What's new
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

how is he getting these effects!!! please help


gvlck

New Member
Messages
1
Likes
0
PLEASE RESPOND, THIS IS DRIVING ME NUTS!!

http://www.staythisday.com/placeholder.html (all flash site)

i went to this website above and was blown away buy these beautiful photos. ive already e-mailed this photographer but havent gotten a response yet. i was just wondering how he is getting these results. he explains his style as "near infrared compressed tone images." i can get the infrared glowing effect with desaturated colors and they look great. but, his photos with sky is whats baffling me. using the infrared effect or a diffuse glow kinda blows out the sky, and if i select the sky and darken it back up it just looks wierd. his photographs with the sky really blow me away. i will not stop till i get it. i already e-mailed him a couple of days ago but havent gotten a reply.
 

theKeeper

Guru
Messages
2,313
Likes
63
First off... those ARE great photos... but the quality reaks of a very expensive camera -- which makes photo alterations just that much easier to accomplish, with the least troubles/hassles.

Second... if you really want to know about the techniques he told you about, here's somestuff to read: Tone Compression & Infrared Filtering

Those should help you understand a little about what he's referring to.

If i was to only use Photoshop to create the general effects i see...
i would use duplicate blurred layers for the "soft filter" effects, and a separate layer atop the palette to add the darker border regions that fade into the photo.
I'd also use Curves to enhance to overall tonal spectrum, and Color Balance to amp up (or down) the saturation levels.

Try playing with those things and see what you can do.

Anyone else have anything to add here?
Please do. :perfect:
 

Tron

Guru
Messages
1,176
Likes
9
Really are great photos ase Mark said.

What I notice the most about his style is the blurred backgrounds, this tends to make the forground subject stand out much sharper. It is quite an effective technique.

Sure remindes of something a local Photographer told one time

He said " anyone can be a picture taker, you need talent to be a Photographer"

Thanks for sharing these gvick - nice Flash site as well
 

Erik

Guru
Messages
1,534
Likes
2
Yup.

Everyone can be a caretaker, but only few really take care.

[saywhat]
:\

using available light is difficult, but rewarding...
 

jbr0530

Member
Messages
14
Likes
0
great photos

Well I must agree thosse are incredible photos,

It sounds like The Keeper has the solution - great camera makes its alot easier....

...wish i had 5,000 or so but the little tips he mentioned are exactly what im going to try - i love the style of those photos and want the same effect - I know it aint gonna be easy but if i can come close to what he has done ill be happy

good luck - let me know how ya make out!
 

kiwi

Guru
Messages
593
Likes
0
Can someone have some pity on me and show me an example of the image/images,I tried to connect {56k} and t just bogged me way down and chucked me offline.......I did see 1 image the first Wedding pic,was that one of them?.........I am keen for the challenge if someone can show me one :D



Stu.
 
J

Josh

Guest
Not that difficult at all. A blurred copy that is blended creates the glow using the right opacity. Infrared effects? No problem either. I've created infrared effects quite often in Photoshop. You'll need the channel mixer for that. Then you can blend the results or use them as a mask to create some other spectacular effects.

Show me which particular Photograph you really like and I'll show you in detail how to do it, I mean, I've done this so many times.
 

MsOz

Power User
Messages
358
Likes
0
Kiwi,

Here's a sample from the website showing the four basic steps used to create the effect, and my favorite example of Todd Johnson's "style"...
All images posted here are copyright Todd Johnson Wedding Photography, http://www.staythisday.com/placeholder.html and are posted for educational display only.
 

jbr0530

Member
Messages
14
Likes
0
Josh said:
Not that difficult at all. A blurred copy that is blended creates the glow using the right opacity. Infrared effects? No problem either. I've created infrared effects quite often in Photoshop. You'll need the channel mixer for that. Then you can blend the results or use them as a mask to create some other spectacular effects.

Show me which particular Photograph you really like and I'll show you in detail how to do it, I mean, I've done this so many times.


If you dont mind giving me a little tutorial on some of these images that would be great

Some of the effects im tryin to create are...
'I love all the photos on his site but here are a couple that stood out.
...Are these just photos with a really nice camera or can you explain how I can make my images look this nice? I have a fairly decent digital camera - but my images dont look like these... any info would be great. Thanks

All images posted here are copyright Todd Johnson Wedding Photography, http://www.staythisday.com/placeholder.html and are posted for educational display only.
 

epic

Member
Messages
5
Likes
0
Most of this guys photographs are done on the camera first.He is a very good photographer. Photography is one of my most favorite hobbies so I try to learn as much as I can about it. I dont know what kind of camera(s) you have or if you use 35mm then scan or what not but here is a short Photography tutorial to help you get. Techniques work best with an SLR camera. Its all about the aperture, the camera's aperture controls the amount of light which reaches the film or CCD. This function plays a vital role in one of the basic aspects of photography: depth-of-field.
Large apertures (ex: f2.8-f5.6): produce shallow depth of field. Basically this means the area of sharp focus in the picture will be small. This can be useful when you want to isolate the subject of your picture while throwing the background and other distracting elements out of focus. Some useful applications of wide apertures include portraits and wildlife closeups.

