Rocky Snapper

Rockhampton Photography Club Google Calendar

2008-06-03T19:14:00.003+10:00

Whiten teeth and eyes in Photoshop

2008-06-01T09:52:00.006+10:00

There are quite a few tutorials available on this topic via Google search. Most of them involved destructive editing, i.e., to undo editing you had to use Edit>Undo or History.
This method uses layer mask so if you want to go back a couple of steps, you just have to change foreground colour by hitting X and painting over the edited area.

Comments and suggestions are welcome.
Sumit

Smoke Art

2008-05-29T15:19:00.001+10:00

Smoke Art - Upload a doc

Time Lapse Photography

2008-05-23T11:45:00.002+10:00

clipped from photojojo.com

Time Lapse 101: An Overview

Alright, so it's not time-travel. All time-lapse photography is, really, is shooting a bunch of photos of the same thing, spread out over a period of time, and smushing them together into one video that plays back in a shorter amount of time. In the words of our pal Genie, "Phenomenal cosmic powers… Itty-bitty living space!" Yeah, time-lapse is kinda like that.

Time-lapse lets you see the natural progression of time, while not having to wait through the actual length of it… so you could watch the sunset (at least, yesterday's sunset) as you always wanted to, without staying up late to do so – and you could fit it all within a nice, brief commercial break in-between episodes of "Dr. Who" too.

Now, there's a few basic steps to take in creating a time-lapse film:

Choose your subject.
Figure everything out.
Shoot your still photographs.
Edit your photos in Photoshop (Optional).
Assemble all your photos together into a video.
Edit your video – add titles, music, and all that jazz.

Step #1: Choose Your Subject

We know that you're a very clever sod and probably have some brilliant ideas already in mind for what to shoot in time-lapse form. But just in case, here are a few suggestions to get you thinking:

Fruit rotting/ice melting
Grass growing
A cross-country drive from LA to NY in 5 days
Sunrises or sunsets
A busy city street over a day's time
Opening of flower buds (basically any form of nature)
A baby growing in mommy's tummy (throughout the whole pregnancy)
A construction site
The desert sky (stars!), or other natural landscapes
A self-portrait as you age over a number of years
Life cycle of a tree over a year's period
Snail races
Cookies baking in the oven

Ask yourself how much time you have to commit – the four hours it takes for a snail to get across the back porch might be a lot more do-able than the four months it takes a construction site to be finished.

Step #2: Figuring Out Intervals and Everything Else

Based on what you're shooting, you'll want to know how long your actual event or subject will last (or at least, how long you're willing to shoot for), whether you want your final movie to be blocky or smooth, how long you want your final movie to be, and based on all of that, how often (at what interval) you'll want to take photos of the event.

The Length of the Event
Usually the length of the project changes how you're going to shoot it. For longer-term projects, like this nifty time-lapse that documented a soon-to-be-mom's growing tummy throughout the nine months of her pregnancy, you might only need to get a new shot every day or so – you could do that with a point-and-shoot, and not need any fancy automated equipment.

Ask yourself how long you can go between photos while still documenting the action of the event; for change that is pretty big and radical over a shorter amount of time, you'll want to shoot it more often. For change that is gradual and slow over a longer time, you can have more lengthy intervals between shots.

How the Final Movie Appears
Your final movie can end up two ways: blocky or smooth and seamless. With blocky, shots will seem to abruptly change into the next – in a crowded street scene, for example, a person might appear in one part of the screen and then, blip!, suddenly be halfway across the screen in the next frame.

The alternative is blending the interval shots together, so that it appears smooth and seamless. Usually you do this two ways: drag your shutter speed when you're shooting, and shoot your subject more often (at shorter intervals).

Which is better? It's up to you! For events or time-lapse subjects where the change is gradual and slow (like a construction site), blocky might be fine. Where change occurs much faster (like a blossoming plant), smooth and seamless would probably be better.

The Magic Formula
Most movies show around 20-30 frames per second; the more frames per second, generally the smoother the movie will play back (though of course, this depends on other things too). If we're going to make E.T.'s flower come back to life, we'll want it to be shown at around 24 fps and be smooth and seamless.

We also need to ask how long we want the final movie to be. We're thinking E.T.'s flower coming back to life to should last around 30 seconds… so, some quick math to find out how many frames we need to capture:

24 fps times 30 seconds = 720 frames

Awesome. Now to find out how often (at what interval) we need to shoot frames of a flower decaying (we'll play the final movie in reverse to make it look like it's coming back alive). First we estimate how long the actual event lasts – about 4 hours (or 14,400 seconds), we think. Some more quick math:

14,400 seconds (length of actual event) divided by 720 frames (frames needed for final movie) = 20-second intervals between shots/frames

So we have our plan, Stan! When you start your time-lapse project, we'd really recommend thinking ahead like this.

STEP #3: Shooting your Still Photographs

It really doesn't matter what you shoot your time-lapse photos with, as long as you shoot them – we've seen people use SLRs, point-and-shoot cameras, and webcams.

Whatever you use, we recommend you mount your camera on a tripod (unless you have Super-Man endurance and don't mind standing there holding it for eight hours or however long). If you don't have a tripod, wedge your camera between a couple books, or make a custom base for it.

Shooting with an SLR: Intervalometers
If you have an SLR, we've got one bit of advice for you: get yourself an intervalometer. They're often called timer remote controllers, and they run about $60 – here's a good Canon one, and here's a Nikon one.

With an intervalometer (or timer remote controller), you can program your camera to shoot at certain times and at certain intervals – such as 1 frame every 5 seconds, 1 frame every minute, and so on. This leaves you free to go do something else, when you're ready.

Now set up the rest of your camera:

Set your camera to record JPG, to save on space. (Each photo is only on screen a small time anyway.)
Set your camera's white balance to manual – auto-white balance can change and fluctuate, especially if you'll be shooting something for a while and the light gets brighter or dimmer over time. Setting it to manual helps ensure all your photos keep reasonably the same look.
Set your camera's exposure manually – for most of the same reasons, you'll want to take your camera's exposure off automatic as well.

The idea is that your camera's settings should change as little as possible while it's doing its thing.

Now, remember back when you decided between Blocky or Smooth? If you're after the smooth and seamless look in your final movie, you'll want to adjust your exposure (how long the shutter stays open to capture light while taking a photo) to be as long as possible. When you force your shutter to stay open a longer time (often called "dragging your shutter"), moving objects, like cars and people, will then appear more as a blur, and will "smear" across your scene. Your final move will have much smoother action this way.

The side-effect of long exposures is a lot more light coming at your camera – often too much light. If you're going to drag your shutter, we'd suggest getting a neutral density filter to help wrangle the extra light under control.

If you're going the SLR route, we'd also suggest taking a look at Zach Wise's awesome video tutorial on shooting time-lapse with an SLR. It's a great primer to begin with.

Shooting with a Point-and-Shoot: Time-Settings
Some point-and-shoot cameras have an interval setting buried deep in their menu somewhere, but most don't – which means that, unless you want to sit there holding your camera however long and manually take the pictures, point-and-shoot cameras might not be your best bet.

For some time-lapse ideas, that might work just fine – especially time-lapse videos where you only need one or two shots a day. A time-lapse of a baby growing in mom's tummy over the course of nine months, for example, would be great to shoot manually with a point-and-shoot.

There are also some extra add-on timer devices, like the Pclix, that will cause your camera to trigger at specified intervals – but they don't work with all point-and-shooters, so the chances might be slim of getting one that works for you. You could also hack your camera and wire it up to a home-made intervalometer… but, uh, do that at your own risk. And probably not with a brand-new camera.

Shooting with a Web-Cam: Time-lapse Software
Amazingly, using a web-camera with your computer might just be the easiest route to take – thanks to some very nifty software.

For Mac, there's the unbelievably cool freeware program Gawker. It immediately recognizes any iSight or web-cam hooked up to your computer – or even better, on any computer on your network – and after specifying an interval for it to take new shots at, gives you one-button time-lapse recording from that iSight. Even better, you can also combine views from multiple iSights or web-cams into a single, split-screen time-lapse video – or you could even use your computer desktop and what you're doing on it as a source for your time-lapse.

For PCs, Webcam Timershot – part of Microsoft's PowerToys package of free add-on software – does much the same as Gawker (minus the split-screen ability and having the option to record your desktop): specify an interval, and Webcam Timershot will take pictures from your web-cam and save them to a location you choose.

Last Minute Checklist
Ready too go? Good. But wait, a few last minute things:

Make sure the batteries are all charged up with enough juice.
Does your memory card have enough room? (If not, select a lower jpg setting – or run out and buy a new card!)
Try not to walk off, leaving your camera abandoned. Many a noble camera lost its life to thievery while on a time-lapse mission.

Step #4: Edit your Photos

Whew. After all of that, can you believe you've finally reached the easy steps? All that's left is to download the photos to your computer, edit them if you want, and, with some software, assemble them into a movie.

It isn't necessary every time, but sometimes you'll have a batch of photos that need just a little tweaking before anything else. Maybe the exposure or levels could use some nudging, or you want to adjust the saturation a bit. Great. One quick tip: Automate Everything.

In Photoshop, practice on one photo from the bunch, adjusting it to how you like it – then create an Action in Photoshop to do exactly what you just did. Close your photo without saving, then use Photoshop's Automate Batch command. Select the folder of all your photos – your source – and create a new folder for where the edited photos are gonna go – the destination. Then select your newly created Action, and Ok – off they go.

You'll end up with your batch of photos, all edited, in your new folder… lookin' good and primed to be put together!

Step #5: Start Making Your Movie

Use Quicktime Pro to Assemble Your Photos Into a Movie
After you've downloaded your photos to your computer and saved them in a folder somewhere, we've found the quickest and easiest way to assemble them into a final time-lapse video is to use Apple's QuickTime Pro (available for $30 at Apple.com for Mac or Windows).

Underneath the File window of Quicktime, select "Open Image Sequence", then navigate to the folder with your photos and select the first one. Hit okay, and then QuickTime will ask you how many frames-per-second you want your movie to have. QuickTime will do all the rest for you.

From here, you can export it for the web or save it so that you can add titles, music, and other effects to it in a movie editing program.

Or: Assemble Your Movie with iMovie or Another Application
We found Quicktime Pro to be the best and easiest for this, but you can also accomplish pretty much the same thing in other video editing programs. To use iMovie, for instance, import all your photos into iPhoto. Once you have a new project started in iMovie, find your photos in the Media window, select them all (either by clicking and dragging your mouse or selecting the first photo and holding shift as you then select the last one too – all the ones in between should also be selected), and then open the Photo Settings for them. Set the duration for each photo to a nice small number, like "0:03″ – this will play each photo for 3 frames, adjust to your liking – and hit Apply to be done!

The photos will be added to your movie's timeline and you'll have the beginnings of a swanky time-lapse video.

(If you're using another application besides iMovie or Quicktime Pro, the process will likely be about the same – either opening an image sequence, or manually adding your photos in order and adjusting their duration.)

Step #6: Add titles, music, and effects

After you have a time-lapse movie file, import it into iMovie or Final Cut Pro if you're a Mac fan, or Windows Movie Maker or Adobe Premiere if you're running Windows.

Add some music and titles, and you're ready to show off your final movie!

You might also want to try some effects, like panning and zooming over your finished time-lapse movie, to add motion and hone in on what's interesting.

Extra Bonus Things & Resources

If you're big on graphs to help you get the bigger picture, Wikipedia's article on time-lapse photography has 'em. It's a great overview and bound to de-mystify some of the more technical aspects of time-lapse.

Print a flip book out with your time-lapse! FlipClips.com lets you upload short video clips and, in a quick jif, will have them printed out as flip books and sent off to you. Perfect for any time-lapse project.

Piclens - immersive slideshows for Flickr

2008-05-23T09:03:00.006+10:00

This slideshow generator is considered to be the coolest plugin ever, to view your photos on Flickr. I SERIOUSLY recommend that you try it out. It'll change the way you look at photos online forever!

Here is a video grab of their slideshow of our group photo pool:

Click here to go to their website for more details.
To get their free plugin for Internet Explorer, click here.
To get their free plugin for Firefox, click here.

How to add photo to discussion or as a comment

2008-05-18T23:01:00.002+10:00

photo2thread - Upload a doc

Creating Stunning Monos 3

2008-03-10T21:57:00.002+10:00

clipped from www.digital-monochrome.co.uk

Contrast increasing using USM

The unsharp mask [effectively a high pass filter] is used to sharpen and image, something the name does not suggest, sharpening will help to emphasize texture and detail, it is a crucial part of the editing process especially in monochrome work, this tutorial is based on using Photoshop.

USM sharpening works by using a slightly blurred version of the original image, this is then removed away from the original to find the presence of edges, using the USM filter increases the contrast giving the look of a sharper image, in this tutorial I will also show how USM used at higher than normal amounts will not only appear sharper with better contrast but will make the image pop so to speak and bring out detail, it is best used selectively using layer masks to give greater control within the images, a word of caution, if over used it will increase the pixalization and give haloing to edges, do experiment with the settings and and when using your brush tool vary the amount of opacity when painting back.

This example is an untouched image straight from Raw image with no USM applied

This is the converted image

Now look at the sky and foreground on this image, it lacks contrast and is flat looking.

In the Photoshop dialogue box below I have set the Amount to 68, Radius to 50 and threshold 0, but as said previously do experiment, next you need to copy the image by pressing Cntrl J and have two layers present in the layers palette as shown.

Here's the USM applied at the settings above, you will see the image now looks over sharpened and has accentuated the edge contrast to much resulting in halos especially where dark pixels meet light, plus added pixel clumps are now present in the clear sky region.

The next part is to apply a layer mask by pressing Alt on your keyboard, keeping it depressed and clicking the add layer mask icon in the layers palette, this masks the USM effect out, we need now to paint back the effect using a soft brush with the foreground colour set to white in the tools palette, remembering to avoid painting where light to dark areas meet, on the white clouds I have used brush opacity at 100% and not applied it to the blue area of the sky or the middle foreground trees and houses, if USM was painted to those areas it would start to "block" the shadows up and give a blotchy appearance in the plain sky, if any white areas start to bleach out just change your foreground colour to black and carefully paint the USM out, or you could lower the brush opacity by 50% in those particular areas.

Here's the image with USM selectively applied as described above

The next part will be to open the shadow regions using levels, move the middle slider to the left to open the shadows, then add a layer mask to hide the effect and painting back the lighter areas where required, flatten the image, open levels again, darken the blue sky area by moving the middle slider in Levels to the right, add a layer mask and paint back the darker area.

The final stage is to apply USM to all the image at a low amount but same radius IE : amount 14% radius 50% threshold still at zero, plus adding a touch of Dodge and burn to further enhance the contrast.

Here's the finished result, as you can see only three types of edit used, [I]USM, Levels plus Dodge and Burn,[/I] the image now has four important elements to achieving a good black and white image, contrast, clean whites, deep blacks and texture.

Finished image

Creating Stunning Monos 2

2008-03-10T21:55:00.002+10:00

clipped from www.digital-monochrome.co.uk

Sky Editing plus Channel Mixer settings to imitate film responce

Sky Editing

For me huge and important part of landscape photography, how many times do we see a great picture with nice land features but no control in the sky areas, bland, blown highlights and featureless, well there's ways around this and in this short tutorial I will show you how to achieve dramatic skies that will improve the look and impact of most landscapes.

Importantly the exposure must be right when the shot is taken as blown highlights are virtually impossible to retrieve, so control at taking stage is of paramount importance, the colour image below was taken in Raw and I used a grey graduate filter to reduce the contrast.

The first image below is unedited in the Photoshop raw converter, as you can see the exposure has given a nice tonal range but there is a slight over exposure between the trees and the white balance needs correction.

In the example below I have made corrections to get the colour right as this is important in BW as much as in colour work, because in conversion we will be working with colour channels to get the desired effect,I have also made adjustments to the auto settings by reducing all the settings slightly to give a more saturated image, but made no adjustment to the saturation slider. The importance of working with Raw files can be seen as adjustments like this are easy to carry out.

Next the image can now be opened into PS for conversion, I used the Channel mixer to convert, settings as example below, I have used 100% Red for a more dramatic look.

This is the converted image with no editing to the sky apart from conversion, you might think this looks OK but theres more work to apply to it to bring out detail and contrast.

First copy the image then go filter~unsharpe mask, set Amount to 54 Radius to 50 and Threshold to 0, now the contrast has increased but their are problems between the trees with blown highlights and haloing to the edges.

Image with USM applied

On example three I have applied a layer mask by pressing Alt and the add layer mask icon in the layers palette, this will hide the USM effect, in the tools palette select a soft brush and make your foreground colour white, what needs to be done now is to paint the USM effect back avoiding the areas where the highlights have blown and the edge haloing has occurred.

You can see that in example three that the highlights have returned and no edge haloing has occurred.

To put a final finish to the image is subjective but I will darken the sky a touch by adjusting the middle gamma slider in Levels, add 20% more USM at the same settings set previously using the add layer mask and painting the effect back but avoiding the areas mentioned above, and then use the Dodge and Burn tools to selectively lighten and darken parts of the sky, when using the D&B tools the Dodge tool should always have the "range" set to highlights and when using the Burn tool the Range set to shadows,vary the brush opacity and its best not to go above 13% exposure for both, always work on a copied layer then fine adjustments can be carried out with the opacity slider in the layers palette, below is the finished image.

------------------------------------------------------------

Suggested Channel mixer settings

Here's a selection of settings to apply in Channel mixer to give colour response using different B&W films

Please note for newcomers using Channel Mixer the Ist number =Red channel 2nd number = Green channel 3rd number = Blue channel

Here's a selection of C/M settings to imitate film

Agfa 200X: 18,41,41
Agfapan 25: 25,39,36
Agfapan 100: 21,40,39

Agfapan 400: 20,41,39

Ilford Delta 100: 21,42,37
Ilford Delta 400: 22,42,36
Ilford Delta 400 Pro: 31,36,33

& 3200

Ilford FP4: 28,41,31
Ilford HP5: 23,37,40
Ilford Pan F: 33,36,31
Ilford SFX: 36,31,33

Ilford XP2 Super: 21,42,37

Kodak Tmax 100: 24,37,39
Kodak Tmax 400: 27,36,37

Kodak Tri-X: 25,35,40

And these basic ones:

Normal Contrast: 43,33,30
High Contrast: 40,34,60

Creating Stunning Monos 1

2008-03-10T21:52:00.003+10:00

clipped from www.digital-monochrome.co.uk

Multi Raw editing plus Dodge and Burn technique

Multi Raw Editing

Under normal non extreme lighting conditions the modern camera of today will give a well balanced exposure for highlight and shadows, in some circumstances fill flash will also improve things further, but where flash is not practical editing techniques in your photo editing software will enable you to fine tune the exposure short falls in the highlight and shadow regions to produce a well balanced image. But there are times when in say landscape photography to produce a dramatic shot of the lighting manifesting itself in front of you, the only way to capture this is to shoot into the light this in turn presents a problem for your camera as to what exposure it will set in either manual or auto, what will happen is that it will generally be fooled by the brightness of the sky area and underexpose the image leaving the foreground with no detail at all or so little data that even adjusting the exposure slider in the Raw converter will not bring out the shadow detail needed, so a method of capturing both highlight and shadow detail is need to provide the right kinds of exposure to produce workable data in these areas, below is a detailed explanation of how to achieve this using two Raw images of the same subject but at different exposure levels, then using these to produce an image with both areas giving acceptable highlight and shadow detail. The images I have chosen as an example are ones of very high contrast in the sky area and a dark foreground, one that would be impossible to produce using one exposure.

