How to eliminate ANNOYING photographers
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 01. 2024
- In this video, I talk a bit about my processing and how to add light and eliminate annoying photographers.
MY NEW BOOK LAND & LIGHT - adamgibbs.com/books/landlight
Check out Henry's channel here / @henryturnerphoto
Check out Paul's channel here / @paulthomsonphotographyuk
Heipi Travel Tipod - heipivision.com?sca_ref=4825421.UpyEdDmn2k
Camera Gear for sale - adamgibbs.com/cameragear
ANTARCTICA BOOK - quietlightphotoadventures.com...
MY WEBSITE - adamgibbs.com
QUIET LIGHT 3rd EDITION - www.kozubooks.com/books-new/q...
Quiet Light - Patreon Page - / quietlight
KASE Filters - kasefilters.com/ref/AdamGibbs/
Shimoda Camera Bags - www.shimodadesigns.com/ Use the code GIBBS10 for 10% off your purchase
Music from Epidemic Sound - www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
PRINT SALE - adamgibbs.com/70000-subs
QUIET LIGHT 3rd EDITION - www.kozubooks.com/books-new/q...
From the title of this video I was convinced Gavin Hardcastle would feature. 😂
@@colintraveller Fototripper. Another landscape photographer CZcamsr who has appeared alongside Adam Gibbs in many videos.
Yes, I was expecting the answer to "How to eliminate ANNOYING photographers" was going to be "Get them to move to Nova Scotia." 😝
So was I !!!!!😂
who did,nt
A tip I was taught by a South Australian pro photographer when faced with a crowded subject was to yell "Snake" 😅
I appreciate your transparency and humility when you describe your process, uncommon these days
It’s not true for every CZcams photographer, but I find your editing videos really useful.
really remarkable how powerful PS has become with that mountain example. great touch ups
as any artist, a photographer can produce a piece which reflects their artistic vision. hence photographic art, its not AI GENERATED it is a case of an artist using different tools to complete their vision of the scene. eliminate a person, a weed, trash, footprints whatever is not cheating as art is not presented as a photo journalist or documentary image
Changing an image, lenses in essence lying about what can be seen - for example a long zoom - have been part of photography since Jesus was in diapers. In a biography written by the nurse who looked after Ansel Adams, she talks about how Ansel told her he spent three days on one print he produced. Ansel was a master photoshopper before the concept even existed. He dodged, he burned, multiply that by a hundred times and that produced the print. I remember roughly a quote where Ansel talked about how he could pre-visualize a photography. I thought - Wow! Must be because the has taken thousands of images - but no, I now realize it was because he could see the final image in his mind's eye after dodging and burning it to death.
I remember once about ten years ago excitement because a number of negatives of his work were found that had never been produced and the find was thought to be incredible. I remember thinking, not really incredible, the negative was a starting place in the journey, not the final product. If it was Ansel playing with your image, he would have dodged and burned to get the light you achieved without all that work Ansel would have done. Pretty much all of Ansel's work were lies or manipulations would be a better way to say it.
I suspect you are a tad nervous because of all the discussion going on about AI and what is real and what isn't in a photograph. For me the problem with AI is for example, when I replace the sky with another sky, is the photographer who produced the alternate sky getting credit. The answer is No.
Well said
The irony is that so many of those who decry "photoshopped images" as some sort of fraud immediately hold up Adams as the model of "PURE photography" from the good old days before digital cameras and Adobe thoroughly corrupted landscape photography. 🙄
I was in Scotland at Inchcolm Abbey and it was impossible to get any shots that weren't full of tourists ... so I unabashedly Photoshop Magicked™ them right out of all of my shots! 😂 My wife was like holy crap that is amazing ... put me back! It was more difficult cloning her back than it was cloning her out! 😁
Thanks for sharing!
