and slam that down to the black side... That should work...

[Scottes]

Yes, you're right stopbath. I wasn't thinking and didn't have time to play.

With Levels, though, moving the Midtones pointer towards black has a similar effect.

Or with Curves, moving the Black point straight up also has a similar effect.

[stopbath]

Yes, you're right stopbath. I wasn't thinking and didn't have time to play.

With Levels, though, moving the Midtones pointer towards black has a similar effect.

Or with Curves, moving the Black point straight up also has a similar effect.
It's Monday (at least I think it is) and that is the perfect day to be not thinking :) :wink:

[PacAce]

If I were doing it, I would just create a duplicate layer of the image and then create a layer of all white in-between. Then I'd lower the opacity of the top image so that the white background underneath showed through partially.

[stopbath]

If I were doing it, I would just create a duplicate layer of the image and then create a layer of all white in-between. Then I'd lower the opacity of the top image so that the white background underneath showed through partially.
Maybe it's Monday for me now, but why create a duplicate layer and insert a white layer? Why not just create a white background, and turn then lower opacity of the image above the white? What benefit is the bottom image hidden beneath the white layer?

[PacAce]

If I were doing it, I would just create a duplicate layer of the image and then create a layer of all white in-between. Then I'd lower the opacity of the top image so that the white background underneath showed through partially.
Maybe it's Monday for me now, but why create a duplicate layer and insert a white layer? Why not just create a white background, and turn then lower opacity of the image above the white? What benefit is the bottom image hidden beneath the white layer?

Simple enough to answer. Because you can't create a layer underneath the background. That's the reason you have to duplicate it.

Or, you can create a new image that's all white and then copy the image into it.

[stopbath]

Simple enough to answer. Because you can't create a layer underneath the background. That's the reason you have to duplicate it.

Or, you can create a new image that's all white and then copy the image into it.
Oh. Ok. Sounds good.

Could you also, delete the background layer after creating the white and duplicate, or just swap layers (make background come up one layer so that the white becomes the background.)

I don't play with layers that often so I don't know (and I don't have a graphics program handy to check with right now..) Thanks.

[Scottes]

Alt-Double-Click on the BG layer makes it a regular layer - that is, it unlocks it, and now erasing makes it transparent rather than the current BG color, etc.

Then create the white layer, and click & drag to swap their positions.

[PacAce]

Well, if you really have your mind set on not having the background image around after making a duplicate, then instead of making another layer that is white, you can just fill the background layer with all white.

But to be honest with your, I don't think the extra unused layer is really worth worrying about. In the end, you'll probably end up merging all the layers together and ending up with only one layer anyway.

[maderito]

The photo is a high-key image - all the tones are confined to the midtones and highlights. The good ones I've seen begin _before_ Photoshop manipulation through good lighting, background selection and modest overexposure.

There's a superb example from one of the forum members:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=26522
Note that the effect was created with both portrait technique and photoshop tweaks.

I like PacAce's approach to producing a Photoshop'd high-key image. Once created (leaving you with a histogram with most or all tonal values on the right-side of the plot), the tonal gradations can be furter refined with levels/curves.

Using a black layer overlayed on an image and adjusting opacity creates a "low-key" image. You should have a dark background.

[PacAce]

If I were doing it, I would just create a duplicate layer of the image and then create a layer of all white in-between. Then I'd lower the opacity of the top image so that the white background underneath showed through partially.

Oops, forgot something. You also need remove the colors from the image if you want to make your image look like the image that was referenced by the original poster. Then you might want to adjust the contrast so that the image is a little more contrasty than usual. This might be better done before turning down the opacity of the image.