Exposure

First it must be said that lens of high quality are better used for a shot like this as they will control flare to a minimum, set your camera on tripod or brace it so there is no camera movement, set your auto bracket to give, 1st/ auto exposure, 2nd/ minus 2 stops and the 3rd in the sequence plus 2 stops EV, once you have the images then the next step is on your computer.

My Multi Raw file editing technique
The images below is part of the AB sequence

Ist shot no compensation

2nd shot minus 2 stops EV

3rd shot plus two stops EV

From the 3 bracketed exposures I have choose images 2 and 3 for my edit, image 2 kept highlights in tact and image 3 with foreground shadow detail present, I did not choose image 1 as highlight detail in the central part had blown, "over exposed"

First for those not that familiar with Photoshop here is a guide to the main tools needed.

Masking and Levels

The first part of the process is to open the chosen images into the Raw converter in this example image 2 is the first, once opened fine adjust the colour balance~shadow areas etc then open the image into PS, now open image three adjust in the raw converter as necessary and open this image into PS, with image three as the active window go to select~select all, edit~copy, deselect and close the image, we now have one active image, go to edit~paste, the copied image is now pasted onto the active image you will notice we now have a copied layer in the layers palette, the next part is to add a layer mask, press Alt on your keyboard and keeping it depressed click the add layer mask icon in the layers palette the image is now masked and only the sky showing, now select a brush from the tools palette [soft brush] and with the foreground colour set to white paint the entire mask out to reveal all the image underneath the mask, now comes the tricky~skilled bit :-) something that requires practice and an idea of what you want the finished "mood" of the image to look like, change your foreground colour to black reduce the brush opacity to 50% and paint back the sky region taking care around the grassy horizon area [we don't want the edit to show here] use the brush as an artist would by varying the opacity to create a balanced overall look and not over processed, if you need to lighten an area just change your foreground colour to white and vica versa to darken, once happy with the edit flatten the image, when done the image should look like this.

Now one thing needs to be done before conversion to monochrome and that is to open the shadow regions and lighten the land area this is done by using levels, press Cntrl J to copy the layer, go to edit~adjustments~levels and pull the middle slider to the left to lighten the land area, all the image will be affected but we are only concerned about the land region, now as described above pres Alt~add layer mask, the levels edit is hidden by the mask, using the brush technique paint back the lighter areas to open the shadows the image should look like this now. Flatten the image.

Conversion to Monochrome

There are many ways to convert a colour image in Photoshop, my favoured method within PS is Channel mixer but i tend now to use a PS plug in called the imagingfactory I find this to be multi functional and more in keeping with conventional BW editing in the wet darkroom era but it does come at a cost, if you only convert the odd image I would use C/M but for the Mono enthusiast theimagingfactory is very good in this example I have used C/M as i think most newcomers to BW will use it, first press Cntrl J then go to image~ adjustments ~Channel mixer make sure the mono box is checked, now set Red to 100% Green to 0 Blue to 0 reduce the constant slider by approx -6 to darken the sky press ok, Alt add layer mask the image is now all colour use the brush tool to paint back the sky area only so your left with a mono sky and colour land and flatten the image, bring up C/M again but this time set Red to 0 Green to 100% Blue to 0, don't be afraid to use more than 100% green in fact I pulled this to 130%, press ok and flatten, the image should look like this.

Now we need to in increase the contrast I like to use the USM filter for this at high settings, some have said that to high and it is a destructive process but if used with care and selectively applied using the masking technique there is no better way of making the image pop, I regularly print out large images on Fine art paper that look great with no signs its been used other than the deep blacks, crisp whites and the contrast that's needed for most BW images, so Cntrl J filter~unsharp mask set it to this below.

Once you have applied it care must be taken on the pixel edges especially light against dark areas as haloing will occur but there is a way around this, yes the "add layer mask technique" we have been using previously, just press Alt add layer mask and paint back the USM "avoiding" the light to dark pixel edges that way no halo will occur, also use the brush at varying opacities, if full 100% brush opacity is used in the darker regions blocked out shadows will result [completely black areas that look bad especially when printed out] sometimes i use two passes with the filter for even more effect, this is a tricky edit to get used to but once perfected you will use it more and more on your edits it does need handling with care as over cooking it will result in a breakdown of the pixels, used on skies it will bring out detail that was not seen before, to finish the edit I used a small amount of Dodge and Burn to further enhance the dynamics of the image, the finished picture should look like this.

I hope this short tutorial has been of help to you, the same techniques can be used with one raw image just by altering the exposure in the raw converter and opening into PS as many times as needed, this image I have used as an example is of extreme EV [exposure values] and without using two images would have been out of the cameras EV range to capture the tonal ranges needed for this shot and could only be produced and processed in the way described.

------------------------------------------------------------

Dodge and Burn Techniques

For many years wet darkroom workers used the dodge and burn method to lighten and darken images in selected areas of the image, because they where working with light that was from the enlarger and no image to actually see it was a very skilled operation using pre-cut shapes of card plus manipulation of the hands to D&B and took years to perfect, with digital that skill has gone and is much easier to achieve but there is still a skill in getting the desired effect just right, in this tutorial i will show how I Dodge and Burn and why its necessary in digital imaging

Firstly i consider any form of subtraction or addition of light to an image as D&B, there are many ways to achieve the same effect in Photoshop, explained below are three popular ways to do this.

D&B using Selective colour

You will find this dialogue box in PS under image~adjustments~selective colour.

Although all colours can be used, the ones that are best for D&B editing in selective colour are Neutrals and Whites, example one is straight from Raw with no adjustment, all work is carried out on a copied layer ["cntrl J"] shortcut.

In example two I have selected Neutrals from the drop down and will move the black slider to the left to open the darker regions.

Now I will add a layer mask by pressing Alt and clicking the add layer mask icon at the bottom of the layers palette, the effect will be hidden under the mask, all that's needed to do is select a soft brush, foreground colour in the tools palette is set to white and paint the effect back where needed, also by adjusting the brush opacity you can control the amount of painting back anywhere on the image.

Now I will use the above method but this time move the black slider to the right to darken the sky.

As you can see in example four that we have opened the shadows and darkened the sky with smooth transition where applied, the image my look flat as no other editing as been done to boost contrast, this is dealt with in "Contrast increasing using USM"

D&B using Levels command

Levels dialoque box can be found in PS under image~adjustments.

The difference with using Levels as against Selective colour is you have the advantage of using the Histogram, this will allow you to avoid clipping the highlights and shadows, the stack in the histogram box should touch both far left and far right points to avoid clipping, by adjusting the middle Gamma slider, you can slide left to lighten and right to darken, then use the mask and brush to selectively D&B.

[B]D&B using 50% grey and bush tools[/B]

First we must go to the layers palette and open the drop down and click on new layer.

Now in the mode drop on the new layer, select overlay, then click the box as in the example below.

Now select a soft brush, harder if you need to be more precise and set your foreground colour to white to Dodge and black to Burn, also lower the brush opacity to around 20% and paint away where needed, in example below no D&B applied.

In the example below I have lightened the grass and darkened the sky, a great deal of control can be had using this method, vary your opacity but don't go to high, this is one of my favourite methods of D&B works a treat.

Dodge and Burn tools in the tools palette

These tools work in a different way to the above methods, I use these normally at the end of an edit to increase the tonal range and contrast, if heavy D&B is required I would prefer to use the above methods.

The Range when using the Dodge tool must be set to Highlights and Range set to Shadows for the Burn tool, always keep your Exposure setting no higher that 13% and vary this when using the tools to give a visual increase in tonal range, the tools are different because when set to Dodge, the Light pixels are effected and set to Dark, shadow pixels are affected

Here's an example of a partially edited image without D&B used.

And here's the image where I have selectively burnt and dodged the image, notice how the tonal range has increased.

Here's the finished image carefully edited with 50% overlay, D&b tools used plus the other techniques in my other tutorials and a slight tone applied.

So to summaries, four different ways to D&B, two very similar, Selective colour and Levels. 50% Overlay and D&B tools.
Which would I use the most, first for heavy D&B the 50% Overlay, for fine tuning, increasing contrast the D&B tools, the others Selective colour and Levels are very powerful tools in there own right but not a user friendly as the other two.
------------------------------------------------------------

2008-03-07T23:46:00.002+10:00

clipped from www.dirkpaessler.com

Tutorial: Create Your Own Planets

To make a long story short: The "Polar Panorama Effect" is one of my favourite ways to process photos into unique pieces of art. It takes a panoramic (or at least a landscape-ish) photo and uses the Polar Coordinates filter of Photoshop or The Gimp to create a circular image that seems to wrap the panorama around a planet.

Here are two samples for you to get an idea:

Planet "San Michele, Venice":

Planet "Manhattan NYC":

In this article I will share my experiences with this technique, scribble together some things I found out and I will add a couple of links to help you get more out of it.

Selecting a Panorama or Photo for Your Planet

When selecting a photo to start with you should keep the following things in mind:

Select a panorama photo or a cropped landscape photo (aspect ratio at least 2:1, which means the width should be at least two times the height).
The bottom area (bottom 25% or so) of the photo in most cases should have only very little detail (e.g. sand, asphalt, water). This area will later be in the middle of the picture and will also be distorted the most.
The upper area (upper 25%) should also have only little detail, most preferably just one color (e.g. blue sky, night sky etc.).
The left and the right border of the photo should neatly fit into each other (which is always the case for a stitched 360° panorama).
The horizon must be exactly horizontal, the left and right end of the photo will be joined together and if they are on different heights your planet will have a big crack in the surface (again this is no issue for 360° panoramas).

Simple Sample: Planet "San Francisco"

We have the easiest start when we start with a 360° panorama, so let's take my Panorama shot of San Francisco taken from the Coit Tower:

Step 1: Convert the photo into a square image

Use the Photo|Image Size menu item to change the image size into a large square. Uncheck 'Constrain Proporties' and set the "height" value to the same value as your "width" value. You will get a square image:

Step 2: Rotate by 180° and apply the polar effect

Now rotate the photo by 180 degrees…

… and apply the "Filter|Distort|Polar Coordinates" filter (choose the "Rectangular to Polar" setting). If you are a user of The Gimp the command is "Filters->Distorts->Polar Coords".

Well, as you can see that was already most of the magic:

Step 3: Rotate and clean up

The rest is just a little digital darkroom work: Rotate the planet to your liking, filter contrast and colors, clean up the sky and the edges where left and right border of the image came together.

Advanced Sample: Planet "Venice"

Most of my planets were created using panoramas, but for this second sample we will use the following photo from Venice which shows San Girgio Maggiore Island. Islands are especially good suited for planets because on the left and right edge you only have the horizon to stitch together. This photo fits all the aspects mentioned above.

Step 0: Cropping and Straightening

First we have to crop the image as needed and straighten it to make the horizon absolutely horizontal. Using the cropping tool of PhotoShop we can do both processes in one step:

First we must make sure that our crop window is parallel to the horizon. This image shows how you can do this:

Choose the crop tool of PhotoShop and select a flat rectangular area of the photo. Move the cursor just outside of an edge of the marked area where the cursor changes into two arrows pointing left and up. Click the mouse button and you can rotate the cropped area.

By moving the top border to the horizon of the photo you can exactly inspect the rotation. Move and rotate the crop window until the top border and your horizon is parallel, but don't activate the crop yet. Good. Now we have a selection that is horizontal.

Now we want to make sure the left and the right border of the image fit together. Using the same trick we now look for areas on the right and the left where the buildings have the same height:

Move the right and left borders as desired. Then finally move the top and bottom border in order to have the waterline roughly in the middle of the cropped photo:

Double click the image and you are ready for the transformation!

Step 1: Convert the photo into a square image

From here everything works like in the simple sample: Use the Photo|Image Size menu item to change the image size into a large square. Uncheck 'Constrain Proporties' and set the "height" value to the same value as your "width" value.

Step 2: Rotate by 180° and apply the polar effect

Now rotate the photo by 180 degrees and apply the "Filter|Distort|Polar Coordinates" filter (choose the "Rectangular to Polar" setting). If you are a user of The Gimp the command is "Filters->Distorts->Polar Coords".

Step 3: Rotate and clean up

Again, the rest is just a little digital darkroom work. Here are the things I did with this image:

Use the copy-brush to hide the stitch borders
Rotate the photo to my liking
The usual photo editing of histograms curves, contrast and color

The final result could then look like this:

Want more samples?!

Source Panorama	Polar Panorama

More on my Make Your Own Planets photo set on flickr.

What's next?

Want to do more with this technique? Here are some suggestions:

Upload your images to flickr and add them to the "Create your own planets" group
For some panoramas leaving away the 180° rotation creates nice images like this images shows:

The source panorama (360°) can be seen here
Flickr user "Seb Przd" has experimented with other projections for his panoramas, this could be an interesting way to go on
Software I use

To create my panoramas I usually take the photos without a tripod and use AutoStitch (freeware) and PanoramaFactory (shareware $30) for the digital work.

The Flexify filter module ($35) for Adobe PhotoShop creates polar panoramas on-the-fly and offers numerous projections for your photos.

About the author

Dirk Paessler is 37 and is hooked on photography since 20 years. Have a look at his photoblog. When he is not taking photos he works as the CEO of Paessler, a software company creating network monitoring software.

Smooth skin with a facial scrub & foundation in Photoshop

2008-01-29T01:40:00.000+10:00

Facial Scrub:

Foundation:

Smoother skin in Photoshop

2008-01-28T22:18:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.lunacore.com

1. Remove blemishes

We're going to use the following image for this Photoshop tutorial:

Download this image to your hard drive by right clicking on it and selecting (when you use Windows) Save Picture As...

The first thing we're going to do is removing blemishes in the face. In the following image I've marked which areas I considered needed a correction:

The reason why we're going to remove blemishes first is because we will have better results when we soften the skin in our next step.

The tool that we're going to use to remove blemishes is the Healing Brush Tool which can be found in the tool bar:

Let's first add a new layer by clicking on the Create a New Layer icon in the layers palette. Rename this layer by double clicking on its name in the layers palette and name it Blemishes.

With the Healing Brush Tool still selected, let's look at the option bar:

On the left we can see a black dot with a sharp edge; it means that the brush is going to have a hard edge (also called 100% hardness). Underneath we can see the size of the brush which is 19. More to the right we notice the selected Blending Mode for this brush. For this tutorial we're only going to use Normal mode. If you want to know more about blending modes then you might consider to look at this very detailed article by Jay Arraich: Blend Modes

The next option is called Source, for which we have two options; Sampled or Pattern.
Sampled means that we're going to use our image as our source.
Pattern means that we're going to use an existing pattern as our source.

In most cases you will use the Sampled option, because quite often we want the new area to have the same texture as the area surrounding it. Pattern can be useful if you don't have any descent area in your image that you would like to use as your texture.

We are going to use Sampled.

The Aligned option allows us to have a source area that follows our mouse cursor. Look at the following screenshot:

In this example the user has selected area C as the source (later we will learn how to set the source). The first moment the user presses the mouse button to remove a blemish (in this case at A), Photoshop will remember the distance and angle between A and C. So if the user now decides to remove a blemish at B, then the source will be D (same angle, same distance).
So you could say that after the user starts to use the Healing Brush that both cursor and source are 'glued' together as shown in this little animation:

The advantage of the option Aligned is that we always stay close to the area that needs to be corrected and that the texture resembles the texture we want to use for our correction.

Notice that the option Use All Layer is selected. This means that the source area doesn't have to be on the same layer, in our case the Blemishes layer. It also means that the result of using the Healing Brush Tool will be placed on the active layer, which is in our case the Blemishes layer. The Healing Brush however only uses those pixels that are visible in our document window, but like I said, it doesn't matter on which layer they are.

If you return to the screenshot of the options bar you'll notice that I have placed the letter A beside a little black triangle. Click with the mouse on this little triangle and a new window will pop up:

We're going to use a small brush size for our Healing Brush Tool so we select a value of about 20 px. We also want to have soft edges to avoid that our corrections are noticeable in the final image and that's why we're going to select a value of 0% for Hardness. The other settings have Photoshop's default values and don't need to be changed. If these values are different in your case then change them according to the values of the screenshot of the options bar.

The last thing we have to do before we start removing some blemishes is setting the source area. Move your mouse cursor close to an area that needs to be fixed (the source area and the area that needs to be fixed shouldn't overlap) and hold down the Alt key (option key on the Mac) and press your left mouse button; this will mark the source area. With the source area set you can start by removing blemishes by using your mouse cursor as if it were some magic brush.

Note: sometimes it's necessary to change the source area of the Healing brush Tool. You can do this at any time by following the same steps that we used to set the initial source area.

2. Smooth skin

Create in Photoshop a new layer on top of the Blemishes layer by clicking on the Create a New Layer icon . Rename this layer to Smooth Skin by double clicking on its name in the layers palette.

Hold down Ctrl + Alt + Shift + E (Command + Option + Shift + E on the Mac) to merge all visible layers on the active layer (Remember this Photoshop shortcut, it's a very useful one) or in other words; the layer Smooth Skin will contain the image that was visible in the document window when you used this shortcut, which includes all the corrections we did to remove blemishes.

We're going going to use the Median filter to make the skin look smooth. Some tutorials advice you to use Gaussian Blur, but I prefer median because it takes better care of edges and it's exactly those sharp edges that we want to leave intact as much as possible.

Now go to the menu and select Filter / Noise / Median... , enter a radius of 10 pixels and click OK. Set the opacity of this layer to 50%:

The result:

The skin now looks exactly the way we want it, but by using the Median filter we've blurred areas that need to stay sharp, like eyes, lips, hair, hat, eyebrows, eyelashes and the edges of the nose and nostrils. We are going to fix this by adding a mask which allows us to ignore those area that need to stay sharp.

We add a mask to the Smooth Skin layer by clicking on the Add layer mask icon in the layers palette.

Press the letter D on your keyboard to make the foreground color white and the background color black:
Press the letter X on your keyboard to switch the fore - and background color:

Select the the Brush Tool by clicking on its icon in the tool bar. Check the options bar:

Use the settings that you see in the options bar. Notice that we're going to start with a size 50 brush. This time the hardness of the brush is set too 100% (hard edges). You can change both the size and hardness of this brush by clicking on the little black arrow like we did earlier with the Healing Brush Tool.