Small apertures (ex: f16-f32): increase depth of field which means more elements of a picture, from foreground to background become sharply focused. This can create a distinct sense of depth to a photograph, drawing the viewer into the picture. It's no surprise that small apertures a must for most landscape photographs.

Lens "sweet spots" (ex: f8 & f11): mid-range apertures of f8 & f11 due to technical aspects of the lens optics, often yield the sharpest images. When neither a large or very small aperture is needed, these are good apertures to use to maximize the sharpness your lens can deliver.

The picture is of an inca dove and wanting only emphasis on the dove instead of background and all I used an exposure of 1/125 sec at f5.6. This image has not been enhanced threw photoshop or anything.
 

MsOz

Power User
Messages
358
Likes
0
epic said:
Most of this guys photographs are done on the camera first.
Well actually, I'd venture that all of this guy's photographs are done on a camera first... :rofl: . But, beyond that, I think you're mistaken. Those effects are achieved with some good ol' New Technology Computer enhancement.
There's no argument about starting off with a good camera, but the rest of the magic is from "near infrared color compression," by Mr. Johnson's own words. Looking at his 4-image example, you can see how digital skills enter into play here.

Your picture is very nice, but nowhere near the examples as posted on Mr. Johnson's site, nor posted earlier in this article. Although your picture shows beautiful clarity and depth of field, the main point of this effect is not the sharpness of the focal image, but the subtle color differentiation due to the layer combinations and adjustments. As you say, it has no digital manipulation, which is why it is close, but not really the same.

Every image will start with a camera first :p , but with Photoshop, a SLR is no longer de rigeur. Today's digital cameras more than meet needs to produce images very similar to yours through blurring, curves, and sharpening techniques.
 

MsOz

Power User
Messages
358
Likes
0
I'm still working on this technique...here's my latest experiment, done on a stock photo from the Photo 5,000 CD, original image on top. It's similar to some of Mark's tutorials, in that there are a lot of layers and blending modes.
 

Shreck

Member
Messages
15
Likes
0
Here is a try at this technique.
The Todd Johnson web site is an inspiration to me
in the same way that Ansel Adams photography
is an inspiration to B&W photographers.
While I do not profess to have the technique or skills
of Mr Johnson, I am begining to see a lot of potential
in this style.
The top picture is original. A bit blue cast and a bit washed out
due to haze(hard to find a clear day in the Fraser Valley)
The lower image has been channel mixed, blended and masked
in several steps to address the original problems. I like the bottom image better.
One note: I use a dual screen LCD setup with different screen settings for each screen.
The Hi contrast darker screen( the screen affected by the Adobe Gamma program,
shows the lower image better while the lighter, 2nd screen shows
the top image better.
It just goes to show how your monitor setting make a huge
difference in perception of an image.

shreck
 

jbr0530

Member
Messages
14
Likes
0
wadda think...

ive been playing around some images, tryin some new things
- hows it look?
 

Gratis Livecam

New Member
Messages
1
Likes
0
Dana from Poland

Hi my name is Dana,

i stay as Aupair in Germany for one year.
I hope i will make new friends here.

I found this great site today and will now
keep on reading.

Best Dana
 

SLXTC

New Member
Messages
1
Likes
0
joke of the day part5

Computer.... Male or Female?

As you are aware, ships have long been characterized as being female (e.g., "Steady as she goes" or "She's listing to starboard, Captain!").

Recently, a group of computer scientists (all males) announced that computers should also be referred to as being female. Their reasons for drawing this conclusion are the followings:

1. No one but the Creator understands their internal logic.

2. The native language they use to communicate with other computers is incomprehensible to everyone else.

3. The message "Bad command or file name" is about as informative as, "If you don't know why I'm mad at you, then I'm certainly not going to tell you."

4. Even your smallest mistakes are stored in long-term memory for later retrieval.

5. As soon as you make a commitment to one, you find yourself spending half your paycheck on accessories for it.

However, another group of computer scientists (all female) think that computers should be referred to as if they were male. Their reasons are the followings:

1. They have a lot of data, but are still clueless.

2. They are supposed to help you solve problems, but half the time they ARE the problem.

3. As soon as you commit to one you realize that, if you had waited a little longer, you could have obtained a better model.

4. In order to get their attention, you have to turn them on.

5. Big power surges knock them out for the rest of the night.
 

Top