The Joy Of Raw And Photoshop

[johngraham2002]

thought id post these as a bit of encouragement for some of the newer peeps to digital photography


when shooting in raw, no shot is wasted even the worst examples can be saved as the image below shows

id be interested to see some examples of other peoples before and after shots


original shot in raw

http://www.john-graham.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/original.jpg

now the photoshop version minus that annoying tree

http://www.john-graham.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/alternate.jpg

[ChP]

Nice work
That was a pretty good shot to begin with, but the debris did pose a problem.
I really like the second shot, what changes did you make on the image?

[stoneylonesome]

I have to agree with you on the RAW. here's my example, Completly blew the exposure on this one.
http://www.bytegallery.com/data/3080/40farm_1.jpg

All I did was adjust exposure comp. to 1.2 and than crop and resize

http://www.bytegallery.com/data/3080/40llama.jpg

[cdhender]

That's pretty phenomenal. I shoot in RAW now but was actually thinking about switching to shooting in JPEG. But this has convinced me otherwise. Thanks.

[johngraham2002]

Nice work
That was a pretty good shot to begin with, but the debris did pose a problem.
I really like the second shot, what changes did you make on the image?

first adjustment was white balance, then half stop adjustment in exposure

then in photoshop major use of the clone tool and healing brush
then i adjusted levels and shadow highlights

then ran through the high pass filter then some colour adjustment


to be honest the cloning was a bit tedious but i feel it was worth it

[lomond]

John, I agree 100%.
There is so much more flexibility in RAW.

If the tonal range is within a certain amount you can even blend two images made from the same RAW shot.
One adjusted for highlights the other for shadows.

Nice shot and great cloning work, but I give up, where is it. :?

[GyRob]

would it have matted if thoes 2 shots had been jpeg and not raw im sure you would have got the same result anyway .
Rob.

[johngraham2002]

would it have matted if thoes 2 shots had been jpeg and not raw im sure you would have got the same result anyway .
Rob.




not quite true there afterall there,s absolutely no adjustment for over exposure in a jpg, yea some of photoshops tools can help a little but raw is so much more flexable

[johngraham2002]

John, I agree 100%.
There is so much more flexibility in RAW.

If the tonal range is within a certain amount you can even blend two images made from the same RAW shot.
One adjusted for highlights the other for shadows.

Nice shot and great cloning work, but I give up, where is it. :?


HI Cameron this perticular shot was taken at the longbar in kilbirnie

you may have heard of tiana falls

[sparker1]

It's a beautiful shot, and you did some great cloning. Funny, but I like the color in the original (the greens and white water) better than the final. Guess it's all a matter of taste.

[Titus213]

I agree with sparker1 on the color of number 1. Nice edit job removing the tree.

Stoneylonesome I remember that shot when you posted it. The original is quite different. Nice job.

I just found DPP and have been having a ball with it. Seems Raw Shooter won't run on this old PC so I've been limited in what I could use. DPP is a great price (free) and seems to do an amazing job. I'm jazzed. I've been shooting RAW only for some time now and with DPP I have been going back over everything - a couple thousand photos....

[alfa1six4]

RAW is the way to go! I also prefer the color of number 1. It's much warmer and inviting. Good job removing the tree. I might also crop out the sky or clone in some more tree leaves to hide it. The moss covered rocks in the foreground are nice. But still a very nice photo, looks like a cool place to visit.