Now it's important that you have your mask active at all times before you start using the brush, since we have to apply the brush strokes to our mask and not our image. An active mask can be recognized by its double border (marked with the red arrow) and the mask icon in front of it:

To be able to see what we're actually masking, let's turn on the equivalent of Quick Mask by pressing \ on your keyboard. You won't see anything happen, but let's paint on the hat inside the document window. You'll notice that the quick mask mode now marks the area that is going to be masked with a transparent red. Turn off Quick Mask by pressing \ again and you'll see the area of the background layer that you've made visible by masking the same area on the Smooth Skin layer:

So that's the whole purpose of our mask in this tutorial, to hide the areas that are blurry and which have to stay sharp. You can change the color and opacity of Quick Mask by righting clicking on the mask's thumbnail in the layers palette and selecting Layer Mask Options... The following window will open:

In this window you can change the color by double clicking on the red square. You can also change he opacity of the Quick Mask color, which is by default 50%.
Note: The opacity setting doesn't affect the layer or the mask itself, it only affects the transparency of the mask in Quick Mask mode.

Continue by turning on the Quick Mask mode by pressing \ again.

Look at this screenshot:

You'll notice that I have masked everything that needs to stay sharp (unaffected by the median filter). If you have a hard time to tell whether you've fully masked those areas that need to be mask, then do the following:

if Quick Mask mode is on, turn it off
Alt + Left click (Option + click on the Mac) on the mask's thumbnail (see next screenshot, A) in the layers palette

This allows you to view (or edit) the mask in your document window and will show you pretty precise where you need to make adjustments, like in this case around the left eye:

You can return to the normal view by clicking on the layers thumbnail in the layers palette (B).

To create a clean mask you have to use the following guidelines;

Change the brush size often. Instead of switching to the options bar several times we're going to use a shortcut; press [ on your keyboard to decrease the brush size or press ] to increase its size. There's also a shortcut for hardness; press Shift + [ to decrease the hardness of your brush or press Shift + ] to increase the hardness.
Mask large areas with a large brush and a hardness of 100%.
Mask small areas with a small brush and a hardness of 0%.
Mask accurate edges by using a large zoom factor and work with a small brush, low hardness of 0% and a low opacity (about 30-50%).

Also make sure that sure that you don't forget to mask areas like the corners of the mouth, fine hairs, eyebrows, eyelashes and the contours of nose and nostrils. For those areas try to use a soft, small brush with a low opacity.

This is the final result (after some slight sharpening):

Note: you can reduce the strength of the effect by lowering the opacity of the Smooth Skin layer.

I hope that you enjoyed this tutorial and don't forget to check out the Beautify a Face Photoshop tutorial that shows a lot more face related retouching.

HDR Tutorial - Photoshop

2008-01-26T22:57:00.001+10:00

HDR Tutorial - Photomatix

2008-01-26T22:55:00.000+10:00

Just to warn you that there is no audio in this tutorial.

2008-01-26T22:46:00.002+10:00

clipped from www.vanilladays.com

HDR Tutorial: How to create 'High Dynamic Range' images using Photomatix

If you want to know how to take photos such as these, then read on.

What's New?

I've reorganised this guide to include more on Photoshop's HDR feature and why I feel that Photomatix's is better. The latest version of Photomatix will detect if your TIFF's have the same EXIF info and it will ask you to confirm which images have which exposure settings. This means you don't have to remove the EXIF from them anymore. A great feature.

This guide has also been featured in the November issue of Professional Photographer. I think that's an official stamp of approval from the photography industry that HDR is indeed great for photographers world wide. It can produce nice balanced images on harsh sunny days, or it can create arty pictures of already stunning landscapes.

Aims of this tutorial

The main aim of this tutorial is to help people use HDR techniques to produce photos with a higher dynamic range than they normally get in a standard out of the camera photo. I will show you how to take a shot from the one on the left, to the one on the right.

What is HDR?

HDR means 'High Dynamic Range'. Using software like Photomatix you can create images with a more detail in the highlights and shadows than you can with a normal photo from todays digital cameras. Its similar to the old technique of exposure blending. Taking one photo for the sky and one for the ground, then merging them both together in Photoshop. HDR takes it a step further by increase the amount of detail in the image and allows you to create some unique photos. You can use it carefully to create natural looking photos or you can use it creatively to create atmospheric and emotive photos. The choice is yours as to how you process the end result.

Tools Needed

A RAW editor such as Aperture, RawShooter, or Photoshop. Secondly, the HDR program. I use Photomatix.

Step 1: Source images

There are two main ways to create the source images needed for HDR. You can either use AEB, auto exposure bracketing, on your camera to take 3 images while you are out, or you can use RAW to take 1 image and then use a RAW editor to produce 3 shots back at your computer. I shall start with auto exposure bracketing.

Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB)

The main advantage with AEB is that you can get better source images with less noise. For example, a sunset. You would normally get really dark shadows and enhancing them later from 1 single RAW file would increase the noise. With AEB you can take a completely seperate image for the shadows and one for the highlights to preseve the detail and keep the noise to a minimum. The disadvantge to this approach is that anything moving in the image will become blurred and repeated as it moves across the 3 images. To start with you will need a camera that has the AEB mode and a tripod. You will also need a tripod so that the 3 shots you take can be perfectly aligned later. Go to the menu on your camera and set the AEB mode to -2 / +2 stops.

It should look like the right image after the changes. Compose your shot, and set the camera up as your normally would to take a picture. Now after you take a picture you will see the exposure compensation level drop down to -2. Take another picture and you will see it goes up to +2. You will notice the shutter speed or aperture changes too. This allows you to get the three shots for the shadows, a balanced image and for the highlights. You now have the 3 shots required to produce a HDR image.

Sumit says: DO NOT CHANGE your aperture with AEB, only the shutter speed (i.e., keep the camera on shutter priority). Why? Cuz, a change in aperture would change the DOF as well and you don't want that!

Using a RAW Editor

The other way to produce the 3 shots needed is to take 1 photo and adjust in a RAW editor such as Aperture, Photoshop or RawShooter. The main advantage to this is that you can produce a HDR shot with moving subjects such as people or cars. The disadvantage is that if you use an image with very dark shadows and you're trying to boost the exposure, the result will be quite noisey.

Load your photo into the editor, then set the exposure level to -2 and save the image as a 16bit TIFF without any metadata such as EXIF info. This is the important part. If you save it with EXIF info you will find that Photomatix relies on that info to produce the HDR shot. The problem with this is that the shutter speed and aperture values will be the same across the 3 images and Photomatix won't know which image is -2, 0 and +2. Set the exposure level to 0, save that and then set it to +2 and save that image.

This is how it looks in Aperture. You will now have the 3 images needed to produce a HDR image.

Step 2: Generating a HDR image

Open the 3 images into Photomatix. From the HDRI menu select Generate HDR. Photomatix will ask you if you want to use the 3 opened images or load in some. Make sure it has "Use opened images" selected and click ok. Now Photomatix will confirm the exposures for each image. 9 out of 10 times it will get it right, but just incase make sure that each image has the correct exposure settings. In the case of this guide they should be +2, 0, -2. Click ok, then check that "use standard response curve" is selected. If you are using 3 images taken at the scene tick the "Align LDR images before generating HDR image" option just so that Photomatix aligns the images for you. Click ok and after a few minutes you will see your HDR image. It won't look exactly right just yet. Some areas will be slightly over-exposed and it'll look odd.

Step 3: Tone Mapping

This is the magic part. Using the Tone Mapping feature in Photomatix will convert your HDR image into something usable. Goto the HDRI menu and select Tone Mapping. You will see how your photo looks more like a standard HDR image. The sky will be nicely exposed, as will the ground. The trick now is to adjust the settings to get a nice balanced image. You could be creative and go for something a little more fun if you feel like it. For the image in this guide I wanted something special and yet not too far from the real world. I'll start with a quick run down of the various options.

Luminosity
Adjusts the brightness of the shadows. Moving the slider to the right has the effect of boosting shadow details and brightening the image. Moving it to the left gives a more natural look to the tone mapped image.
The optimal value depends on the image and the effect you want to achieve.

Strength
Controls the strength of local contrast enhancements. A value of 100% gives the maximum increase in local contrast.
The optimal value depends on the image and the effect you want to achieve.

Color Saturation
Controls the saturation of the RGB color channels. The greater the saturation, the more intense the color. The value affects each color channel equally.

White Clip - Black Clip
From watching the way the histogram changes, the white clip adjusts the highlight contrast and the black clip adjusts the shadow contrast.

Micro-smoothing:
Basically this setting should be called "How arty do you want your shot?" At 0 you can get the cool arty style HDR images with all the detail in everything from walls to clouds you didn't know where there. However, if you want a nice simple blended exposure photo set it to 30. 95% of the image should be perfectly exposed as if you spent hours putting them together in Photoshop. This is a great new addition to Photomatix as it allows people to use the software as they see fit. If they want a nice photo that is perfectly exposed then they can get that just as if they used ND Gradient filters on their lens. However, if like me they want something a bit more unique they can drop the micro-smoothing down and get something dramatic.

Light smoothing:
Never set this below 0 as you will get horrible results.

Microcontrast
Controls the accentuation of local details. The default value (High) is the optimal value in most cases. However, this control may be useful in the case of a noisy image or when the accentuation of local details is not desirable (e.g. seams of a stitched pano in a uniform area may become visible when local details are too much enhanced).

Real World Examples

Natural Feel

Settings used;

Luminosity +8, Strength 25%, Colour Saturation 65%, White Clip 0.220, Black Clip 0.075

Natural Feel 2

Luminosity -2, Strength 80%, Colour Saturation 65%, White Clip 2.230, Black Clip 0.490

Being Creative

Luminosity +5, Strength 75%, Colour Saturation 65%, White Clip 4.305, Black Clip 1.140

As you can see, when you increase the strength, luminosity and clipping you increase the visible detail in the image. You can see more detail in the building and the clouds.

Issues

Shooting on high ISO will increase the noise in the image. For example, using ISO100 can produce a noise image like ISO400. So if you use ISO400 it will be very noisy. Don't even think about ISO800 or 1600 unless you are desperate and have a great noise reduction technique. I find that Noiseware doesn't do a thing against the noise in a HDR shot, but Noise Ninja can. However using Noise Ninja will soften the image.

Halo effects around buildings and people can occur too. I've read that this can be due to lowering the luminosity below 0.

Extras

Generating a HDRI from a single RAW file

Using the latest version of Photomatix, 2.3.1, you can load a single RAW file and generate a HDR image. Simply goto File -> Open and then select the RAW file. Photomatix will load the image and generate a HDR from it. You will still need to tone map the image after. I tried it but I didn't really like the results. The image was too noisy and had some corruption in certain areas. The best method is still to take 3 bracketed images on site.

1 RAW vs 3 RAW's

There is a lot of talk on the Web about true HDR images. Lots of people argue that a HDRI from 1 RAW file isn't a true HDRI. I personally believe that the end result is all that matters. If you sell a print in a gallery is the buyer really going to care if its a true HDR image or a "HDR" image? Are they really that bothered about how many bits of colour there are or just how much data there really is in the image? Probably not. They may ask how you created it out of a passing interest but are they really truely going to care? I doubt they will. They'll take it home and hang it up and look at the end result. They will enjoy the end result. Its all about the end print in my opinion, not about how nerdy the process was. Out of interest I decided to produce a HDR image from 1 RAW and 3 RAW's to compare the end result.

HDR from 1 RAW file

HDR from 3 RAW files

As you can see from the photos they are fairly close. There is more detail and better colour in the image produced from 3 RAW photos. The right hand side wall isn't burnt out like on the 1 RAW image, and neither is the blue wall to a lesser extent. There is also more detail in the sky and the whites aren't as grey. Things like this can corrected to a certain extent in Photoshop so I wouldn't worry too much. I did find that reducing the "Colour Saturation" for this image in the "Tone Mapping" settings did produce a nicer shot. There was more detail in the blue sections and the wall on the far right wasn't burnt out as much. For the most part the images are similar and it does show that a 1 RAW HDR image can produce a striking result. It may not be a true HDR shot and its not a Low Dynamic Range image but what it can be is a stunning photo with a little effort.

Photoshop vs Photomatix

With Photoshop you can create a HDR image from 3 RAW files very easily. Simply open them in PS, goto File -> Automate -> Merge to HDR. It'll ask you where the source images are and then generate the HDR. It will then display the image on screen so you can adjust the histogram to make sure the image isn't overly dark or too blown out. Once you have done that goto Image -> Mode -> 16 or 8 bit and it will bring up another dialog box. From the drop down select "Local Adaption." Using this you can tweak the levels in the image. You have to be careful as it can cause the image to look horrible. The end result will be a well balanced image that you can further edit in Photoshop. The results are quite natural looking and don't feature any of the extreme looks that a lot of HDR images do. For more information read this excellent guide on Photoshop's HDR feature.

You can achieve a similar result using Photomatix. Convert the RAW files to 16bit TIFF's and generate a HDR image using this guide. Once in the Tone Mapping interface set the strength to 1, Micro-smoothing to 30, luminosity to 0, light smoothing to 0 and micro-contrast to 0. The image will then be similar to Photoshops. I found that Photomatix's result was brighter in the shadows, but this was before playing with the "Local Adaption" feature in Photoshop. The benefit of Photomatix over Photoshop is that you have far more control over the end image. You have control over the luminosity, micro-contrast, light smoothing, micro-smoothing, etc. So you have the ability to tweak the image further than you can in Photoshop. How far is up to you.

As you can see they are virtually the same. However, using the features in Photomatix you can create stunning pieces of art like the following;

HDR from JPGs

I've ran a test using my dancer image and it seems that you can get just as good a result using 3 JPGs instead of 3 TIFFs. Its probably better to use TIFF's as they will store more detail, but if you want can use JPGs well enough. There is a definite difference in using JPGs and TIFFs. I prefer the TIFF look. JPGs seem more saturated and noisier.

Removing EXIF

This is now redundant as the latest version of Photomatix, 2.3.1, will now detect if the EXIF info is the same and will ask you for confirmation on the various exposures of each shot. However if you need to you can use these tips to remove the EXIF. If you're having trouble removing the EXIF from a TIFF I've found a couple of things you can use. You can copy the TIFF into a new document as save it. Useful when you don't want the lossiness of save for web [eg PSDs or TIFFs] and you can create an action to do it as a batch function. There is also a program called, IrfanView that can supposedly edit EXIF.

For Aperture users, when you export versions click on the export preset drop down, then edit presets. If you select the full size TIFF or JPG preset then click + it will duplicate that. Then make sure that "include metadata" is unticked and click ok.

Conclusion

So that just about wraps up my HDR guide. I hope you found it interesting and a starting point for your own HDR images. Some people see HDR as just another fad but I really believe that it could have plenty of real world applications. I'm already exhibiting a couple of my shots in Liverpool. It definitely has its uses, but as with everything too much of a good thing can be bad for you. Feel free to check out my other HDR photos.

Credits and Links

Thanks to stollerdos for directing me to this great tutorial on HDR that explained the single RAW file trick.

Killer Headshots The Cheap Way

2008-01-21T01:40:00.000+10:00

clipped from www.studiolighting.net

The Prince of Cheap IS HERE AGAIN!!! This time I'm gonna tell you not how to save money but a way to make money!

Lots of people ask me, "Whats a quick way for me to make some easy money with my camera?"

The first thing I seem to always think to say is "Learn to take head shots."

By no means is that a shot (no pun intended) at the pro's out there making a living with head shots, its just the first thing I usually think of. "Why head shots?" I'm asked. I tell them, "Its fast, it can be fun and (usually) doesn't require a lot of equipment." They're usually stumped when I say that last part. The truth is, for myself head shots are like a basic interview/chatfest between actor, model, musician or whoever is being photographed. Since I prefer to create head shots using natural light it really minimizes my equipment needs.

My typical equipment for a head shot session is my 85mm F1.4, 50mm F1.7 lens, Shepard Polaris Light Meter, 42" Ebay 5n1 Disc Reflector and sometimes my 3×5ft homemade Diffusion panel. The panel is especially useful if I will be out at "Devil Light" between 9a.m. to 4:30p.m. when the sun is high in the sky or I will be in an open area where there is nothing to cast a shadow to shade the subject from the full blast of the sunlight. (Its actually overkill going out in daylight with a lens faster than F2.8; however, I just love the sharpness of those prime lens'.)

All the images above were created using natural light and took only 2 minutes or less total time each in post processing.

As a matter of cheap, I could switch out my high speed primes (85mm F1.4 and 50mm F1.7) with a single kit zoom lens like a basic 28-80mm F3.5-F5.6 lens and simply up my ISO to compensate for the light loss. One thing I will say is a definite "bring along", is a diffuser of some kind. For me, the $42 investment in the 42" 5n1 disc has proven itself invaluable and the $14 investment in building my own 5ft x 3.5ft light panel has proven a lifesaver! I gotta make this point! I highly recommend that if your Digital SLR has a 1.5x crop factor or more - RUN out and find a used 50mm F1.7 or F1.8 fixed lens! On a Canon DSLR with a 1.6x crop factor the lens acts like a 80mm f1.8 portrait lens! For Nikon and Sony DSLR users it would act like a 75mm F1.8/F1.7 portrait lens! For almost all camera brands - they should run from $50.00-$100.00 used from ebay to local camera stores! In the lens world, thats cheap for a good - piece of glass!

Now that you have your gear set for going outdoors and battle the light to make some fast money, heres some tips to jump start your head shots in the right direction:

1.) If shooting during "Devil Light" look for large areas of shade place your subject and photograph into (unless you know for sure it will compliment your subject you may not want to photograph your subject in shade while your background is being hit by direct sunlight).

2.) If shooting under overcast (cloudy) light - the silver reflector to add more punch to your subjects eyes, or to create beauty light by placing it underneath the subject just like when your in the studio.

3.) KILLER POINT AHEAD!!!: The key is to find some area that is NOT in DIRECT SUNLIGHT (if shooting during the midday when the sun is high in the sky). Find an area that has something overhead to block out the top-light. Top light is responsible for the infamous "racOOn eyes" - where the entire eye area is pitch black!

4.) KILLER POINT AHEAD!!!: After you've found or created (light panel or something else you've set overhead) shade for your subject - you will take an incident meter reading while standing in the shadow area (just make sure the dome of the incident meter faces back to where the camera will be at).

-NOTE: Incident light meters give readings that if used will tell the camera how to expose the scene to look just the way it is under the light that is hitting it (as the scene is). It is only a starting reference point of exposure. I frequently over expose for slightly smoother skin or underexpose for more saturated backgrounds depending on how I want the final image to look like.

