Blending two Images

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19065038
.

I do wonder, however, why you chose to have the birds facing away from one another instead of having them face each other.

I thought of it but didn't want to do all the masking. Have at it.

Peano wrote in post #19065010
That's the spirit! Here is a different interpretation (just for fun).

Hosted photo: posted by Peano in
./showthread.php?p=190​65010&i=i188949911
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

Thanks Peano, never really thought about doing that but I really like it.

Harry

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19064556
.
thanks for posting the original images - that is quite helpful when it comes to giving you suggestions.

I would suggest using the top image (the one with the male) as the base image, and then bringing the female into that.

Why?

Because then you won't have that nasty looking out-of-focus tan object that is along the right side of the tree trunk. Something like that can ruin what would otherwise be a nice image.


.

Thanks Tom, I took your suggestion and used the male photo for the base and removed the distraction in the background, it made a huge difference. Thanks again,
Harry

Peano wrote in post #19065044
.
I thought of it but didn't want to do all the masking. Have at it.
.

.
Oh, I see. . I didn't realize it would be more work to do it that way.

I know what I want images to look like, but I'm not really a Photoshop user, and have no idea what needs to be done in order to make the changes that I see in my mind's eye.

In Photoshop, as soon as something requires working in "layers", I run away! . I've never used layers, and probably never will. . My brain just doesn't work that way, so it is not easy and intuitive for me.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19065083
.
. In Photoshop, as soon as something requires working in "layers", I run away! . I've never used layers, and probably never will. . My brain just doesn't work that way, so it is not easy and intuitive for me..

I do pretty much all edits in layers. The version I posted above had a dozen layers.

Here's another variation (of which there is no end):

Peano wrote in post #19065044
.
I thought of it but didn't want to do all the masking.
.

.
I'm not really sure what you mean by "masking", but I suspect it has something to do with the background behind the birds, that would appear as a blank space in the image when the bird is removed. . Is this the case?

If this is the case, then I am curious about something:

Would it be helpful, when shooting images that are to be blended, to take one photo of the scene when no birds are there? . I mean just a moment before or after the birds were there, so that the light and the shadows would all be the same?

I'm thinking that if one had a photo of the scene with no birds, then one would not have to fill in any blank spaces left when the birds are removed from their original locations.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19065083
In Photoshop, as soon as something requires working in "layers", I run away! I've never used layers, and probably never will. My brain just doesn't work that way, so it is not easy and intuitive for me.

The use of layers is a very powerful part of PS & I can't imagine not using them. I will admit that way back when I first started layers were a little confusing. There should be lots of info about layers online. Here's just one - https://helpx.adobe.co​m …p/using/layer-basics.html

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19065095
.
Would it be helpful, when shooting images that are to be blended, to take one photo of the scene when no birds are there?.

It might be helpful in some cases. Just depends on the image and the extent of the blending.

D Thompson wrote in post #19065097
The use of layers is a very powerful part of PS & I can't imagine not using them. I will admit that way back when I first started layers were a little confusing. There should be lots of info about layers online. Here's just one - https://helpx.adobe.co​m …p/using/layer-basics.html

Thanks for the link, I think it should be a good place for me to start.

Harry

harryv wrote in post #19065242
Thanks for the link, I think it should be a good place for me to start.

Harry

Hope you find it helpful as well. I put it up in response to Tom's post, but glad if anybody finds it useful!

john crossley wrote in post #19065099
Aye, but the elements that you are trying to align have to be the same size to start with, before you start dragging them around and rotating them.

When things are sized different it's easier for me to lower the layer opacity and semi get it into place before I use the Transform tool.

harryv wrote in post #19064433
I would love to have an experienced PS user to take a look at this image, does it look like one image or is it pretty obvious that it's a blend. Thanks, Harry

Hosted photo: posted by harryv in
./showthread.php?p=190​64433&i=i94501323
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

I'm not an experienced photoshop user, Harry, but your blended image looks like one, and not at all like a blended image.

Lame-Duck wrote in post #19070482
I'm not an experienced photoshop user, Harry, but your blended image looks like one, and not at all like a blended image.

Thank you Mike, with the help of this thread and other information I've got better handle on it. Thanks again!
Harry

The direction the light is coming from in the image is important for cohesiveness: it's on opposite sides of the birds' bodies now. I also find the composition works better with the subjects facing in different directions - it adds a nice directional tension to the image IMO.

Really like this interpretation. Looks very natural.