Recommended Posts

Here are some pictures to show how much post-processing can change the quality of your work. The file sizes are quite high (796 KB and 1.08 MB) but it's worth the download. Check them out! Of course, comments are welcomed. :)

imagefb1lc4.png

imagefb2lp6.png

crazy88eess where are you from in ca? i see you went to santa clara, thats where I live....if you're ever down to go out shooting sometime let me know.

Livermore.

I only go outside of that area like twice a year :/ Being in school cuts down on my travel, but I'll keep you in mind!

Both pictures taken with Nikon D80 and Hoya R72 filter (EXIF Info available with the Original pictures). Lens used was the 18-135mm one.

The postprocessig included switch of blue & red channels and small correction of saturation. Finished with a small touch-up on curves.

Aww, I was hoping for flickr links so I could favorite those.

I just got a hoya R72 recently, but I can't seem to PP like that.

-Using CS2, I go into the channel mixer.

-Under the Red channel I set the red slider to 0, and the blue slider to 100.

-Under the Blue channel, I set the red slider to 100 and the blue slider to 0.

That's how you switch the channels right? No?

Edited by crazzy88ss

Okay so here's what I have. Everything was changed in Photoshop CS2:

Growth

2723319126_80afc6e678.jpg

This is the original picture.

Growth Postprocessed

2722487327_6ff2ac6e70.jpg

Auto curves, auto color, and some tweaks to hue and saturation.

Growth Vibrant

2722494919_4af20879f4.jpg

Based off of Growth Postprocessed, changed hue and saturation again.

Growth Sepia

2723307194_bfda539097.jpg

Based off of Growth Postprocessed, changed saturation so that it was black and white, then added sepia filter.

Growth Exposure

2722491037_54e9ffeb95.jpg

Based off of Grwoth Postprocessed, added exposure.

Please let me know which you think is best so that I have a better idea on what I should be looking toward while postprocessing. Please also critique the original image. I am an amateur photographer and am looking to get better. Without a DSLR camera for the time being.

This photo was taken using a Canon Powershot S2 IS.

#2 is nice for me, then again, I prefer much pale colors when it comes to Plants :p

And exposure one hurts my eyes :)

BTW you don't need a DSLR to shoot nice photos :)

Thank you for your input :). I think if I can add maybe some filter to the exposure it might look better. But I do agree that it is a little bit too much.

Hey Fowarek,

The first image looks the best to me, in all honesty. I just calibrated my monitor a few days ago and calibrate frequently. The only thing I might do with that image is shoot the hue of the yellow channel slightly towards the greens and get a little more green out of the plants. Kick up the contrast a tad and you shall have a nice photo. You might even experiment with the dodge tool on the bottom leaves and dodge the midtones a little bit too. Might balance the foreground a little with the flower.

Thats more grayscale than sepia, define%3Asepia&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3a%6ffficial&client=firefox-a should be a shade of brown basically.

some examples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/sepia/

I know that. That's why I pointed out I made it greyscale first, and then added a sepia filter. I just really didn't want it to be a full blown out sepia picture, because I don't think it would have complimented the picture very well.

It looks my days of amateur photography are over. Due to financial problems, my father has decided to return his camera (Fujifilm Finepix S1000fd). Now I'm stuck with a crappy 5-megapixel cell phone digital camera. :cry:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Maradona if hydration breaks had existed in Mexico 86.
    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!