Here are some image example of my First Annual "Head shot Marathon Session" where I photographed over 30 Models, Actors, and Musicians in rapid succession as a (~~publicity stunt)~~ marketing test. Good news! Following these techniques and a few unmentioned (yet) I came away with over 1200 photographs in 4 hrs and over 300+ usable head shots!

The Image above is an example of the outdoor hi-key lighting effect you can get at "Devil Light" with a panel or some kind of diffuser. You can find the technique explained in detail here: http://www.studiolighting.net/studio-quality-high-key-lighting-without-the-studio/

Here's a breakdown of the location (the why), lighting (what to look for), and results (complete with John Madden style X and O's layout!). Study it well and your in business!

Find or make a large patch of shade and use it for balanced light!

Remember to get into the spot where your subject will be to meter the light. Make sure the meters dome is facing the cameras location (for incident light meters)!

Notice the common thread in all the diagrams? KILL THAT TOP LIGHT! The cool thing about this little location is that all I have to do is change the direction of the camera and I can have multiple background tones (notice the grey wall to the left, the pink solid color next to it, on the right - the beige colored block wall on the right and the blue/grey colored door.

What have you learned? Find your shade, block the direct sun, and VIOLA… KILLER HEAD SHOTS… THE CHEAP WAY!!!! NO EXCUSES! NOW GET TA SHOOTIN!!!!

-The Prince of Cheap

High, Mid and Low-Key Lighting

2008-01-21T01:38:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.studiolighting.net

When used in portrait photography, the term "Key" refers to the overall tone of the final photograph. The elements of the portrait that play into the tone of it are the color of the background, the color of clothing used and the color of any props or foreground elements. Portraits that have a consistent key generally have much more of an impact that those whose elements are not consistent. It is true as well that, though rare, tones can be mixed in a photo with success. A danger in mixing tones is that the potential for confusion on the part of the viewer.

Generally, portraits are classified in one of three keys – low key, middle key or high key. Low key portraits are created using a dark background and dark clothing and props. You can identify the key of a portrait by determining the average tone for the scene.

Generally a low key portrait would have more dark elements than bright ones. Clothing and background might be black or dark browns giving the feeling of drama or rigidity. Low key portraits may also be shot with a higher lighting ratio near 3:1 as contrast is acceptable due to the drama of a lower tone.

A high key portrait setup would involve the use of a white or off white background and brighter clothing. A high key portrait can be challenging as it requires a great deal of light control and has the most risk of overexposure and loss of detail. In general they would have a low lighting ratio near 2:1. A common background for high key portraits is paper which is slightly overexposed resulting in a pure white seamless background and a feeling of cleanliness. Great care is usually taken to separate the subject from the background to eliminate shadows. These portraits also tend to require more light and thus more power and lighting equipment to create.

As expected, a photo which has tones in the middle of high and low would be called a middle key portrait. Often middle key portraits will use skin tone to set the mood. In these cases, clothing may be used to accent the tone of the skin with contrast rather than allow all elements to blend together. Often a high key portrait can be converted to a middle key portrait by reducing exposure.

Often the background sets the tone for the image and as such key should be a consideration at the beginning of a portrait setup. A background should not take focus off of the subject, but rather help lead the eye to the subject in the final image. Take time to identify your overall tone, or key before you arrange the lighting setup and you will be surprised at the results.

Photographers' Rights

2008-01-17T00:42:00.000+10:00

This link was forwarded to us by Rex Boggs and Wayne Donnelly. The links on this page are not functional EXCEPT for the link to SUMMARY OF RIGHTS at the end, which is a PDF document you can download and print to keep with you. For working links, please navigate to the original article using the link below at 4020.net.
Sumit
clipped from 4020.net

Australian street photography legal issues
by Andrew Nemeth BSc (Hons) LLB

URL Reference: <http://photorights.4020.net>

Your right to take photographs

In Australia the taking and publication of a person's photograph, without their consent or knowledge, but within the limitations outlined below, is not an invasion of privacy, nor is it in contravention of case or statute law. Privacy advocates may disapprove, but in this country it has always been, and for the moment remains, a perfectly legal thing to do.

No Bill of Rights

A legacy of our convict past is that we have never had a Bill of Rights. Constitutionally speaking, there has never been any concept of a "Right To Privacy" here. Because of this, our common-law has always rejected attempts to prohibit photography by merely claiming privacy rights — see this PLPR 1999 overview by Sharon Theedar, as well as this Net Law article by Jeremy Malcolm.

Interestingly, Australia is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCRR), which means the Federal Government could in theory establish a statutory Bill of Rights by implementing the treaty via the External Affairs Power in the Constitution. That it hasn't done so is mainly due to politics, history and indifferent public opinion.

High Courts "approve"

"Unauthorised" photography in Australia has in fact been authorised since the 1937 High Court decision in Victoria Park Racing v. Taylor (1937) 58 CLR 479 (at p.496). This was reaffirmed recently in ABC v Lenah (2001) HCA 63, where the Court ruled that despite the passage of decades since Victoria Park, any concept of a "Tort of invasion of privacy" still does not exist in Australia.

As Justice Dowd put it with blunt clarity in R v Sotheren (2001) NSWSC 204:

A person, in our society, does not have a right not to be photographed.

Photography is not (yet) a Crime

Many photographers are fed up with being treated like creeps or perverts. In the last few years things have deteriorated to such an extent that JPG Magazine devoted an entire issue to it in February 2006:

[…] amateur photographers are the documentarians of real life. People with cameras bear witness to the everyday dramas of ordinary people. We capture our world to help us understand it. We are not terrorists. We are not dangerous. And we are certainly not a threat.

Likewise the lengthy article by John Reid and subsequent blog discussion, "Talking Pictures: Photography Is Not A Crime", on the Sydney Morning Herald website (Feb-Mar 2007).

Similar sentiments have led to the making of a documentary movie called "Off Limits (La rue zone interdite)" (2005). Featuring interviews with Marc Riboud, William Klein, Willy Ronis, Janine Niepce and Elliott Erwitt, it was directed by Gilbert Duclos — the Quebecian street photographer who lost a 1998 Supreme Court case concerning his photo of an art student sitting on a bank's steps (see the Canadian discussion below).

Limitations on photo rights

Even though "unauthorised" photography hasn't been prohibited, it doesn't necessarily mean it's a free-for-all. Far from it! NSW Defamation and Offensive-behaviour laws still apply, as do common-law doctrines of Nuisance, Trespass, or statutory prohibitions arising out of the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act. For a broad summary, see this 2005 Press Council speech by Ken McKinnon, along with this Australian Arts Law Centre "Unauthorised use of your image" article.

The remainder of this article features an analysis of these various photo restrictions and limitations.

Private Land

Every time you enter private land, you do so with the understanding that you consent to any requirements the property's owner may impose upon you. So if a property's owner (or their agent) tells you to cease taking photographs, for whatever reason, even if the area is freely accessible to the public, then there is nothing you can do about it. The owner has full power of veto — put the camera away.

As noted by Professor George Williams in "Picture this: city puts photo ban in the frame":

The law would say that once you own land you get to control what goes on there.

The basic problem is that so much of our space these days is out of public hands and in control of private enterprise. […]

[T]he law recognises few public rights on private property. It is a very large debate around the world. It has become a big issue in the US where shopping centres can ban people wearing T-shirts with political slogans, and the courts have sought to define quasi-public spaces.

Hence the difficulty taking photographs inside department stores; bars; nightclubs; sports arena; shopping centers; "walmarts" or supermarkets. They may be areas freely open to the public, and may even be regarded as the "village square or commons" of our time, but they are all private land, and so come under the control and regulation of their owners. Which means they can prohibit almost anything they like (including photography) on their land and there is nothing you can do about it. Their turf, their rules. No Bill of Rights in Australia = no Freedom of Expression.

Once you leave the property however, there is no restriction on taking photographs from outside. This was the finding in the 1937 Victoria Park case, and it is still law. Thus for example the July 2006 photography ban at Melbourne's Southgate Precinct was carefully limited to pictures taken inside the centre. Even management admitted they were powerless to stop people from taking photographs outside.

What if you take photos of a private space, publish them, and are then contacted (threatened?) by the property owner, claiming you have no right to display or sell images of their land? Frankly, ignore them. They may be able to restrict you while taking the picture, but they cannot do anything once the images have been shot (unless of course the photos are defamatory or infringe trademarks, trade secrets etc). As noted earlier there is no general "right to privacy" here, especially for publicly accessible areas. Furthermore in Australia there is no concept of ownership over the appearance of architectural spaces (see the copyright discussion below).

Weekend Markets — caution

Occasionally photographers contact me because they have been prevented from taking photos at either Melbourne's Queen Victoria Market or Sydney's Paddys Markets. Are market proprietors allowed do this?

In a nutshell — yes they are. Although stall-holders do not have property rights over the space they occupy, the people who run and operate the markets — do. These markets (and others like them) are on private land, and consequently their owners can prohibit almost anything they like. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that many stall-holders deal in stolen or counterfeit goods, so reluctance to allow lens-hounds to document this is perhaps understandable :P

But malls, markets etc. are public space!

No they are not. Just because an area is publicly accessible, it doesn't also mean it is "public land". What confuses some Australians are United States cases where people have won the right to hand out leaflets in malls:

<freedomforum.org/packages/first/freeexpression/index.htm>

Unfortunately we lack any Bill of Rights protection in Australia, so these precedents do not apply. Furthermore leaflets are one thing, photography something else. Despite constitutionally protected Freedom of Expression rights in the USA, their shopping centres are still notoriously photo-hostile places — see for example this Feb 2004 online discussion. Even a street redevelopment by The Petersen Companies in Silver Spring has tried to ban photography, much to the disgust US photographers.

As noted earlier Australia is a signatory to the ICCRR, Article 19 of which protects everyone's right to freedom of expression. Unfortunately the treaty has not been incorporated into Australian law, so it is of academic interest only.

What about railway stations?

This is a different story for they are public space (even if they are not, technically speaking, "public land"). So provided you don't make a nuisance of yourself, you should be fine. In 2004 the NSW Minister for Transport Services spelled it out (at NSW Legislative Council Hansard, 24 Feb 2004, p.6394, art.53):

It is not an offence to take a photograph on a train or at a station.

Transit officers are required to detect graffiti and other offences as they occur, as well as protecting State Rail property from vandalism. I am advised taking photographs of graffiti may indicate a connection between the person and the graffiti they are photographing, as graffiti offenders often photograph their work.

See also the earlier Q&A in NSW Legislative Council Hansard, 12 Nov 2003, p.4731, art.22.

In 2006 there was a lengthy discussion about this issue at Railpage Australia. As many advised, apply a little common sense. If you are going to linger and take formal photographs (eg. using a tripod or for publication), then contact the Station Master first. For casual hand-held photography however — don't ask, shoot.

Victoria?

South of the border, down Melbourne way, Connex take a much dimmer view. In fact photography is expressly prohibited at metropolitan railway stations they administer. The stations, platforms and rails might still belong to the Crown, but unlike NSW they are controlled and are under the authority of a private company. You can apply for photography permits however if you are a "rail enthusiast" or an "amateur photographer" — see their website for more detail.

Sydney Harbour and foreshore

In anticipation of the Sydney 2000 Olympics, the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority Act 1998 was created to enable the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority to regulate various matters concerning Sydney Harbour, its foreshore, Darling Harbour, the Rocks, Cockle Bay etc.

The Olympics came and went, but the legislation was retained and regulations upgraded to create the current Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority Regulations 2006. Of particular interest to photographers is Part 2 — Reg 4, which provides a long list of prohibited "Commercial and other activities", including:

r4(b): use [of] any audio, loudspeaker or broadcasting equipment or camera (whether photographic, cinematic or video), for a commercial purpose,

Thus despite being "public land", any saleable photo taken in or around Sydney Harbour (or the Rocks, Darling Harbour etc.) is forbidden without SHFA authorisation… right?

Maybe not. The exact meaning of "commercial purpose" is not defined in either Act or Regs, while the language used in Form 33 and 42 (see below) is clearly aimed at Film/ TV productions and (maybe) wedding photographers or coffee-table book Pros — not casual photographers.

As an indication of how seldom this restriction is invoked, the Permits page of the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority does not include any photography permit forms. You have to go to the <business.gov.au> website and search for "Film and television producers" forms. Then download the "Application to conduct film or photo shoot…" PDF for the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority (Form 33 + Form 42).

So relax. You only need to worry about SHFA permits if your photography requires a film crew, portable generators and a couple of semitrailers. Otherwise the law is, as far as the general public is concerned, "more honour'd in the breach than the observance".

Sydney Luna Park

Has its own special legislation, the Luna Park Site Act 1990. Although public land, Luna Park is actually leased to and under the control of a private company. Which means that like other "private land" sites, they can arbitrarily prevent you from taking photographs or even ask you to leave (see discussion above). Rather than common law, the power to do this has been enshrined in Section 6G of the Act.

Notice however the "boardwalk/foreshore" exception in s6G(3), whereby the Luna Park lessees can only control what happens within the boundaries of their site. Meaning you are free to photograph from outside the exterior/ face/ buildings as much as you like, or more accurately, as much as permitted by the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority Regulations!

Assaulting Photographers

Although property owners may use "reasonable force" to evict people, they can never threaten violence ("assault"), detain you at length ("false imprisonment"), push you around and seize your camera or film ("battery"), or even force you to delete digital files ("coercion"). Rent-a-cops, supermarket clerks, shopping centre managers and even customers at a Haldon Street Cafe in Lakemba should take careful note.

In 2005/6 there were a spate of attacks on photographers, and in every case the assailants were charged with criminal offences:

Feb 2006: Former politician Mark Latham was charged with assault, malicious damage and stealing after a press photographer snapped him and his children leaving a fast food restaurant.
Dec 2005: A twenty-year-old was arrested and charged with malicious damage for assaulting St George and Sutherland Shire Leader photographer on Cronulla beach (in the lead-up to the pre-Christmas "race riots").
Nov 2005: Five men were charged with affray and assault after attacking a Channel Seven TV crew, who filmed them leaving a Melbourne terrorist suspects hearing.

What is the law here? Threatening to damage your camera or equipment: s.199 of the NSW Crimes Act 1900 — maximum penalty 5 years imprisonment. Threatening violence against you: s.93C of the same Act — 10 years. Even if someone tries to prevent you from contacting the police: s.315A or s.319 — 7 or 14 years.

The moral should be fairly clear: an unwilling photo subject may only ask you to stop taking photographs, that is all. No touching, pushing, shoving or grabbing. Even Police officers must institute legal proceedings (ie. detain or arrest you) if they wish to seize your camera, film or digital files.

Common sense dictates however that if a 150kg Goon starts Being Ominous, then it's wise to go with the flow, even if it isn't legally justified. After all no photograph is worth GBH!

Note: Forcing deletion of digital files

Obviously if you take photos of security installations, military manoeuvres or of special security lock-down zones, then duly authorised personnel can and most likely will ask you to delete photos.

My earlier remarks about image deletion only apply to general photography taken under everyday conditions (eg. at shopping centres, public parks, office parties, people walking along the street etc.) Furthermore, it is unlikely that anyone can ever compel you to erase images of people on the basis of security concerns.

Assault by Police

In my experience NSW Police Officers don't mind having their photo taken. A lot obviously depends on what they were doing at the time (eg. surveillance or criminal activity), but generally speaking, when out and about on the street or working at public events, Police officers will be friendly and won't complain — see the following examples from my Sydney Unposed project: one, two and three.

That's the good news. The bad news is that like the general public, there are occasions when Police officers can misbehave, and even threaten or physically manhandle a photographer for pointing a camera at them.

Which of course is unacceptable. If you have such an experience and wish to take the issue further, then I suggest you contact one of the entitles listed on the NSW Police Integrity Commission complaints page. A word of warning though, make sure you have plenty of evidence to support your claims.

Why the anti-photo angst?

Most likely a mixture of commercial use and copyright ignorance, along with Baby Boom 2.0 Bambino On The Brain. The recent proliferation of voyeur websites hasn't helped either. Finally, photographers must also shoulder some of the blame. For years we have used our cameras like "weapons", so it shouldn't surprise that people eventually balked at being treated like "targets".

Countering misconceptions about illegality and immorality won't be easy. FWIW the following tips may prove useful: Adopt a professional attitude; Don't sneak or creep about; Prepare a simple and rational answer to the question "Why did you take that photograph!?"; Be clear and confident when confronted but not cocky or argumentative; Always remember you have rights, but don't forget your subject has them too, especially on private land; Finally, it is always easier to put your camera away than engage in shouting matches.

If this sounds too touchy-feely and metrosexual, then sixty push-ups before breakfast and a pair of steel-capped safety boots may also help. Finally, download a copy of my "PDF Rights info-sheet".

Common Law

Injunctions may be sought to halt the publication of photographs if the images are indecent, offensive or otherwise demean the subjects (Lincoln Hunt Australia v. Willesee (1986) 4 NSWLR 456 at p.464). The depiction has to be clearly degrading though, saying you are "embarrassed" or "uncomfortable" will be laughed out of court — Donnelly v Amalgamated TV Services (1998) NSWSC 509.

For Nuisance or Trespass, merely taking a photo of someone is always permitted. It only becomes an actionable Tort if you photograph the same person again and again over an extended period of time (Bathurst City Council v Saban (1985) 2 NSWLR 704 at pp.706-8). The occasional shot is okay, as is pointing a camera over a fence, or even following people down the street, but do it to the same person day after day and you're asking for trouble (not to mention stalking charges or even a punch in the face).

BTW, the "no Tort of Invasion of Privacy" doctrine isn't fixed in stone. Already in ABC v Lenah there were minority judgement hints that the High Court may allow privacy-infringement claims in future (see also these 2003 articles by David Lindsay and Paul Telford).

Nevertheless an Australian Privacy Tort is still a long way off. Although allowed in Grosse v Purvis [2003] QDC 151 and Jane Doe v ABC and ors [2007] VCC 281, both have proven to be weak precedents. They dealt with stalking, sexual harassment and rape ("hard cases make bad law"), and both are lower-court decisions limited to Queensland and Victoria. More significantly, higher courts still refuse to challenge the majority in Lenah: Milne v Haynes [2005] NSWSC 1107, Giller v Procopets [2004] VSC 113, Moore-Mcquillan v Workcover Corporation SA [2007] SASC 55 and Kalaba v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] FCA 763.

The "Kidman Defence"

Australian celebrities face a problem in that they cannot claim general privacy rights, yet they often wish to restrict photographs of themselves when away from the public spotlight — eg. see Stan Grant and Traci Holmes in Aug 2000.

So what can they do? In January 2005 Nicole Kidman managed to obtain an interim Apprehended Violence Order ("AVO") against Paparazzi photographer Jamie Fawcett, via Part 15A of the NSW Crimes Act 1900, by claiming she feared for the safety of herself and family (see "Paparazzi ordered away from Kidman"). Although initially considered a legal masterstroke, the AVO turned out to be flawed in that it only prevented photographers from approaching within 20 metres, not from taking photographs. Unsurprisingly the AVO was quietly dropped a while later.

