Making Your Image "Pop"

[Suhit Gupta]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1075277' target='_blank'>http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1075277</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Often a very good photo (and this ISN'T a very good one) is ruined because it lacks "pop". This is a way of saying that the image looks flat and boring. I'm going to use this image to show how to quickly add pop to your flat images. Yes, there are many ways to do this, but we're going to go over a very simple and basic first step. Setting your black point. Nearly every picture should have a black point. As you can see in this image, the blacks are all gray and milky looking. This is because there is no true black point. Fixing this is a simple operation, that we'll outline below."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/49940960-S.jpg" /><br /><br />Very cool guide to some simple things you can do. One of the things that I almost always do in Photoshop is hit Ctrl-Shift-L which sets auto levels (colors, brightness, etc) on an image.

[Jason Dunn]

I wonder when we'll see better on-chip solutions from the camera makers to auto-adjust levels, punch up images a bit, etc.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Best way to punch up images is to shoot RAW. Seriously. Any adjustment you do to contrast and saturation are 1,000 times more accurate in a RAW converter than they are in playing with JPEG's and such. It's almost like getting a second chance at taking the picture.

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

I find most consumer cameras fairly punchy already. Anymore and you risk losing large chunks of data in less-than-ideal conditions.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Most consumer cams are very punchy on reds, probably to keep people from looking like they're dead when you snap a picture of them... Over all, though, most are pretty weak on actual contrast...

Just my humble opinion, I could be wrong...

[Jason Dunn]

Best way to punch up images is to shoot RAW. Seriously.

Yeah. I keep "playing" with RAW, then giving up and going back to what I'm comfortable with (JPEG). When I get my next camera I'm going to go RAW. Really. For sure! :D

[Vincent Ferrari]

I'd say if you're interested in RAW, grab the new Adobe Camera Raw 3.3 from Adobe.com. It really does work exceptionally well, uses a familiar interface (for those used to PS) and really does kick much booty. Once you get in the habit, it's very easy.

[marlof]

I'm currently working my way through "Camera Raw with Adobe Photoshop CS2" by Bruce Fraser. His way of explaining why Raw can be such a big difference in your post processing capabilities are pretty solid. Great book for those trying to get the max out of their images in ACR.

[Jonathon Watkins]

Best way to punch up images is to shoot RAW. Seriously.

Yeah. I keep "playing" with RAW, then giving up and going back to what I'm comfortable with (JPEG). When I get my next camera I'm going to go RAW. Really. For sure! :D

I'm with Jason on this one. Some of my best shots over the past few years I have taken on jpg and RAW, but I keep going back to the jpgs as RAW is so much hastle. Bring on Adobe Lightroom!

[Vincent Ferrari]

I've shot some great stuff on JPG and RAW, but what I've saved (as far as pictures that would've otherwise been wastes) doing RAW makes it all worth it.

Lightroom will probably be great, but remember, you're still going to have to make the same adjustments to multiple files before they're usable. It may be nicer, but it won't save too much time in the end.

One nice thing about RAW is that it forces you to edit. You're not going to post-process 200 pics that are RAW if you only like 10 of them.

[Jonathon Watkins]

One nice thing about RAW is that it forces you to edit. You're not going to post-process 200 pics that are RAW if you only like 10 of them.

Hmmmm, I'm a hoarder, so I hate getting rid of photos. I've still not settled on photo organising software, so it's hard to rank and tag all my photos. I've played around with many photo applications and never been terribly impressed with any of them. Did I mention that I am so looking forward to Lightroom? :wink:

[Vincent Ferrari]

Delete!? 8O

You can do that?!

I meant edit in that you only process and show off your best work ;-)

Delete... Holy crap... I have every picture I've ever taken with any camera I've ever owned...

Deleting...

Wow... :confused totally:

[Jason Dunn]

Delete... Holy crap... I have every picture I've ever taken with any camera I've ever owned...

Uh...are you kidding or being serious? 8O You don't delete ANY photos, even bad/duplicate ones?

[Vincent Ferrari]

100% serious. I have separation issues with my photos ;-)

Current count: 7.233 photos since late 1999 (14 gigs)

[Jonathon Watkins]

100% serious. I have separation issues with my photos ;-)

Current count: 7.233 photos since late 1999 (14 gigs)

Umm, I have around 16,000 photos and just under 40Gb - WITHOUT all the photos I have deleted. (To be fair, that 40Gb includes many huge panoramas and several 200Mb Photoshop collages).

Hey, *I'm* the hoarder here, but some photos just aren't worth keeping.... :wink:

I keep meaning to archive off the so-so stuff and just keep the good stuff on HD, but then I read about DVDs only being good for 4 years or so.......

[Vincent Ferrari]

:werenotworthy:

[davedeal]

Rawshooter by Pixmantec makes RAW a breeze... workflow is quick and easy. Deisgned by photographers for photographers. Of course it doesn't have all the mythical powers of PS but there is a lot to be said for tools that do one thing and do it well. .02

http://www.pixmantec.com/

[[email protected]]

100% serious. I have separation issues with my photos ;-)

Current count: 7.233 photos since late 1999 (14 gigs)

Here here!

2566 (17,5 gigs) since October 2004.

[jizmo]

Here here!

2566 (17,5 gigs) since October 2004.
Lamest .. competition .. ever.

[Jason Dunn]

100% serious. I have separation issues with my photos

I think this will make a good front page post, so I'll kick off a new post.

[Jason Dunn]

Lamest .. competition .. ever.

Oh come on, it's just people talking about how many photos they have, not a competition. :roll:

[Jonathon Watkins]

Lamest .. competition .. ever.

Chill Jizmo. :) It's interesting to see what/how/how much other people shoot. It's natural to compare notes. ;-)

[davedeal]

I'll chime in ... 10.47 GB in the 2005 folder (older ones are archived). Not sure how many that is but I dump my 350D cards into date folders and convert/redistribute from there.


Can I have a 5D now? :multi:

[SassKwatch]

I wonder when we'll see better on-chip solutions from the camera makers to auto-adjust levels, punch up images a bit, etc.

I guess I'm 'old school'.....or, in 'old school' terms, I'm just a grouchy old fart.:).........'but'....

I would love to see far LESS 'automation' in digital cameras. Unless I'm shooting very casual family stuff, I always turn my dial to 'M' for everything. The problem is......manual focusing is more than a bit of a trick on my Olympus DSLR.

[SassKwatch]

I'm currently working my way through "Camera Raw with Adobe Photoshop CS2" by Bruce Fraser.....

EXCELLENT book!