Great video - a nice use of AI. This reminded me of a workshop in Iceland I guided a workshop in Iceland with 3 legendary Nature photographers, David Muench, Jim Brandenburg and Tom Mangelsen. We were shooting a waterfall and Jim Brandenburg had climbed up the hill to get a closer vantage, while David was still below for a wider perspective. Jim walked into David's shot and David yelled, "Jim!" and gestured for him to get down behind some tall grass between them. In deference David's seniority and reputation, Jim hit the dirt as if hit by sniper fire. I've seldom seen such respect amongst photographers. The worst is what I call 'leap frog' photographers, where one gets in front of another, who then moves and gets in front of the offender. Simple, courteous communication often works wonders, if timing isn't an issue.
Thank you for your honesty. I think every photographer knows that the artistic freedom of each individual lies in post-processing and you have edited the image brilliantly. You have shown in this way what you can get out of a RAW image. That motivates me not to reject the pictures immediately because I don't think they turned out well.
Absolutely!
The artist license you took was perfect. I love the before AND the after.
Thanks for sharing. Another way to eliminate objects that move in different frames is to import the frames into a stack then use the median filter from Layer>Smart Objects>Stack Mode>Median. This technique is also useful in reducing noise.
Cracking piece of guidance, certainly made me think. Fancy eliminating poor old henry in the process. 🤣🤣
Really enjoyed this and thank you for your honesty and advice
It is nice to see a Professional using Generative Fill without hysteria about A.A.
Some excellent techniques, both in the vid and in the comments. I've used PS for many years (I never have cared as much for LR but that's likely because I've become so accustomed to my antiquated workflow) but I often find some different approaches that never occurred to me after seeing the processing techniques of others. The approach for the initial image was excellent and I suppose I don't look at such processing as "cheating" or "unethical" any more than we once did with dodging/burning in darkrooms in the past. As for the generative AI, I have played with it a wee bit in PS out of curiosity and I don't have a problem using it in minimal doses as a tool to remove certain things (people and man-made objects like wires, fenceposts, you name it...) as long as the image is remaining true to what I originally intended to shoot. My guess is that one could ask a thousand people their opinions about what is and isn't "ethical" in post processing and get a thousand varying opinions. As for me, I say well-done and thanks for sharing! :)
I always thought the solution to this problem is simply to be the most annoying photographer of them all and just set up in front of everyone else.
Saving this for education. Super helpful.
I love these kind of videos you do when you show your processing techniques. Also love the other videos as well, but just wanted to tell you that happy new year.
Awesome, thank you!
Very helpful! Thanks!
You're welcome!
Really enjoy your tuition on how you process your photographs. Really appreciated.
Many thanks!
Adam, thank you. Happy New Year !
Happy new year!
I once got shaky legs on Jacks Rake the Grade 1 Scramble over on Pavey Ark there. There’s me thinking I was Bear Grills. A climber appeared on a rope and I was rescued by a 72 year old Vicar from Bury😢
Thanks for the video.
You bet
Great stuff Adam 👍👍
Thanks 👍
I usually use Photoshop Remove Tool for stuff which can’t be masked out. It’s pretty awesome imo. Also Luminar Neo is brilliant as well. Especially for dust spots and power lines.
Thank you for the video!
My pleasure!
I actually just received your previous book this week (Quiet Light). I guess your new one will have to wait a bit. 🙂
Thanks for grabbing a copy
Thanks!
Cheers!
really interesting video. thanks for the tips.
Glad it was helpful!
Well done Adam - I'm surprised you didn't warm the upper left (slightly - radial filter) with so much blue in the rest of the image - you made that area appear as if the sunlite was slightly present - (maybe artistic expression) well done. :o)
Good call!
2 posts on the same day 🙂 ... Wow! Interesting I would never have considered the Dehaze first 🙂
Very helpful
Glad to hear that
Society generally frowns on eliminating annoying photographers.
Brilliant Adam , a lovely demonstration of how to use lightroom and photoshop together , may I take this opportunity to wish you and your's a Happy and Healthy New Year
Happy New Year! Thank you!
Generative Fill works for an area of maximum 1024 pixels (horizontally and vertically). If your area is bigger, it just expands the 1024 pixels it generated to the needed size. The results are horrible. Just divide the area in parts no bigger than 1024 pixels. Before you merge the generated area to your original photo, add some sharpness and noise to it, just zoom in to about 200% to find the right amount.