Then in January 2007 a "distraught" Kidman again called the Police against Fawcett, this time claiming "harassment" during her holidays at Bateman's Bay. In this case the Police sent an unmarked highway patrol vehicle, "to ensure everyone's safety on Rosedale's narrow roads", but otherwise refused to restrict or lay charges against Fawcett.

So what does this all mean? Not much. Apparently you can rush to court or call the Police, but any legal relief will be at best superficial, and won't directly address the issue of being photographed without consent.

As you can gather from the Kidman example above — not in Australia.

Aside from commercial use or Summary Offences issues, consent for photography is not required in this country. It is purely a question of etiquette and taste. As pointed out in the August 2005 Federal Attorney General's Discussion Paper "Unauthorised Photographs on the Internet And Ancillary Privacy Issues", (as quoted on the <anlysphere.com> website):

[…] for any society to function in a relatively free and open manner, there could not realistically be a requirement for all photographs to be taken with consent. If there were such restrictions, candid shots could never be taken, and the media would be severely constrained in the images they show us. Freedom of expression and artistic expression would undoubtedly be adversely affected ... while there may be legitimate circumstances when recording images should be restricted, it would not be practical or desirable to obtain consent from every person all of the time, for example, for use in television news file footage.

In Nov 2005 this view was supported by the NSW Commissioner for Children:

Even the NSW Commissioner for Children, Gill Calvert, agrees that a ban on photography without permission would be overkill. The commission has written to the Government, saying that for any society to function in a "free and open manner", there cannot be a legal requirement for consent to being snapped.

(For more on the AG's discussion paper, see further below. For the aesthetics of photographing without permission, see the remarks on my Sydney Unposed critics article.)

Video sidebar

Everything on this page applies to video photography. After all, movies are just a stream of individual still photographs.

The only difference with video is the possibility of a sound component. Here there is special law in NSW (and the ACT) which specifically prohibits the recording of private conversations without consent. The emphasis is on private conversations though — if someone is performing or yelling or whistling, then presumably this falls outside the NSW Listening Devices Act 1984. (See also the extensive review of the LDA by the NSW Law Reform Commission in their "Issues Paper 12 (1997) — Surveillance".)

So although consent isn't required for the general recording of video images, it is required when recording sound to accompany them. That is why you will often see "hidden camera" investigative TV reporting with the sound deliberately turned off.

BTW also keep in mind the consent provisions of the NSW Workplace Surveillance Act 2005, even if it is specialist legislation concerned solely with the filming of employees at work by their employers.

Photographs of children — special case?

No.

Many people assume parental consent must always be obtained when photographing children. But aside from specific provisions in the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (especially child protection orders arising from abuse, AVO's or custody proceedings), children are not afforded unique legislative protection when it comes to photographs, consent, privacy or defamation. As with adults you need a signed release for commercial use, but for non-commercial images — nothing.

Perhaps the misconception arises from the child identity protection requirements of s.11 of the NSW Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (which only apply to children charged with criminal offences). Maybe it's due to the under-18 consent provisions found in most Model Releases (a requirement for commercial usage only). Maybe it's just a deep cultural fear of child pornography?

Whatever the case, photographers are — within the limitations outlined in this article, in particular commercial use and Summary Offences issues — perfectly at liberty photograph children as freely as any other subject.

Photographing children without consent is certainly a provocative topic! Part of the reason school groups (see below) or Local Councils try to ban photography at dances, plays or sporting carnivals is to "protect" children from "internet paedophiles". Likewise many of the submissions to the 2005 AG discussion paper referred to the need to "protect" children from unauthorised use of their image on websites, blogs etc.

Yet until the law changes, consent for general child photography remains purely an ethical and moral issue, not a legal one.

Consent does not trump "Obscene"

For wannabe Sally Mann's, Jock Sturges' or Jill Greenberg's, please note that consensual photographs, even if they are of your own children, will fall foul of state censorship laws if the underage subjects are photographed in a sufficiently provocative or sexual manner.

As noted earlier, our constitution lacks guarantees for Freedom Of Expression. Cross the line with kiddie-pix and you will be swamped by serious criminal charges.

Bans at swimming carnivals, school plays or eisteddfods

Many school and childrens groups prohibit photography, even by parents (eg. the 2006 Coffs Harbour Eisteddfod photo ban). Do organisations have any right to do this?

If the performance is on private land, then yes they do — see the discussion above about property owner rights. This also applies to schools and council-owned facilities, as strictly speaking they aren't "public land" even if they are publicly owned (ie. aren't freely accessible to everyone like a street or park or beach). See the discussion at "Sports Photography Legal Issues".

Organisations may claim they wish to "protect" children, but the real issue is that people can prohibit almost anything they like on their own land. If however the event is held on property not owned or controlled by the organizers, then you are free to photograph as much as you like — subject of course to other issues discussed on this page.

Some organizers try to restrict performance photography due to "copyright reasons". This is a misunderstanding of IP law, for you cannot infringe the copyright of a "dramatic work" by merely taking still photographs (see discussion below). You have to take extensive video footage of a substantial part of the performance for infringement to occur (see the "Choreography G072" information sheet on the APC website.) This is incredibly unlikely if daddy only wants a couple of shots of Jessica's solo!

Let's be honest though, many of these bans are rent-seeking in disguise. Organisers prevent people from taking photographs by claiming "Child Protection". Yet a visual record is required of the event, so they hire their own photographers. Now guess who pockets the sales of these official videos and stills?…

Finally, in 2007 the Australian Sports Commission released an "Acquiring and Displaying Images of Children" information sheet regarding photographs of children at sporting carnivals. Although an interesting read, their recommendations were not legally enforceable. What made the ASC Guidelines noteworthy however was that Soccer NSW adopted them as policy for a few weeks in 2007…

2007 Soccer NSW photo ban

In May-June 2007 I received a few e-mails from concerned parents and soccer officials about attempts to prevent parents from photographing their own children at weekend soccer matches.

It transpired that Football NSW had aggressively adopted the suggestions in the ASC Child Guidelines (see above) as if they were law, and issued a directive to NSW clubs that henceforth all "unauthorised" child sports photography was forbidden.

Thankfully due to behind-the-scene efforts by Christian Wright and Bob Kershaw, this Policy was quickly rescinded in late May 2007 and the status-quo reinstated: ie. photography is no longer banned at NSW Soccer matches. If an official still tries to prevent you from taking (legitimate) photographs, then direct them to contact Michelle Hanley at Football NSW. Of course security personnel at sporting arenas may still prevent you from taking pictures, but that is a "private property" issue (see discussion above).

Offensive Behaviour

If photos are taken, without consent, "to provide sexual arousal or gratification", the photographer may face criminal charges under Section 21G of the NSW Summary Offences Act 1988.

Thankfully 21G doesn't really apply to candid photography, as its language is clearly aimed at perverts and creeps. Furthermore its scope is specifically limited to (a) photographs of a "sexual nature"; (b) taken without consent and (c) taken in places where subjects have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" (such as toilets, showers, changing rooms, enclosed backyards etc.).

So a photo of a semi-naked person on a public beach, even if it was a "perve" shot, would still be beyond the scope of the Act because it would fail the "privacy" part of the 21G test. (See also "beach photography bans" discussed below…)

OTOH if the photographs are indecent enough, then even if they were taken with consent you may still run afoul of the National Classification Scheme, should you publish them online or in a magazine.

"Upskirting" or "Downblousing"

Ostensibly both infringe 21G because they are done without consent and are obviously sexual in nature. But… if they were taken where subjects could not have a reasonable expectation of privacy (crowds, public thoroughfares etc.), then technically they do not violate the Summary Offences Act.

Presumably this is why Police in other states also charge downblousers with "Improper use of surveillance equipment" — see the voyeurs caught upskirting at the 2007 Australian Open Tennis Championships on 19th Jan and 25th Jan. In Victoria the applicable law is the Surveillance Devices Act 1999, but in NSW we only have the NSW Workplace Surveillance Act 2005, which is carefully limited to employer/ employee relationships only, and not the activities of the public at large.

Thus in NSW we have a Big Loophole, which has given rise to pointed questions in Parliament and remarks by the LRC in their "Report 98 (2001) — Surveillance: an interim report". Clearly it is time Attorneys-General stopped talking about this and pulled their fingers out!

Meanwhile current NSW law isn't completely toothless. In May 2007 Sydney high-school teacher Robert Ian Drummond was caught with 3000 upskirt videos. He was subsequently charged with a raft of sex and obscenity related criminal offences, mostly with respect to minors (he seemed to have a predilection for filming northern beaches schoolgirls). Thus there is plenty of NSW legislation to charge voyeur photographers with, just nothing upskirt or downblouse specific.

National anti-voyeurism legislation?

Owing to the child-photo antics of Paul Michael Bartram in Queensland, amendments to the QLD Criminal Code 1899 were introduced in November 2005, via the Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2005 No.70.

Part 10, s.55 of the amending Act established new offences to broaden the existing "Indecent Acts" law: s.227A "Observations or recordings in breach of privacy" and s.227B "Distributing prohibited visual recordings", with s.227A(2) specifically targeting voyeurism and "upskirting".

To allay fears of inadvertently criminalising candid photography, 227A(2) is specifically limited to "… the observation or visual recording made for the purpose of observing or visually recording the other person's genital or anal region" (emphasis added). This would exempt everyday shots of people in crowds or bars or at the beach.

The rest of Australia should keep an eye on this, for the July 2006 SCAG meeting noted their intention to adopt the "Queensland model" for nation-wide anti-voyeurism laws.

Commonwealth Trade Practices Act

There are two ways for a person to prevent the "commercial use" of their likeness without their consent: either by the Common Law Tort of "Passing Off", or else via the Unfair Practices portion of the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act 1974, (Part V — Division 1 — Section 52 and Section 53).

Passing Off

This is where you sue someone for appropriating your name or likeness to sell their product. There are a number of famous cases — eg. Henderson v Radio Corp [1960] S.R. (NSW) 576 or Hogan v Koala Dundee Pty Ltd (1988) ATPR 40-902 — but the basic point is that you initiate court action(s) to prove you have suffered monetary loss by someone else's misappropriation of your reputation. Needless to say it only makes sense to do so if you are famous, for not only is litigation ruinously expensive, but you also have to prove you have a substantial enough reputation to damage. The good news is that if you win, you can receive serious compensation for losses you have sustained.

TPA Unfair Practices

Unlike Passing Off you don't launch an action against the offender, but rather complain to the ACCC, who investigate the infringement for you. If they decide to launch legal action, then they have all the resources of a major Commonwealth Department to chase the miscreants down. And they don't take prisoners.

At the end of the trial(s) the offender may have to pay court costs, fines (up to $1M for corporations or $200K for individuals), destroy the offending material and/or pay for advertising space to publish corrections or apologies. Keep in mind you won't see a cent of this, as all compensation is paid directly to the ACCC. If you want damages then you have to launch the s52/53 action yourself.

Are unauthorised photos actionable?

They are, but it took the courts a while to agree. Initially the "Honey Case" (Gary Honey v Australian Airlines (1989) 14 IPR 264) found — by some rather oblique and pedantic logic — that the mere unauthorised use of a person's photo was not enough to construe "endorsement". Ditto the first "Perkins Swimming Cap Case" (Talmax v Telstra Corp Ltd [1996] QSC 34).

Luckily these narrowly legalistic interpretations were reversed on appeal in "Perkins II" (Talmax Pty Limited v Telstra Corporation Limited [1996] 2 Qd R 444). Henceforth commercial use of a person's photo without their consent can be an infringement of the TPA.

Do you have to be famous?

On the face of it s53(c) doesn't care. If someone "represent[s] that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, uses or benefits they do not have", then they have infringed the Act. Yet a review of case-law, mainly featuring musical and sporting personalities, tends to suggest otherwise. See remarks by Clayton Utz solicitor Nicholas Tyacke, along with remarks by ArtsLaw:

The mere use of a person's image is unlikely to be found to mislead or deceive under this area of law unless that person is a celebrity or well known endorser of products. If a person is well known by the public as an endorser of products then the unauthorised use of their image in connection with a product may constitute misleading and deceptive conduct. This is because the public would be lead to believe that the celebrity is endorsing the product.

I would argue differently. If you follow the above logic then there is nothing to stop a company from exploiting any non-famous person's image for unlimited financial gain. Someone could take a photo of your mother and — without her permission — put it onto millions of cake-mix boxes. Likewise a candid snap of a girl on a beach could be freely used for a national billboard campaign for tampons. Forever.

There are good reasons why this hasn't happened. Marketers are fully aware that the ACCC has a hair-trigger about this sort of thing. Legalism aside, the practical application of Australian TPA law is no different to that in any other civilised country: you cannot make commercial use of any person's likeness without their consent. Ecce Nestlé.

What is "commercial use"?

In a photographic context, "commercial use" does not mean the sale a picture, but rather the use of a person's likeness to endorse some product or service, or to entice others to buy it.

A few examples to make this clear:

A photographer displays photos on their website and offers prints for sale. Non-Commercial — they are merely selling individual photographs, not using the people in them to endorse any product or service.
A wedding photographer shows samples of their work on their website. Commercial — they are using images of people to endorse or sell their wedding photography services.
Fizzy drink manufacturer runs a magazine-ad featuring a candid photo of someone drinking a can of their product. Commercial Use — they are trying to sell a beverage. Requires a signed Model Release.
Telephone company "re-purposes" editorial photographs of an Olympic swimmer or people being rescued from floods, for use in ad-campaigns. Ditto — they are trying to sell phone services.
National Tourist body holds a competition to solicit photographs of people enjoying Australian scenery, for use in an ad-campaign. Despite carefully worded indemnities in the competition rules, this is still Commercial Use — they are trying to sell tourism services.
Art exhibition sells prints or posters or postcards. Non-Commercial — they aren't selling anything other than the photo itself. (However it will become a "commercial use" if the posters are used to entice people to visit the show.)
Photographs are sold for publication inside a book or magazine, but not as part of an ad. — eg. monographs, editorial illustration, celebrity gossip, tutorials, how-to articles etc. Non-Commercial.
A photograph is published on a book or magazine cover. Commercial as the image is used to entice people to buy something, in this case the book or mag. (BTW this is why you almost never see candid-people photos used as magazine cover illustrations.)

Remember, the mere sale of a picture itself does not make its use "commercial". A person's likeness has to be used in such a way that it appears they endorse some product or are trying to entice others to buy something. Which ultimately makes sense, as photographers sell thousands of people-images to newspapers and magazines every day, as do the publications themselves, who legitimately sell thousands of people-images directly to the public (eg. Fairfax or News Limited).

For more discussion about "commercial use" in a photographic context see: the ASMP Model Release Tutorial; the UK and Ireland Editorial Photographer's article on Creative Commons; Carolyn E Wright's PhotoAttorney Blog; Dan Heller's (long) Model Release Primer; and Sarah Skinner's article on the Salome Belly Dancing website (!)

Commercial Use case study: Virgin Mobile "areyouwithusorwhat?"

In June 2007 Virgin Mobile Australia launched an "exciting and impactful" multi-hundred thousand dollar billboard and internet campaign to tout their SMS-TEXT services in Australia. What made it noteworthy was that they illustrated their ads with "creative commons" pictures appropriated from Flickr, without the photographers' knowledge or permission. Moreover a lot of the images also featured close-up and clearly identifiable depictions of people (eg. Molly E. Holzschlag or Alison Chang), again without their knowledge or consent.

Despite assertions the photos were used legitimately via Flickr's "creative commons" license, the fact is Virgin never obtained consent from any of the people shown in the ads: the license only applied to the photographer's copyright, not the subject's consent to use their likeness. Thus: (1) the images were used to sell products and services and (2) photo-subject consent was never obtained. Consequently the ads appeared to be in direct contravention of the TPA, and considering the magnitude of the campaign, prompt action could then be expected by the ACCC to injunct and fine the things out of existence.

Or so it would seem, except for one major problem — either by accident or design the people-photos were not taken in Australia and neither the photographers nor subjects were Australian citizens. Which put them beyond the scope of the TPA or any other Australian legislation! If the photographs were taken here, then the subjects would have a case. If they were taken overseas of Australian citizens, again people might have a legitimate complaint. But foreign persons + foreign photographers + foreign locations?… Nyet.

(Mind you it hasn't stopped Ambulance Chasers from trying.)

Luckily the campaign created such an international stink that Virgin Mobile had to act. Despite the apparent letter-of-the-law compliance, on July 25th the ad-copy was reworked and all identifiable images of people were removed. Furthermore, a few weeks later Virgin Mobile then abruptly terminated the campaign and ghost-towned the website.

So in case you missed it, the moral of this story is: Always Get A Signed Release From Any Person Whose Image You Wish To Use In Advertising!.

Sample Model Release forms

See the following URLs for examples of Australian release forms. Use them as a guide when creating your own:

Book Design Australia Model Release
Queensland UTS Release Form
Australian Portraits Talent Release form
Arts Law Centre of Australia Photographer's Release

What about Property Releases?…

Broadly speaking, Property Releases are not required to photograph buildings or private land in Australia. See the Arts Law Centre "Do I need a Film Location Release?" web page and also further below for architectural photography copyright exceptions.

NSW and Commonwealth Privacy Acts

Owing to federal/state jurisdiction and constitutional issues, both federal and state Privacy Acts are limited to the regulation of Government Departments and corporations (and even then, only those with an annual turnover of more than $3 million).

Therefore current privacy legislation does not apply to the taking and display of photographs by individuals.

As the NSW Privacy Commissioner noted in 2004:

Privacy laws, which deal with the handling of personal information, don't generally regulate the behaviour of individuals.

Even if legislation was extended beyond corporations and departments, "candid photography" would still fall outside its scope, for current law is aimed at the collection, storage and transmission of public records (such as address, health, credit reports or financial details etc.), and not the blanket concealment of people's intimate lives — see this Commwealth Privacy overview, as well as the index of Federal Privacy Commissioner cases.

Occasionally Privacy Commissioners attempt to insert general photography into the Act's scope — so far without success. For example on the Federal Privacy Commissioner's website, you will find a bland statement that photography is covered by the Cth Act. Unfortunately they fail to specify just what kind of photography (editorial, candid, personnel records?). Similarly in 2000 there was an attempt in Hong Kong to broaden Privacy Legislation to include photographs — it failed.

In 2005 the Commonwealth Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee conducted a thorough review of the Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988. In June 2005 they published their report. Despite rumours of restricting certain kinds of photography due to fears raised by camera-enabled mobile phones, the 186 page report barely mentioned photography at all, and even then only in a medical record or biometric security context.

Meanwhile state attorneys-general and privacy commissioners regularly circulate papers calling for restrictions on all "unauthorised" photography (eg. 2005, 2006). Luckily things haven't gone that far — yet. For as many commentators have remarked for many years, the Privacy Act is thankfully not a defacto Secrecy Act.

