Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 12 Feb 2014 (Wednesday) 02:00
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

I did a really bad job of blurring the background on editing a shot for DOF.

 
Nick_Reading.UK
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
836 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK
     
Feb 13, 2014 15:52 |  #16

Nathan wrote in post #16686659 (external link)
depth mapping is the proper way to go about it

lol - nittaya, that's a pretty big girl. kinda hot... but big.

Yeah she does look double sized ;-)a


EOS 5Dmk3 X2, 60D, EF24-70mm f2.8L mk2, EF70-200mm f2.8L IS mk2, EF85mm f1.8, EF50mm f1.4, EF50mm f1.8 mk1(350D with 18-55mm Sh"kit" lens).
Speedlite 600EX-RT, 430EX II Flash. manfrotto 190XDB tripod, Giottos GTMML 3290B Monopod, B+W 77mm 110 Single Coated filter, Hama 77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
nittaya
Member
122 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: dubai
     
Feb 14, 2014 05:41 as a reply to  @ Nick_Reading.UK's post |  #17

yeh. it looked odd but could not figure out what was wrong. till nathan mentioned it.
forgot to resize the girl.:oops:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,981 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 780
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Feb 16, 2014 19:11 |  #18

Here is what I generated with the full res, unblurred JPEG. I PMed you the full res.

The image was shot with at 55mm on a 350D. I guesstimated the distance to the subject of about 10 to 15 feet. The DOF ends at about 2 to 3 feet behind the subject for this condition. So, I established the middle ground subjects as partially in focus and the end of the full DOF gradient at the front of the bus, more or less, where the other people are.

I also defringed the shot and added some deconvolution sharpening to counter the f/14 aperture and diffraction in the original.

kirk

IMAGE: http://kirkt.smugmug.com/Photography/Link-Share/i-gQQtrGx/0/O/comp.jpg

Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rimmer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,416 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2010
     
Feb 16, 2014 21:51 |  #19

Fantastic thread, learned a lot! Thanks to all and especially Kirk, and to Douglas for the link.


Ace Rimmer -- "What a guy!"
"Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast." ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAlz1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,475 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere Great!
     
Feb 17, 2014 01:57 |  #20

birderman wrote in post #16683726 (external link)
Well I don't profess to be an PS expert, but since I am learning (well trying to teach myself) I thought I would have a quick and dirty go at this With PSE....hope you don't mind...
I duplicated the layer and created mask of the girl and edit the mask to use gradient fill to protect part of the road in same focal plane as girl, I then applied guassian blur, I also tried to lighten the distracting shadow on the road and dodge the girls face to bring out some shadow detail and applied some hue/saturation adjustment to the background.

This is only a quick edit whilst at work so the selection and masking might not be the most accurate but it would be interesting to get some feedback on the ideas attempted.

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by birderman in
./showthread.php?p=166​83726&i=i194386055
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

Wow, horrible.... I wish the original was still available so I could see why the edit was so poor.

nittaya wrote in post #16684022 (external link)
i think bluring the background in post processing most often looks weird. better approach is to replace the background . here is one attempt . it is a quick edit so it has many flaws but if one spend little bit more time in post processing , it is possible to avoide those flaws.

Omg, either she is a twelve foot giant or you placed her on a miniature set strait out of Hollywood.

kirkt wrote in post #16684075 (external link)
I'm not sure what the DOF was like in the original, but here is a quick fake using the Lens Blur filter in PS with the rough depth map inset in the image. The blur is a little too much, but I did it that way so you could see what was going on - the blur I applied was on top of that in the original posting, so that also adds to the slight strangeness.

In my depth map, the area of the gradient at the mid gray should probably be pushed further back, to an area between the middle group of 5 people sand the background group of people.

kirk

Perfect! That's exactly how it's done. Good job mate, ;)




Eos 7D, 40D w/70-200L 2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, Nifty Fifty II, 100MM 2.8 Macro, 18-135mm IS , Sigma 30mm 1.4 , Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART 580ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
birderman
Goldmember
1,049 posts
Likes: 42
Joined Mar 2011
Location: London, UK
     
Feb 17, 2014 04:05 |  #21

Rather than just commenting 'horrible' bigalz1 something more constructive would have been more useful. Considering I already commented that this was quick attempt at the idea using PSE. Whilst its not perfect, I think the Gaussian Blur has been overdone, and maybe I should of tried lens Blur instead, but not having tried it before wasn't quite sure on using it in PSE. I believe the methodology was along the right lines but poorly executed especially when someone as skilled as Kirkt shows the correct techniques to be applied. In the end we are all here to learn and there is something we will always discover.....


Birderman
London, UK
my photos on Flickr (external link)
My Website (external link) or my Facebook - KishWphotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAlz1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,475 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere Great!
     
Feb 17, 2014 13:54 |  #22

It's my personal belief that you add help and advice when you can give it properly. A poor, "quick", and incorrect edit is exactly what he was trying to avoid. So therefor you did for him what he didn't want to do.
I guess that explanation would have been better, ;)




Eos 7D, 40D w/70-200L 2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, Nifty Fifty II, 100MM 2.8 Macro, 18-135mm IS , Sigma 30mm 1.4 , Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART 580ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
birderman
Goldmember
1,049 posts
Likes: 42
Joined Mar 2011
Location: London, UK
     
Feb 18, 2014 03:50 |  #23

BigAlz1 wrote in post #16696570 (external link)
It's my personal belief that you add help and advice when you can give it properly. A poor, "quick", and incorrect edit is exactly what he was trying to avoid. So therefor you did for him what he didn't want to do.
I guess that explanation would have been better, ;)

I think your comment is still more your opinion rather than constructive criticism, it would be more helpful to everyone to explain why you think it is horrible and what the issues are. Surely to help people learn the idea is not to do the work for them but to point them in the right direction which I think the description I gave in post does because I explained it was a quick edit in PSE to try out and show the techniques. It would also appear that given the limitation of PSE compared to PS my methods were along the right lines albeit poorly executed according to some. Therefore I believe that it was not necessarily poor advice or incorrect edit just a different approach to the problem. In retrospect maybe I overdone the blurring so that it was more obvious of the parts that I was applying the blur to so that a discernible difference from the original was more obvious. For a constructive comment one should advice on what elements are poor such as: is the masking bad, too much blur, wrong type of blur filter etc. and suggestions on alternatives or improvements. Just making a statement that something is horrible doesn't help anyone improve or others to see what's wrong and how it may be fixed and therefore nobody gets to learn anything.


Birderman
London, UK
my photos on Flickr (external link)
My Website (external link) or my Facebook - KishWphotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAlz1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,475 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere Great!
     
Feb 18, 2014 06:31 |  #24

I feel that it was a horrible solution. There wasn't need to break down your work. It's like giving the wrong answer to a question. No need to tell you why it's wrong based on the simple fact it wasn't right.
That statement may not seem very nice but it's truthful. If you're looking for positive cc on you're edit I would be more than happy. But that isn't what this thread was about.
Not personal, it was just wrong. ;) No hard feelings....?




Eos 7D, 40D w/70-200L 2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, Nifty Fifty II, 100MM 2.8 Macro, 18-135mm IS , Sigma 30mm 1.4 , Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART 580ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,515 views & 0 likes for this thread
I did a really bad job of blurring the background on editing a shot for DOF.
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is paneerIegend
1177 guests, 298 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.