Author Topic: Photo Editing... (Read 640 times)

Golfer · « **on:** September 29, 2006, 02:31:54 PM »

I have some pictures that I've taken which I like. I think they're just fine and dandy as they are but my lack of skills with photo editing programs leaves me with no idea how they'd be improved.

Beyond adjusting brightness, tint or such I really don't know the capabilities of the different programs or which is better and why.

Suggestions of different programs (Photoshop is one) or actually "how" you'd go about modifying them or why you'd modify would be a great leg up for tinkering

Thanks.

Eagler · « **Reply #1 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:04:38 PM »

looks good to me as is

I am in the middle of putting together a dvd slideshow for my older sister's 50th birthday next month. I have been digging out and scanning photos from the mid 50's to present. Some of the most memorable photos are the blurriest, darkest, crappy looking ones of the bunch. A photo is a memory captured to paper/file for later re-living. The majority of those viewing the photos will not care if byebye or rip have improved your photos through software. just saying.

eskimo2 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:14:06 PM »

Is this what you meant by "improved"?

Golfer · « **Reply #3 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:16:22 PM »

I've yet to see byebye do anything so thats partially a dig at him

Any rate I realize that as snapshots these are fine. I'd like to get some proficiency in some of the editing software available for my own "artistic" reasons. That and I'd like to be able to take pictures and edit them for fun and humor.

I hear humor is still allowed in some countries. It scares me!

Golfer · « **Reply #4 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:16:53 PM »

Almost exactly, eskimo!!!!!!!!

Saintaw · « **Reply #5 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:20:30 PM »

Golfer,

I haven't used it personaly (I'm colourblind... wouldn't be a point now would it). But I heard a lot of good about Gimp. (No, not the "Furball" kind)

http://www.gimp.org/windows/

ramzey · « **Reply #6 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:22:10 PM »

sorry wrong pict before

Golfer · « **Reply #7 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:25:43 PM »

What did you do to it ramzey? I keep flipping back and forth and can't figure it out.

Ah now I see. It looks like a green filter? Shadowing different? I'm looking for terms/definitions rather than just tweaking the pictures.

It's interesting. Not natural, it's different but it is interesting.

Dux · « **Reply #8 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:26:24 PM »

Golfer, (apart from removing dust or scratches from a scanned photo) most of the "editing" you'd ever have to do with photos like that is color-correction and contrast adjustment... and that's really only if you intend to print the pictures.

It's a can of worms unto itself... you need to calibrate your monitor to your printer, or if it is someone else's printer, find out what profile they use and calibrate to that.

I wouldn't worry about it... you will never be able to adjust a photo so that it looks good on everybody's monitor, you have no control over that.

If you're talking about image manipulation (like what Eskimo did

) then Photoshop or an equivalent will do you just fine.

Dux · « **Reply #9 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:28:09 PM »

He saturated the colors a little. Case in point; your monitor may not show it.

Golfer · « **Reply #10 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:29:01 PM »

Dux the picture he had up before was the same one. I now see the new one he editied in

ramzey · « **Reply #11 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:32:50 PM »

sorry i upload wrobg picture before
honesty there is not much for color correction, just play with saturation as Dux said

imho first thing you have to improve is taking SHARP pictures, otherwise they are just scrap not worth to publish

ByeBye · « **Reply #12 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:33:37 PM »

Photography is an art and everything about the way a picture looks or how it is composed or presented is subjective.

That's one reason why I went off on ripsnort. He even "improved" Wolfalas wedding pictures, for Christ's sake, in a thread about a wedding, not photography.

eskimo2 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:34:08 PM »

or this?

Golfer · « **Reply #14 on:** September 29, 2006, 03:35:33 PM »

Doh found where I went wrong with the lear pic

having it blown up to "original" poster size. Ooopsie.