What about Press or Privacy Council guidelines? Frankly they don't apply to non-members or (again) individuals. At best they are recommendations only, not enforceable obligations arising out of Law.

2007 LRC Privacy reviews

In 2006-7 both the NSW Law Reform Commission and the (federal) Australian Law Reform Commission reviewed the current state of Privacy law. Both produced lengthy discussion papers which, among many other things, proposed the creation of a Statutory Cause of Action for Breach of Privacy to protect individual privacy rights (eg. NSWLRC Proposal #7 and ALRC DP72 Proposal #5).

To balance "freedom of expression" concerns raised by artists and the media (see submissions by the SBS and Arts Law Centre of Australia at ALRC DP-72, para 5.61-3, pp.293-4), both LRC's also recommended the creation of a "Public Interest" defence to use as an exception to new privacy right.

Thus if you film someone or publish photos of them on the internet, without their permission, it is proposed they would now have statutory rights to take you to court for "Breach of Privacy". In order to avoid damages or injunctions, you would then have to argue that your actions were "in the public interest". A sad development this: it took decades to get rid of the hopelessly subjective "public interest" test in NSW Defamation actions, now lawyers want to bring it back for Privacy…

Thankfully the LRC proposals are only speculative recommendations by legal academics, and are a long way from becoming law. It is also important to remember that Law School bookshelves groan with LRC reports which were never implemented. Nevertheless it's important to keep an eye on these things. In the current climate of anti-photo and anti-internet hysteria, it's plausible that one day laws like these may be enacted.

( Presumably this is why Google Australia rushed into photographing their "Google Maps Street View" panoramas of Australian cities in November 2007. Even if the LRC Privacy recommendations are eventually adopted, it's unlikely they will apply retrospectively. )

Meanwhile see below for more detail on the Australian Law Reform Commission report due in 2008.

Abuse of Privacy examples

For those who worry about invasion of privacy, have a look at how professionals really do it:

(1) CCTV Public Surveillance

Let's get the obvious one out of the way quickly. Every time you walk into a bank or railway station, or through a supermarket, you are photographed by CCTV Surveillance cameras. Every time walk across the Harbour Bridge or go to the cricket at the SCG, your snapshot ends up on a disc. Visiting the Sydney Casino? Look up and wave at the dozens of high-rez cameras watching you from the ceiling.

Like most global-economy cities, it is impossible to go five minutes in Sydney and not have your photo taken. And don't imagine the pictures are low-rez B&W blobs typical of 1980's technology. Think instead close-up zooms of your face, in colour, from any number of angles.

(2) Australian-Records website

For only $AUD 46, "you will have access to complete research tools for obtaining private information about practically anyone from the privacy of your own home or office". Thus you can do unlimited searches on anyone to see their Criminal and Court Records, Marriage and Birth certificates, or even reverse-search on phone numbers, car license-plates or e-mail addresses. How very handy. You see a busty MILF drive past in a Subaru WRX. Note down her license-plate and look her up online, From The Privacy Of Your Own Home Or Office…

(3) MySpace and Facebook

Social networking sites offer a free and easy way to set up web pages and keep in touch with friends. But first you have to register, whereupon you need to supply details of your name, age, education, address and — most importantly — favourite film, TV, music, book and food choices etc.

Therein lies a marketers' El Dorado. Countless millions of twentysomethings, blithely listing and chatting away about their favourite corporate brands, just waiting to be harvested and sorted into purchasing preferences.

Some kids are savvy about this and intentionally give false biographical detail (eg. "widow, 72, pensioner"), while others block access to their pages by "non friends". Unfortunately most aren't so cautious, so they chat and post in the open, much to brand consultants' delight. Facebook also has a habit of de-registering false profiles, and also aggressively selling their data behind the scenes, so you are forced into playing their game even if you don't want to.

(4) IP address tracking

Every computer on the internet must have a unique IP address (eg. yours is "124.186.232.141" ). This is required by networked machines so they can identify themselves when passing messages — ie. "packets" — between each other. They are built into the TCP-IP header of every packet, and cannot be suppressed or (easily) faked. Which means your computer's IP address is exposed every time you access a website, do a web-search, buy something online or post a comment to a blog. Although of itself an IP is just an anonymous number, if you interact with a website often enough then the site-owner can build up a detailed profile of your computer's visits (how do you think Amazon or Google target their advertising?).

The good news about IP tracking is that it lets the police nail evil-doers. It also lets server-dudes analyse and monitor website traffic. But tracking also has privacy implications in that it's done without your knowledge or consent, and that your every move on a website is exposed and can be recorded. The sheer intrusiveness of this can be staggering. For example: from the IP addresses stored in my server-logs, I notice that an old-flame visits my website on average four times a month. She usually does it late in the morning or evenings, and mostly to check this page for updates or to look at some of my photos. Considering there has been no contact between us for years, is it appropriate or even ethical to know this?… [BTW Hello darling. Just before Christmas I saw some photos from your Jul 07 "neutron river cruise". You look as lovely as ever and the longer hairstyle suits you. AZN]

(5) Global Shunning

He-said-she-said and a teenage girl commits suicide. A neighbouring family is implicated but no charges are laid. Outraged friends/ citizens/ weekend-vigilantes start a campaign to ostracise the people they think responsible. So far so ordinary, except this time it has a global reach. Every detail of the Drew family (photos, address, business clients) is published online for the entire world to gawk at and abuse, ad infinitum.

Having your photo taken on a public beach is one thing, but having your name, age, home address and exact GPS co-ordinates published on "rottenneighbour.com", to act as an lightning-rod for millions of angry people, is something else.

(6) The valuation page at "My House Value"

Under the guise of providing free home valuations, the online estimator at My House Value insists you give your full name, address and contact details. Now read their (well concealed) terms and conditions:

[…] We advise that myhousevalue.com.au Pty Ltd may, from time to time, receive a fee for providing your personal information to real estate professionals in your area […]

… and then admire their "privacy policy":

[…] You invite Us and Our sponsors and agents to use Your personal information for marketing purposes. This includes contacting You by telephone, mail or e-mail to discuss products and services […]

If this isn't personal-data harvesting to generate leads for Real Estate Agents, and thus outrageously against the spirit and intent of Privacy guidelines and legislation, then I'll eat my/ your/ everyone's hat.

Defamation

Until the introduction of nationally uniform defamation laws on January 1st 2006, even lawyers considered Defo a hopeless quagmire. Thankfully the new NSW Defamation Act 2005 (and its state equivalents) has — finally — swept away the judicial waffle and archaic dross.

Relatively speaking it is still early days, so the law has yet to be rigorously tested (eg. see Channel Seven Adelaide Pty Ltd v Manock [2007] HCA 60 and Bingle v Emap Australia [2006] FCA 1704). There is also little commentary online; for the moment see this ABC Mediawatch 10th April 2006 transcript, or this March 2006 overview by AAR. "Perfecting Polly Peck: Defences of Truth and Opinion…" by Andrew T Kenyon is also worth a look for its detailed analysis of "Truth" as a defence.

Meanwhile, how does the new legislation impact on photographers?…

The truth will (finally) set you free

For decades in NSW you also had to show Public Interest if you wished to claim Truth as a defence. Not any more. Thanks to the new s.25 and s.26, "truth" alone is now sufficient. Which means provided you stay clear of reenactments, digital mayhem, unflattering captions or Lara-Bingle-speech-bubbles, it will be extremely difficult to construe "straight" photography as defamatory anymore. Hence the notorious penis photographs in Ettinghausen v Australian Consolidated Press would not be actionable today.

Claimant must have a "reputation" to defame

Defamation is ultimately a form of censorship to protect the interests of the Ruling Elite, not those of the general public. This principle has been enshrined in the new Section 33 defence of "Triviality". So if a mere commoner objects to your photo, then it's unlikely they will take it further because they lack a substantial enough reputation to damage. Poke fun at the nobility however, and you can expect a lot of trouble in a very short space of time. (Oh how I wish I was kidding here…)

Universal Jurisdiction

Keep in mind that thanks to the controversial 7-0 decision in Dow Jones & Company Inc. v Gutnick [2002] HCA 56, you may be still be liable for defamation in Australia even if you publish your content overseas, or on the remote planet where High Court Justices live.

Do Unto Others…

Legislation and case-law aside, use a little common sense. Whenever you take a photo of someone, ask yourself is it the kind of thing you wouldn't mind others taking of you. The bloke picking his nose; the other scratching his crotch; the Bogan shrieking at her kids… Ask yourself: do you really need to humiliate people to make a point?

Copyright?

Alongside ignorance about the Privacy Act(s), one of the commonest misconceptions about photography is that it can be prevented "due to copyright". This is incorrect — no part of the Copyright Act prohibits any kind photography! Copyright only applies to the published duplication of original works, such as books, paintings, dramatic works, prints, drawings, motion pictures, DVDs, audio recordings etc.

In Australia still-photographs of 3D objects such as performances, buildings, statues or interior spaces (and the people in them), generally cannot infringe copyright, as one-off images cannot reproduce a substantial enough portion of the original work. The only way to infringe copyright in these cases is to create a sufficiently similar 3D copy, or with respect to dramatic works, lengthy video recording (eg. see the "Choreography G072" information sheet on the APC website.) The same kind of thing applies to the "performers' rights" of actors or musicians during a performance — it is almost impossible to infringe these by merely taking an occasional still photograph.

All these principles have been adopted by the Commonwealth Copyright Act 1968. See for example Part III — Division 7 "Acts not constituting infringements of copyright in artistic works", especially Section 66:

The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.

Thus due to our s.66 exemption, the internationally notorious SABAM Atomium building copyright heist would be very difficult to mount here.

Furthermore according to s65 of the Act, a similar kind of exemption applies to photography in publicly accessible places where sculptures or other copyrightable "works" are displayed.

So when a Sydney Opera House guide or a Paddys Markets Wigs-stall owner waves their arms and rushes towards you yelling: "You can't take photographs because of Copyright!" — smile and shake your head, because they have no idea what they're talking about :?)

For further discussion about Copyright in an Australian context, see the Information Sheets index on the Australian Copyright Council (ACC) website. In particular see the "Duration G23" and "Photographers G11" publications, under the "D" and "P" index headings.

Finally, unlike The United States or England, there is no need to register Copyright in Australia for an author's copyright to vest.

Ownership sidebar

Since 30 July 1998 the photographer owns full copyright in their images, even if they were commissioned by a third party (see ACC information sheets "G058" and "G035"). There are a couple of caveats though. By Section 35(4) of the Act, copyright is owned by your employer if the image was taken as part of your job. Alternatively by Section 35(5), if the photograph was commissioned (by agreement and for money) for a "private or domestic purpose" — such as a family portrait or wedding or birthday party — then the client owns copyright, unless there is agreement to the contrary.

This exception isn't as arcane as it seems. Say you were invited to a take photographs at a childrens' birthday party. The "Alpha Mom" pays you $50 to cover expenses. You take the shots and one of them turns out to be a once-in-a-lifetime masterpiece. Guess who owns copyright to the image according to s35(5)?…

Not you.

Duration sidebar

Australian copyright law changed radically after signing the Australia-USA Free Trade Agreement in May 2004. Of particular interest is the situation which now applies to photographs taken prior to 1955. Due to the AUSFTA, all such images are now deemed to have their Copyright expired. (See also p.4 of the "Duration G23" ACC publication above.) Which means for example, that Frank Hurley's or Max Dupain's best work, and all of Harold Cazneaux's, are now in the public domain and can be freely reproduced and sold without license.

Trademark protection?

What if you take a photo of a person wearing a T-Shirt or standing in front of a poster which has (say) the Nike or Coca-Cola logo? Can the corporation take action to prevent you from infringing their trademark?

Generally speaking in Australia, they cannot. Everything hinges on the context of how your photograph is used. If it is shown on a website photo gallery or printed in a magazine as part of a monograph, then there shouldn't be an issue as the mark is not used for goods or services in respect of which the trademark is registered. If however the image is used commercially on (say) a T-Shirt, and the corporate logo is prominent enough, then there may be cause for the trademark owner to claim dilution of their brand, since — for example — Nike or Coke sell T-Shirts too. See this Bond Law Review article by Lynne Weathered, and also the remarks by Lien Verbauwhede on the WIOP website and the Trademark Basics article by Lloyd J. Jassin.

Alternatively, can someone prevent you from taking photographs because they have registered a trademark in a cityscape or building? Looking at famous USA examples, this appears very unlikely. See for example the failed attempts to trademark the The Rock Hall of Fame, or the Lone Cypress at Pebble Beach golf course.

It is partly because of the above failed cases that the "H.R.683: The Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006" was passed by the US Congress in April 2005. In January 2008 Ford USA appear to be the first corporation to flex their new trademark muscles. When they learned the Black Mustang Club wanted to publish a wall-calendar featuring photos of Ford motor vehicles, they sent in the lawyers. There was no argument over the copyright of the images (they were legitimately taken by the club), Ford merely argued they owned intellectual property over the look and appearance of the cars - see this overview on the BMC discussion forum. Although the claim is yet to be tested in court, it did prevent the club from publishing the calendar.

I doubt this is the last we have heard of this…

Beach candids "banned"?

This was a Hot Topic in 2005. It arose from the arrest, guilty plea and $AUD 500 fine imposed on Peter James MacKenzie in November 2004, for secretly photographing topless women with his mobile-phone camera on Coogee beach.

In the following months there was a lot of concern and commentary about this (I was even interviewed off-air by a producer of the 702 ABC Sydney morning radio program). Although most critics considered PJ's actions offensive, even legal academics agreed that people could not expect any sort of privacy on a public beach. Furthermore, many worried about the incident's broader implications in perhaps banning all candid photography on Sydney's Beaches.

Luckily things never went that far. Wiser and cooler heads prevailed. When in February 2005 a couple of university students — Gaur and Singh — were similarly charged for (again) taking mobile phone photographs of topless girls at Coogee beach, Police prosecutors this time withdrew all charges, and on April 5th Magistrate Lee Gilmour formally dismissed the case.

That's the good news, the bad is that on certain high-profile beaches, Police officers, council rangers and surf lifesavers still remain photographer adverse, if not downright hostile. This was illustrated by the extensive questioning of Rex Dupain by four Police officers in December 2006, for attempting to photograph sleeping backpackers on Bondi beach. Luckily after 25 minutes Mr Dupain was released and had his confiscated camera returned.

At least the controversy has put photographers on notice to Behave Themselves. In Australia there may be tremendous freedom to photograph whatever you like, but if you "do a PJ" and creep the length of a beach, taking close-ups of people's crotches or breasts, then also be prepared for an "Alright Officer, I'll come quietly".

Surf Life Savers ban photography?

In November 2005 there was a flurry of indignation when the Sydney Morning Herald reported the SLSA wished to "ban" beach photography, especially at surf carnivals where young swimmers ("nippers") were involved.

A few weeks later Shellharbour photographer Barry Daniel contacted Sean O'Connell, Surf Life Saving Australia's Communications Manager, for their view on the media coverage. The following was Mr O'Connell's (edited) response:

[… November 29th, 2005 …]

The story in the Herald did not quite state our position correctly.

We have made a submission to the Standing Committee of Attorneys General who are currently reviewing the issue of unauthorised imagery on the internet. Our position is that while we support the rights of legitimate photographers and have no wish to hinder them, we also have a responsibility to our youngest members. Our submission contained a draft photography policy which would inform our members of their rights and responsibilities in this area. Generally our advice is that if our members are concerned that inappropriate photographs are being taken, they should report the person to the appropriate authority.

In any event, we are now waiting for the outcome of the inquiry to finalise our policy and I will certainly [communicate the decision] when the outcome is known.

So the SLSA's "ban" on beach photography was merely a submission to a Cth government discussion paper — nothing more.

Council Bans on photography

Waverley Council

Thanks to PJ's infamy, in late 2004 Waverley local council tried to ban all "unauthorised" photography at all of its beaches (Bondi, Coogee etc.). To the council's dismay, this caused tremendous uproar, with many reminding the Council that, er, they didn't quite have the right to prohibit any photography in public areas! Only the NSW State Government can do this (and politically it's unlikely they ever will).

A couple of weeks later the Council reluctantly agreed. On January 16th 2005, Deputy Mayor George Newhouse admitted during a 6pm Channel 7 Sydney TV news report that, yes, it was impossible to ban photography on public beaches. Nevertheless, the council were going to try to restrict photography anyway by giving Surf Lifesavers the right to ask certain "unauthorised" photographers to leave the beach.

No problems with that, but it turned out to be a moot point anyway, as the council failed to pass the anti-photography motion in early February 2005.

However as recently as December 2006, Waverley Council still seem to be pushing an anti-photography agenda. Following the Police seizure of Rex Dupain's camera on Bondi Beach, it transpired Waverley now insists on photography permits for $160 — an hour. Sigh. It appears they need to be reminded about the illegality of such "permits" for public (ie. NSW State owned and controlled) land…

NSW P&C Association

On February 21st 2005, Ms Sharryn Brownlee, then president of the Federation of Parents and Citizens' Associations of New South Wales, recommended parents should be required to obtain permission whenever they wish to photograph their own children at school swimming carnivals, plays, concerts or sport days.

Shades of Maude Flanders and another public backlash. By lunchtime Ms Brownlee backed down, claimed she was "misquoted", and then pulled her head in and went away.

Randwick Council

A day after Sharryn's Retreat, Randwick council stepped into the fray. Taking their cue from Waverley Council, Randwick passed a motion banning parents from taking photographs of their own children at council owned swimming pools. If parents wanted pictures, they would have to buy them, at $5 a print, from council or school accredited photographers.

Public Uproar III. This time Mayor Murray Matson stood his ground. His colleagues — didn't. Support for the measure wavered and then evaporated. A few days later a new meeting was held, a rescission motion was passed, and the policy was officially suspended pending a report by Council Officers. No prizes for guessing its re-adoption was not recommended.

You have to hand it to Randwick though. Unlike Waverley they were smart enough to limit the prohibition to council property only, and not general public land. This would have made court challenges very difficult, for property owners have broad rights to restrict whatever happens on their land (see discussion above). That's very clever. Not coincidentally, it was also a handy way to turn a quick buck ($5 X thousands of children = a nice little earner).

Council digital camera use

Many councils attempt to prohibit "unauthorised" photography on the basis of "privacy" or "protecting children", but interestingly they have no qualms when taking candid photos themselves.

In March and June 2006 a number of reports appeared (eg. ABC Sydney, Sydney Morning Herald) noting that many councils equip their officers with digital cameras to record parking hazards and infringements; traffic violations; illegal rubbish dumping etc. It was claimed such photography was done for evidentiary purposes, to make proving cases easier should council fines be challenged in court.