Something I have done when working with black masks is to shift-click on the mask when I want to see what I am adding (or erasing on another layer). This temporarily disables the mask. IIRC Alt-Click brings it back. I hope I have the keystrokes right. It has been awhile.
Great insights, thanks Adam, part of me wonders how you got the added light more amongst the limbs. Your radial just touched them, did raising the shadows do it enough or was dehaze applied there also but it so did you mask out the limbs themselves. Maybe I am overcomplicating it. Overthinking it but I feel like that part would be hardest for me. Thanks again for great video.
I masked them out and reduced the effect. I should have mentioned that
@@QuietLightPhoto ah.. thank you. Good to know. Much appreciated
I too first thought of Gavin, but expected a demonstration of the Ps Remove Tool. I’ve pushed the limits of the Remove Tool and in my hands at least would have made a mess with it in a case like this. My prejudice has been that Generative Fill is pure AI evil. This demonstration has softened my opinion. I’m eager to try it out on an intrusive oak branch that frustrated me just yesterday.
🎯
When comments are made about image manipulation some people can get a mixed reaction/idea. Photography is an artform using light as against paint etc., (painters are renowned for their artistic license!). As far as I'm concerned it's you producing an image that suits you in the hope you've created a pleasant picture. This is far removed from journalistic and documentary photography where the image should/ought to represent the scene as is without any manipulation that contorts the story being told. If you're after "artistic"... do what makes you happy!
I felt sure you were going to push Gavin off a cliff when I read the title.... 😂
This is the reason why I use Luminar Neo (for ease), I don't have twenty years to master Lightroom or Photoshop😇
that's like eating at mc donalds because you cannot wait for proper cooking
@@krobbeldierschen Luminar Neo used with restraint is simply a wonderful intuitive experience and many amateur photographers will appreciate that, especially when they are dealing with raw files for the first time.
I don't eat junk easily nor do I pretend that I am always getting the best Michelin * service when upping the ante🤫
I just ran across your channel for some reason and thought your title was interesting so I thought I would give it a watch. I am highly annoyed by other photographers - especially the ones who introduce themselves by stating the number of likes an image has received on facebook! I haven't gotten to that part of the video yet and have just been watching you apologize for editing your image. My philosophy is that unless you are adding pixels by generative fill or AI, you are doing nothing more that working the light that was there into your vision for the image and what your creative mind saw that caused you to snap the picture. Ansel Adams did exactly the same thing and his post processing skills were at least equal, or maybe even exceeded his ability to compose and expose an image. You do not need to apologize or "come clean" for this. All that light was there and I saw it in your RAW file. Outstanding image by the way. Cheers!
I took a photoshop class last year, but I don't use it much. I've forgotten how to do stuff.
Yes that is the problem with this stuff. If you don't use it that much it is easy to forget
If when you created the contrast curve to darken shadows, and lighten the rocks, you put that layer in “luminance” mode, it will not affect the saturation of the blues.
Don't you find the low resolution of generative fill compromises your image, if you want print quality, rather than just a small screen viewable result?
Good question! I believe in Luminar Neo you get twice as much resolution with the generative fill tool.
@@freetibet1000 I haven't tried Luminar, but with Ps, generative fill on my R5 images looks lousy at 100%, unless I muck around for hours and tile the fill in little bits, so I don't use it. I'll have to check the Luminar version out, thanks.
Henry and Paul, the great-great-grandsons of Leon Trotsky 🧀
😂
u unsub them
How to fake a photograph. When does it become digital art instead of photography?
I don't know I guess you'll have to decide for yourself
I appreciate how you can show us how to mitigate the gun laws in the uk with the use of photoshop 😂
Harsh!
🤣@@QuietLightPhoto
In my opinion, this is to much editing, not much different from AI generated images.
I dont disagree
I don't mind using AI for removing things, in this case, their packs but I would never add a dinosaur to the scene! 🫣
I never thought about that😉
Back in the day, you would have made a great assassin. 🥷
The way you just rubbed two people out, just magical Adam.
Perhaps CZcams is just a cover, oops said too much 🧐
Stay safe 🇦🇺