Okay — but people who appear in such images have obviously not had their permission obtained. Indeed most pictures were taken surreptitiously to prevent alleged malefactors from being alerted. In which case, isn't this identical to the kind of "unauthorised/ invasion of privacy" activity councils wish to ban in the first place? Or is their idea of "authorised" carefully limited to only mean "authorised by them"?

Or to put it more cynically, maybe it's just another bureaucratic example of: "When revenue is at stake — do as we say, not as we do".

Other Restrictions

What about NSW recording devices or work-place surveillance legislation? Neither apply as the former is limited to sound recordings and telephone taps, whereas the latter is only concerned with the misuse of surveillance cameras in places of employment. What about "performer's rights"? In this case we have a copyright issue, dealing with the recording performances by musicians and actors — hardly relevant when taking the occassional still photograph of everyday people.

Keep in mind court orders prohibiting photography and/or the publication of images can also be obtained in child custody and protection matters or witness protection. I personally encountered this while taking general photographs of a spectator crowd at a football match in July 2003. After a few shots, a woman screamed at me and ran 50m down stairs demanding to know who I was, why I was taking pictures etc. It turned out a seven year-old in her custody was subject to a child protection order, and photographs of him were prohibited by court order. No problem, I made a note and used a different image. Couldn't help wondering though about the wisdom of taking such a child to a public event bristling with cameras and media coverage…

The overseas experience

A worldwide review of photo-privacy law is well beyond the scope of this article. For a general introduction, see the excellent overview of Privacy law in various international jurisdictions by the Hong Kong Law Reform Commission (2004).

New Zealand

Arising out of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, in 2004 there was a watershed case (Hosking v Simon Runting [2004] NZCA 34) which found that in some circumstances photography in New Zealand could be an invasion of privacy. It was a fascinating departure from existing NZ law, and has subsequently been reaffirmed and even extended by R v Rowe (CA 374/04, 18 April 2005). Thankfully neither case has any application in Australia as we don't have an equivalent to the NZBoRA. It's something to keep an eye on though, as photo-ban advocates keep referring to it in a hope it will influence the development of Aus. privacy law.

Canada

In Canada, photographers are still coming to grips with the Aubry v. Éditions Vice-Versa (1998) 1 SCR 591 decision, where Gilbert Duclos had to pay damages to a subject in one of his candid pictures ("Pascale-Claude Aubry", then 17, sitting on the steps of Scotiabank) for "invading her privacy". The image was used to illustrate an article "Inside and Outside the Glass house" by Giose Rimanelli, in the Issue #24 June 1988 edition of Vice-Versa magazine (see also this Aug 2005 article in the Montreal Mirror). Many argue the precedent only applies in Quebec, but read the judgement, the Supreme Court's language is far broader than just another Anglo-hating Quebec thing (see "Privacy : a New Trojan Horse?" (1998) by Marie-Philippe Bouchard, Senior Legal Counsel for the CBC, along with Eric Swetsky's article in Marketing Magazine, Aug 1998).

For a brief summary of Canadian photographer's rights, see the overview put together by Ambient Light.

USA

Attorney Bert P. Krages II is the man to consult here. Both his PDF summary "The Photographer's Right" (2003), along with his book "The Legal Handbook for Photographers" (2002), cover every possible aspect of photographer's rights in the USA. A slightly more recent (Dec 2005) "Legal Rights of Photographers" summary is also available by USAToday.com columnist Andrew Kantor. Ditto the National Press Photographers Association "Memo on Photographer's Rights in Public Places" (summary and PDF download, Aug 2005).

For a more whimsical overview, see this "Land of the Free" column by Mike Johnston. If you are specifically interested in how to respond to Police questions when taking photos in public, see the "Should Photography be Illegal" article by Jim McGee. Want to know about state-by-state Privacy Invasion standards? — see the "Photographer's Guide to Privacy" by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Finally, for up-to-date news and discussion on USA photo rights, see <photopermit.org>.

In July 2005 photo-consent became a hot issue in the USA, when Philip-Lorca diCorcia was sued for $1.6 million by Erno Nussenzweig, for taking his portrait without permission in Times Square in 2001. As you can imagine this caused a lot hand-wringing by photographers worldwide. Luckily in February 2006 Nussenzweig lost.

England

Although Brits have historically tended to be lax on photo-privacy, things tightened after the murder of Lady Diana Spencer in Paris in 1997. The Data Protection Act 1998 and Human Rights Act 1998 both feature language broad enough to include restrictions on all non-consensual photography — editorial or candid! See the discussion in the Redeye National Symposium 2004 Report, as well as the impact of the Douglas v. Hello! (2003) and Naomi Campbell (2003) cases, analysed on the University of Edinburgh Law School website. Finally, for a detailed two-page summary of the law as it applies to photographers in the UK, download a copy of the UK Photographers Rights PDF (2004) by Linda Macpherson.

France

With the passage of the Presumption of Innocence and Rights of Victims legislation in 2001, the publication of any photograph of a person without their express consent is prohibited in France. This applies to all photography, and is irrespective of editorial or artistic or personal or advertising use. There is anecdotal evidence that in practice things are even worse, with some members of the public and Police even attempting to prohibit people from merely taking photographs, which in fact the PIRV law does not ban — only their publication! For more information see: "Droit en photographie" (French), Time Magazine Europe: June 26, 2000; "France bans citizen journalists from reporting violence" by Peter Sayer, and Tom Stoddart's "Out Of Love" in Black & White Photography Magazine (UK), Issue 3 Aug/Sep 2001 at pp.24-28.

Needless to say, were Kertész or HCB working in France today, then not only would they be harassed on a daily basis, but their photographs could be censored and even banned from publication in that country. Ah yes, but what about Luc Delahaye's "L'autre"?… Well, his Paris metro hidden-camera photos were taken in 1995-7 and published in 1999 — a couple of years before the 2001 "PoIaRoV" law came into force.

Thankfully none of this applies in Australia. Is it only a matter of time? Let's hope not.

So much for introductions

What about other Australian States?

Does the information on this page apply to other states, say Queensland or Victoria?

In a nutshell, yes, most of it does. Federal law applies to all of Australia, so sections dealing with Privacy Law and Torts; Trade Practice issues; Copyright; Defamation; Private Land rights etc. apply as much in Toorak, Brisvegas or Geraldton, as it does in Sydney.

Only areas dealing with distinctly New South Wales issues, such as the NSW Crimes or Summary Offences Acts or attempts by NSW councils to ban photography, are (obviously) NSW specific.

If you only wish to know the law which applies in your state, please don't send me a note. See the Commonwealth or State links on the Australian Privacy Foundation website, or else study the relevant parts of the 60-page "2005 Cth A-G discussion paper" (see links below).

NSW Photo Rights Summary Sheet

In collaboration with fellow Australian Photographer Kolya Miller, we have created a two-page summary of the main issues in this article — for you to download, print, and take with you when out on a shoot. It is written from a photo-subject's perspective, and may prove useful when dealing with rent-a-cops, supermarket managers or hostile bystanders.

NSW Photo Rights Summary (PDF 60k bytes)

N.B. This is a two-page document. If you have trouble viewing it, either right-click to "Save Link As…", or else download the following ZIP compressed version:

NSW Photo Rights Summary (ZIP 50k bytes)

2006-8 ALRC "Protecting privacy in a wired world" Inquiry

In January 2006 the Commonwealth Attorney-General announced a broad-ranging review of the Privacy Act 1988, to be conducted by the Australian Law Reform Commission:

ALRC — Privacy Inquiry main page

In September 2007 they published a "ALRC Discussion Paper 72 Review of Australian Privacy Law". In particular see "Chapter 5: Protection of a Right to Personal Privacy" and "Chapter 8 Individuals, the Internet and Generally Available Publications".

Public submissions closed on 7 December 2007, so now it's a matter of waiting for the final report to be tabled, some time after March 2008.

2005 Commonwealth Attorney-General discussion paper

In the meantime, if you wish to read more about Australian photography rights, then download a copy of the…

"Unauthorised Photographs on the Internet and Ancillary Privacy Issues
Discussion Paper — Standing Committee of Attorneys-General, Aug 2005"
(PDF 300k bytes)

Alternative link at jcs.act.gov.au
Original link at ag.gov.au

The 60-page paper features the most spectacularly detailed analysis of Australian case law and legislation with respect to photography, consent, privacy and the internet I have yet seen! Mind you, responses to the A-G's paper closed in October 2005, so it may eventually be taken offline.

The discussion paper has certainly led to a few interesting responses:

… but it appears the only legislative outcome was to prompt the A-G into conducting yet another review of the Privacy Act in 2006 (see above).

2007 Rights of Photographer's Petition

In March 2007 a petition was started to ensure the rights of Australian photographers to take photos in public places. Quoting from the website blurb:

This is a petition to represent the concerns of all professional and amateur photographers within Australia.

We are concerned by suggestions raised in a Federal Parliament working committee that suggest public places should become "camera free zones". (Sunday Telegraph 11 March 2007)

The reasoning behind this suggestion relates to the recent incidents involving sneak cameras, in particular mobile phones and hidden cameras. As serious photographers we take great offence at having our hobby and/or livelihoods placed into disarray at the actions of a small minority. As a group we fully support any action taken to prevent these "sneak photos" which are a blatant invasion of a person's privacy.

By signing this petition we are requesting the following points be considered by this or any future working committee or legislative group, within State or Federal Parliament […]

For more information about the petition and a chance to sign it, see the link above.

As you can imagine, the petition has attracted a bit of flakiness and heat. See for example this discussion thread on the Digital Photography Review Forum (!)

A Very Basic Guide to Critiquing Photos

2008-01-17T00:39:00.001+10:00

clipped from digital-photography-school.com

A Very Basic Guide to Critiquing Images

I know we have a lot of people here that might like to take a stab at commenting on shots posted on the forum, but feel they don't know enough or are unsure where to start. I, too, was nervous about doing this, but I've found that by studying the images of other people and analyzing what I see, I've been able to improve my own photography with self-critique. It's really a great learning process!

Here are some of the things I look for when I critique a shot. Of course, not all things apply to each image and there are always exceptions to "the rules".

1. Is it in focus? This is actually a more complex question than you might think. Sometimes an OOF shot is what the photographer is trying to do (such as showing movement), but generally the subject should be in focus even if the surrounding area is not. Notice the depth of field and see if it is working well for the image. Would it look better with a narrower or wider DOF?

2. What is the subject? Is it apparent when you look at the picture? Are your eyes drawn to it, or are you asking yourself why did they take this shot? If it has to be explained, it probably is lacking a purpose.

3. How is the composition? Are there extraneous areas that are not adding to the overall effect? Is the subject lost in a sea of background? Not getting close enough to your subject may be the problem. Maybe cropping will save the shot. Maybe changing from horizontal to vertical would make the difference. Is your eye moving easily around the image from subject to secondary subjects (visual rest spots) in a visual path or are there abrupt stops? Would following the "Rule of Thirds" improve it?

4. Does it have impact? Are there any interesting elements, such as perspective, dramatic angles, leading lines, colors, textures, shapes, etc? What makes this shot stand out from the usual? What grabs your attention? Anything in the shot that helps set the mood?

5. How is the lighting? Are there blown out highlights or areas so dark you can't make out details? Has poor lighting created shadows that distract? Can some post processing help? Has the direction of the light hitting the subject helped or hindered?

6. What is the mood it evokes? If you still feel uncomfortable commenting, particularly on a technical level, mention how the shot makes you feel. Discussing it on an emotional level is just as valid and important. Remember, technical or emotional, it's all opinion anyway.

7. Offer a solution to the problem if you can. Do you know some editing trick that could help? Can you give a suggestion that would fix the problem next time?

I usually start out by saying something positive, and there is always something positive, about the picture, and then pick out something that I think could be improved. If I can, I explain what they could do to fix it or what to do next time so the problem won't happen again.

And a few rules for people asking for a critique:

1. Include pertinent information: camera and lens used, camera settings, time of day, perhaps what you were trying to achieve.

2. Asking a specific question, such as "How can I improve the lighting?" and explaining what lighting you used will get you the precise answers you need to improve.

3. Saying "I love this picture! What do you think?" will not get you the help you need to improve.

4. No comments on your picture? As forums get busier (and remember both mods and members have lives outside of Flickr!), your post could get overlooked. Try giving it a title more interesting than "Critique My Shot". Ask a clear question in your post. Get involved critiquing other member's images and join in discussions (like polls). Before you know it, you will become an active member and people will go out of their way to look at your posts. Additionally, take a good hard look at your image. Is it lacking a lot of the things mentioned above? It could be passed by because it (and I know this sounds harsh) is just a snapshot. Posting your best efforts will get more comments as well as help you learn how to critique your own images.

5. Post ONE shot! Concentrate on only one image at a time. Throwing up a lot of different threads at once will not help you learn either and will cause members to ignore some of them.

Anybody else have ideas I might have missed? Feel free to add!

Borders in Photoshop 8 - with basic masking (CS3)

2008-01-07T00:38:00.000+10:00

Borders in Photoshop 7

2008-01-07T00:37:00.001+10:00

Borders in Photoshop 6 (CS3)

2008-01-07T00:32:00.000+10:00

Borders in Photoshop 5

2008-01-07T00:28:00.000+10:00

This method is probably identical to what Steve told us at:

www.steve-vit.com/Border.pdf

Borders in Photoshop 4

2008-01-07T00:14:00.001+10:00

clipped from mayhemstudios.com

STEP ONE
Open up a photo or an image you want to apply the torn edges to. Using the Lasso tool

make a selection to the area you want to rip away (more jagged & unique the better).

Reset the back ground color to white, then fill the back ground with white by pressing

Delete on a Apple Computer, Back Space on a PC.

Now, inverse the selection, by pressing Command+Shift+I on a Apple Computer,

Control+Shift+I on a PC. Press Command+J on a Apple Computer, Control+J on a PC to place the selection on its own layer.

STEP TWO
Again, use the Lasso tool to make another selection to the left of the torn edge. Make

the selection on the inside edge different, so it will make the torn edge look more realistic.

Next, press Command+Option+D on a Apple Computer, Control+Alt+D on a PC to bring
up the Feather Selection dialog box, enter 5 pixels, click OK. Float the selection on its
own layer by pressing Command+J on a Apple Computer, Control+J on a PC.

STEP THREE
Command+Click on a Apple Computer, Control Click on a PC on layer two, to make

the selection active. Go to the Filters Menu, under Render and choose Clouds.

Press Command+L on Apple Computer, Control+L on a PC to bring up the Levels dialog
box. Move the middle slider to the left, almost to the end, also move the white slider a little

to the left. Play around with the settings to achieve the desired effect.

Go to the Filters Menu, under Noise and choose Add Noise. Enter 10% for the amount of

Noise, check Guassian for Distribution, check Monochromatic and click OK.

STEP FOUR
Press Command+D on a Apple Computer, Control+D on a PC to deselection. Select layer
one on your layers palette and add a drop shadow to make it look more realistic. Rotate the
photo and you are all done.

Borders in Photoshop 3

2008-01-07T00:12:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.myjanee.com

Framing a Picture

In this tutorial, written with beginners in mind, we are going to mat and frame a picture using a frame and mat that we make ourselves. We will learn/practice the following skills:

Cropping a picture.
Using layers to manipulate images.
Using gradients.
Using the rectangular marquee and the polygonal marquee.
Using Layer Effects.

As you work through this, read the first line of the step and think about how you would do it. Try it on your own before you read how I did it.

(This tutorial was written with screenshots for PS version 5.5, but it works fine for newer versions and for PS Elements 2, as well. I give directions for later versions where they vary.)

1. Open the file

for the picture that you want to frame. Double-click its layer in the Layers Palette to make it so that it isn't the background layer.

File > Save As and choose a name for your file. Save it in PSD format.

2. Make your mat:

a. Enlarge your canvas to make room for your mat: Image > Canvas Size and make it the dimensions you want your picture and the frame ultimately. Making it too big won't hurt. Making it too small won't hurt either; you can always change it later.

b. Position your mat layer below your picture: Click the new layer icon next to the trash can in the layers palette. Drag this new layer below the picture layer in your layers palette. This layer will be your mat. Double click the layer and label it "mat".

c. Color your mat: Choose a shade for your foreground color in your toolbar. Alt-backspace to fill the layer with the color. (What you do for your mat is completely flexible. I used a light ivory shade and made my noise mono-chromatic and about level 25.)

d. Put a design or texture on your mat: Filter > Noise > Add Noise .. Now let's do something to the noise. There are many ways you can alter the noise to get a cool result for your mat. I'll make my now-famous Wheat Thatch paper. Filter -> Brushstrokes -> Crosshatch. Here are the settings that I used for my wheat thatch texture.

Ctrl-S to Save.

3. Make your frame. Do a LONG side first.

a. I am going to make a sculpted pewter frame for my picture. We will make one long side and then duplicate it for the other three sides. By doing this, we will ultimately have 4 layers for the frame. Click the new layer icon at the bottom of the layers palette to make a new layer. Using the rectangular marquee, select the area for one of the long sides of your frame.

b. Click your gradient tool and hold for a second. When the flyout happens, choose the reflected gradient tool. (In version 6 - 7 or Elements 2, you will choose the reflected gradient in the Options Bar.) Make white your foreground color and black your background. In the Reflected Gradient Options, choose "foreground to background". This will give you, in this case, the white -> black.

Beginning in the middle of the area you selected, drag a reflected gradient across your frame. Hold Shift to make the gradient go at an exact right angle. I dragged mine horizontally. Ctrl-D to deselect.

(If you are new to this tool, take this opportunity to play with it a bit. Click back in your history palette to undo if you need to, but as long as you are messing in the selected area, you can't do too much damage. <g>) Ctrl-D to deselect.

c. Now sculpt it a little. Use the Rectangular Marquee again to make a smaller rectangle inside that one and do a linear gradient from right to left. This results in the effect to the left. Ctrl-D to deselect.

Ctrl-S to Save.

d. Drag the frame piece that you have made down to the "New Layer" icon to duplicate it. You need 4 copies, one for each side of your frame.

e. Rotate your frame pieces around so that they are surrounding your picture. Use Edit > Free Transform. Bring your pointer outside of the bounding box and it will turn into a little turning arrow. Hold the Shift key as you rotate the pieces. (What does holding the Shift key do?)

Be sure that you rotate them so that the gradients are going the right way so that they match up in the corners. If you care deeply about the shadows not looking right, you can fix them manually or with lighting effects when you are done, or you can use a different kind of frame on your next project. For now, I will not worry about this.

f. Proportion the space for your picture as you want it; we will trim the long ends of your frame next.

Ctrl-S to Save.

4. Miter your frame.

a. When you line up your frame pieces, be sure that they overlap completely as mine do here. You will see why in the next step.

b. Now trim off the parts of the frame that you do not need. Study the end result for a moment before you read the next part and see if you can figure out how to do it.

c. Choose the Polygonal lasso tool and click in one of the inside corners of the frame (A). Hold Shift, to constrain your selection to 45-degree increments and then click to the outside of that corner (B). Click over beyond the inside of the corner that you are getting rid of as i have here. (C). Double-click to close the triangle.

d. In your layers palette, click on the part of the frame that is overlapping where you selected your triangle. In this case it is the vertical. Hit the Delete key. A mitered corner! Ctrl-D to deselect.

e. Once you get the extra overlapping parts of the frame deleted, get rid of the extra parts behind the frame.

For this one at the left, select the upper horizontal piece of the frame, make your selection, then hit the delete key. Ctrl-D to deselect. It is critical to have your selection intersect at that corner that i have circled. Why is this so important? (Try it and see! Go back up in the history to undo it after you do.)

f. With one section of the frame selected in the layers palette, click the little box next to the eye for the other frame layers. (See screenshot at right.) This links the layers. Ctrl-E to merge the linked layers. Now your frame is all nailed together!

Ctrl-S to Save.

5. Trim your mat.

a. In order that we get part 6 to work right, we need to decide what order we want the layers. If you want your picture to be on top of the mat in the final result, then the picture layer is fine as it is. Otherwise you will need to cut a hole in your mat for your picture to show through and then drag your picture layer below your mat. I think that is what I'll do for mine.

b. Make a selection with your rectangular marquee tool on your picture layer where you want your mat edge to be. Drag your picture layer below your mat layer in the layers palette.

c, Now cut your mat. With your mat layer selected, hit the Delete key. Et Voilà! Ctrl-D to deselect.

d. Trim the outside of the mat. Make a rectangular marquee appearing inside the frame. With your mat layer still selected in the layers palette, Ctrl-Shift-i to inverse your selection and hit Delete. Ctrl-D to deselect. Trimmed mat!

Ctrl-S to Save.

6. Apply layer effects to give it that final 3D look.

a. You could call it quits before this, but this last step adds more realism to the project. Select the mat layer in the layers palette and then Layer > Effects. (In later versions of PS, you can click the little at the bottom of the Layers palette. In Elements, you'll be using the Effects or Styles palette.) Try a drop shadow with its various settings.. Try the different bevel/emboss settings.

b. Now select the frame layer and do effects there too.

Here are some others that I've done.

Borders in Photoshop 2

2008-01-06T23:53:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.creativepro.com

Have you ever wanted to add a unique element to an image, but weren't exactly sure what it needed? An easy way to add impact to an image is by creating photographic edges. This technique originally stems from photography, but in Photoshop you can create similar effects like those shown in our cover image. In this article, we'll demonstrate how to create interesting edges by using a Quick Mask and a series of different filters.

The Technique
Modifying pictures through the use of photographic edges is a fairly simple process that can add impact to ordinary images. To begin, you'll first need to select an RGB image you want to experiment with. Once you have an image, you'll create a mask. Then you'll edit the mask using any of the filters Photoshop has to offer. After applying a filter, you'll remove the mask and delete the surrounding area of your image to reveal the modified edges.

Creating a Quick Mask
To begin, open an RGB image you want to work on and then use the Rectangular Marquee tool to make a selection, leaving a 0.5-inch border around your image. Then click the Edit In Quick Mask Mode button on the Toolbox (or press the letter Q on the keyboard). The area outside of your selection now appears with a red overlay, as shown in Figure A. The mask is actually protecting the area of the image that it's covering. This way, when you apply your filters to the image, the edges where the mask and the unmasked areas meet will be the only areas that are affected.

Figure A
The red overlay around the image shows where we applied the Quick Mask.

Applying the Spatter Filter
We'll use the Spatter filter now to create a jagged edge. Select Filter > Brush Strokes > Spatter. In the Spatter dialog box, you'll see a preview of the filter in the Preview window. Adjust the Spray Radius and Smoothness of your brush to your preference by moving the sliders or inputting a numerical value. For our image, we selected a Spray Radius of 10 and a Smoothness of 5. When you're ready, click the OK button. If you want to increase the effect of the filter at this point, press cF ([Ctrl]F in Windows). You can continue applying the filter until you achieve your desired results.

Once you've finished applying the filter, click the Edit In Standard Mode button on the Toolbox or again press the letter Q. Now select the inverse of your selection by choosing Select > Inverse or by pressing c[shift]I ([Ctrl][Shift]I in Windows). Then simply press [delete]. Now your image appears to have torn edges, as shown in Figure B.

Figure B
To create this ragged-edge effect, we applied the Spatter filter.

Experimenting with Different Filters
Now that you have a basic understanding of how to create photographic edges, let's try applying different filters to our mask. But first, let's make our image's edges a little more chaotic by adjusting our initial mask. To do so, open an RGB image, and as you did before, make a selection using the Rectangular Marquee tool and then click the Edit In Quick Mask Mode button. Now, rather than applying the filter, select the Paintbrush tool. Painting with black will add areas to your mask, and painting with white will remove areas from your mask.

You can also try experimenting by painting with different percentages of black in order to add areas of muted texture from the filter. Figure C shows how we created a new mask by adding and subtracting areas of our original mask.

Figure C
Use the Paintbrush tool to create a unique mask around your image.

The Glass Filter
For our second example, we'll apply the Glass filter to get a bumpy, broken effect, as shown in Figure D. When creating our mask, we manipulated the edges using the Paintbrush tool again to add visual interest. Select Filter > Distort > Glass. When the Glass dialog box appears, experiment with the different settings to create new edges. The settings we used to create our textured edges are shown in Figure E. Each texture in the Texture pop-up list creates an entirely different look, as shown in Figure F. You can choose from one of the following four preset textures: Block, Canvas, Frosted or Tiny Lens, or load one of your own textures. Sample each one to see which works the best with your image.

Figure D
We created these edges by applying the Glass filter, using the Frosted texture.

Figure E
To create the effects shown in Figure D, we made our adjustments in the Glass dialog box.

1) Block texture

2) Canvas texture

3) Tiny Lens Texture

Figure F
When using the Glass filter, you can create different effects depending on the texture that's applied.

The Wind Filter
Another filter that creates interesting edge effects is the Wind filter. Apply a Quick Mask to your image as we did before. This time select Filter > Stylize > Wind. Set your preferences in the Wind dialog box and click OK. For our example, we chose the Blast option from the Method area and the From The Left option from the Direction area, as shown in Figure G. You'll notice that this only affected one side of your image. In order to apply the effect to the other side of the image, select the Wind filter again. Don't click on the shortcut under the filter menu for Wind, it will just repeat the same filter you applied. Again, choose Filter > Stylize > Wind, except this time, in the Direction area, click the From The Right option button, then click OK.

Now that you've completed two sides of your image you'll have to rotate the canvas to apply the filter on the remaining sides. You can rotate the canvas by selecting Image > Rotate Canvas > 90deg. CW. Now repeat the previous steps to apply the Wind filter to the right and left sides. When you've completed your effects, go back to the menu and choose Image > Rotate Canvas > 90deg. CCW. Then disengage your mask by pressing Q, choose Select > Inverse, and delete the selected area. Your final image should look similar to our example shown in Figure H.

Figure G
To give all your edges a wind blown effect, you'll have to apply the filter four different times.

Figure H
We created these edges by applying the Wind filter to each edge.

Take It to the Edge
In this article we've only touched on a few effects that can be applied to the edges of an image. Take the time to experiment with the other filters that Photoshop has to offer; no doubt you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Creating Borders in Photoshop

2008-01-06T23:49:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.scrapjazz.com

Creating Borders in Photoshop

Computers have quickly become an indispensable tool for scrapbookers. One of the main reasons for this is because of photo editing software such as Photoshop. These programs are so powerful, they're like having a darkroom right on your computer. As many scrapbookers are discovering, programs like Photoshop allow you to creatively edit your photos in ways that can greatly enhance a scrapbook page. One such technique is adding borders to your photos.

Like most techniques in Photoshop, there's more than one way to do this, and some are easier than others. Here are a few of the easiest and most useful ways. All of the instructions are based on Photoshop CS, but if you use another version or a different program, the instructions should be somewhat similar.

As an example, we'll be using a photo of Jamie's (momtoprincesses's) daughter Jillian. Pick a photo of your own to follow along! Always save your photo with a different name before you make any changes. You don't want to permanently alter your original photo.

Using 'Stroke'

By far the easiest method to add a simple border is by using the 'stroke' command in Photoshop. To do this, begin by selecting the entire photo (Select>>All), then choosing the stroke command (Edit>>Stroke). You'll be asked to choose how wide you want the border to be in pixels, as well as what color. The more pixels, the wider the border will be. I usually stick to one or two pixels wide.

You can leave the rest of the settings alone, but feel free to fool around with them! Using a different blend mode can yield interesting effects. For instance, by using "soft light" here with a navy blue color, I was able to create a border that still showed the photo underneath.

Creating a Border Selection

For most of the techniques to create a border, you'll start off with the part you want to turn into a border selected. The easiest way to do this, in Photoshop, is to use Select All the way you did before, and then choose Select>>Modify>>Border. Make the border as wide as you'd like. I made it eight pixels.

If your program doesn't have the 'Border' option, you can achieve the same thing by selecting the entire photograph, and choosing Select>>Modify>>Contract instead. Contract the selection by the width you'd like the border to be. Then choose Select>>Inverse to leave the border selected.

Using Brushes to Create a Border

Have you explored all of the things you can do with the brush tool? Playing around with it can be a lot of fun, especially since you can download new brushes online. You can also use this tool to create an easy border.

Once you've created the border selection, choose a color you'd like to use and a brush that has a lot of texture. For now, leave the brush's settings at the default values, although changing them around is a great way to experiment.

Paint in the border with the brush tool. Don't paint over the same place too many times, so that the texture of the brush shows up. Thanks to the selection, you don't have to worry about "coloring outside the lines."

Using Texture to Create a Border

Another thing that you can download on the internet are patterns that you can import to Photoshop as textures. My favorites come from the Inspiration Gallery (http://www.theinspirationgallery.com/).

Once you have a pattern you'd like to use, create a texture by opening the image in Photoshop and selecting Edit>>Define Pattern. Once you've done this, create the border selection again, the way we did before. Then, select the paint can tool and choose "Fill: Pattern." The pattern you just defined should be available from the list-make sure it's selected.

To make things easier, create a new layer to make the border on by selecting Layer>>New>>Layer. Now, all you have to do is use the paint bucket tool to fill the selection in with the pattern.

Like most techniques in Photoshop, there are thousands of variations on each one! Start with what I've described, and branch off from there. The more you explore the program, the more comfortable you'll become, which will lead to you discovering your own ways of doing things. If you liked what you learned here, be sure to search for more Photoshop tutorials on the internet-they are everywhere!

What Is Bokeh?

2008-01-04T23:23:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.vanwalree.com

Usually, the chief concern of lens designers is the best possible image quality of the plane of sharp focus. The rendering of out-of-focus (OOF) image parts does not enjoy a large weight in the overall design compromise of a normal photographic lens. However, the OOF blur characteristics mattered to certain Japanese photographers who introduced the term "bokeh" to the photographic society to describe the aesthetic quality of the blur. In the absence of a single English word with the same meaning, there seems no reason not to adopt the Japanese term. The internet abounds with lens qualifications like "good bokeh" and "bad bokeh" but strictly speaking this use of the word should be discouraged. Owing to the subjective implications of some unquantifiable aesthetic value, it would be more appropriate to speak of pleasant or unpleasant bokeh, respectively.

Characterization of the blur disk

Since any image is represented by a large number of images of points, we may attempt to understand the whole by considering the blurring of a single point. An unsharply imaged point is associated with a circle of confusion, or a blur disk. This blur disk is characterized by

A size.
A shape.
The light distribution across the disk.

The size of the disk determines the "amount of blur". The shape of the blur patch does not need to be circular, in which case the designations "circle of confusion" or "blur disk" are misnomers. Nonetheless, for convenience the word disk will be freely used to mean a patch of arbitrary shape. Although the size and the shape of the disk are unmistakable blur characteristics, they do not touch the essence of bokeh as the Japanese intended the word. The distribution of light across the disk does [1]. However, the distinction is not always clear and what follows is intended as an overview of a variety of factors that influence the rendering of OOF image parts. Explanations of the underlying mechanisms will be brief and the reader is referred to other pages for elaborateness.

Amount of blur

It is well known that the amount of background or foreground blur is controlled, among other things, by the F-number. Fig. 1 shows a picture taken at a small and at a large aperture. The larger aperture comes with a more blurred background, but the question that needs to be answered to define the bokeh is not to what degree the background is blurred, but whether the blur is a pleasing one. In this case, the Japanese would probably speak of a neutral bokeh.

Figure 1. Gromit captured at f/22 (top) and at f/4 (bottom).

Shape of the blur patch

It is also well known that out-of-focus highlights (OOFH's) assume the shape of the lens aperture. At reduced apertures the shape of the blur disk is the same as that of the diaphragm opening. For instance, a six-sided diaphragm leads to hexagonal blur patches. Generally, the better an aperture approximates a round opening, the more pleasing the blur. However, when a lens is used at a large aperture, obliquely incident light is confronted with a narrower aperture than normally incident light. Consequently, the blur disk narrows from the image center towards the corner. This is known as the cat's eye effect, a result of optical vignetting. When there are many OOFH's scattered across the frame, the cat's eye effect yields the impression of a rotational background motion (Fig. 2).

Figure 2. Optical vignetting creates a sense of rotational motion of the background around the street sign. Photograph by Edo Engel.

There is more to this article that I felt is a lot more complex to understand and therefore out of the remit of this blog. You can access the rest of it by clicking on the link at the beginning of this post.
Sumit

DIY Bokeh

2008-01-04T23:18:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.diyphotography.net

Bokeh is an adaptation from a a Japanese word meaning blur. In photography this term is used to describe the quality of the areas in the picture which are not in focus.

When referring to Bokeh, we can distinguish some of it characteristics:

- Is the light/dark gradient smooth or sharp?

- What shape will a small dot of light take what it is in the Bokeh area? (mirror lenses for example, create a bagel like Bokeh)

We can play with those two variant to create a special Bokeh.

You will need :

One large aperture lens (a Canon 50mm F1.8 is used here)
One sheet of black paperboard

1. Cut and shape the sheet to make a fake lens hood. The Diameter is made so that it snugly fits on the lens.

2. In the middle of the filter the wanted bokeh shape is cut out - in out example a heart is used. I'm not sure how big a hole the shape can be. But you can check it right away by just looking through the viewfinder. On the 50mm lens @ F1.8 a 15mm heart gives a metering value equal to F3.2, so it can probably be a little bigger.

3. Set your camera to its lowest aperture value (completely open).

Here are two shots to demonstrate this technique - one with a bare lens and the other with the hearted hood: (I leave it as an exercise to tell which is which :)

Here are the parameters for the example shown above:

Lens - Canon 50mm F1.8
"Lens hood" Diameter: 70mm (2.75 inch)
Hole diameter: 15mm (0.6inch)

Here are two more great examples for this technique from RottieLover (note - there only one "real" heart in each picture):

Just remember:

the lights should be out of focus in your photo. You can do this by focusing on something in the foreground so that the lights in the background get blurred nicely with the wide open aperture. You will notice in your viewfinder that the lights take on the shape that you've cut in your DIY hood.

Creating Vignettes in Photoshop CS3 (text, photos & video)

2007-12-28T01:25:00.001+10:00

clipped from blog.epicedits.com

Quick Tip: Using Photoshop to Add Vignette

« PHOTOGRAPHY PROJECT: Edit My Photo

How Many Hours Do You Post-Process? »

By Brian Auer • September 18th, 2007

Vignette (pronounced vin-'yet) is a sort of framing element that you'll sometimes see in photos (particularly older photos or Lomo shots), in which the image fades out toward the corners. It's most commonly seen as a fade out to black, but white is also used sometimes. The vignette can be a powerful element of the photo because it has a natural tendency to draw the eye toward the center of the photo.

Vignette can be produced naturally if you're using a lens intended for a smaller medium (like using a dSLR lens on a film SLR), because parts of the lens actually block out some of the light from hitting the sensor or film. There are a few other methods of getting the vignette effect, but the simplest of them is with Photoshop. Also, using Photoshop will allow you a wider range of control since it can be adjusted many times without destroying pixels.

The following Photoshop techniques are non-destructive (destroying pixels is a bad thing, and it's downright mean) and easy to adjust. Now listen closely, and do as I do:

DO THIS AS YOUR LAST STEP IN PHOTOSHOP!!!
Create a new empty layer on top of the stack. Ctrl + Alt + Shift + N
Fill the layer with pure white. Shift + Backspace
Set the blend mode to "Multiply". Alt + Shift + M
Apply the vignette filter to the new layer.
Filter >> Distort >> Lens Correction…
Mess with the "Amount" and "Midpoint" sliders in the "Vignette" section.
Press "OK", and now you have art!

You've officially added vignette to the photo in a non-destructive manner using Photoshop. If you decide to come back to the photo at a later time and you want to change the vignette, just refill the top layer with white and repeat lens correction. This isn't the only way to do this (and I apologize to those who don't use Photoshop), but its the easiest and safest way that I know of.

This is a video tutorial that also deals with vignetting in Photoshop CS3" in a few different ways:

Studio Lighting 8 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T01:00:00.001+10:00

Studio Lighting 7 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:59:00.001+10:00

Studio Lighting 6 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:58:00.001+10:00

Studio Lighting 5 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:57:00.001+10:00

Studio Lighting 4 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:56:00.003+10:00

Studio Lighting 3 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:56:00.001+10:00

Studio Lighting 2 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:55:00.001+10:00

Studio Lighting 1 of 8 - Ken Henderson (video)

2007-12-28T00:49:00.000+10:00

Seamless Background for Table Top Photography (video)

2007-12-28T00:46:00.001+10:00

Table Top Photography Tutorial (text & photos)

2007-12-28T00:23:00.001+10:00

clipped from www.shortcourses.com

Preface

CHAPTER 1. THE CAMERA IN THE DIGITAL DESKTOP STUDIO

Choosing the Camera
Choosing the Lens or Amount of Zoom
Focussing
- Auto Focus
- Manual Focus
- Focus Lock
Controlling Depth of the Field
- Capturing Maximum Depth of Field
- Using Selective Focus
Selecting an Image Size
Selecting an Image Quality
- File Compression
- File Formats
- Choosing a Format
Controlling Exposures
- The Shutter
- The Aperture
- Using the Shutter and Aperture Together
- Exposure Modes
Metering the Set Up
Metering and Middle Gray
Using Exposure Compensation
- Exposure Compensation
- Exposure Bracketing
Other Camera Features
- Sensitivity and Noise Reduction
- Image Manipulation
Controlling Brightness— Histograms
Controlling Colors— White Balance
Putting it all Together — Exposure and White Balance

CHAPTER 2. THE DIGITAL DESKTOP PHOTO STUDIO

Using the Camera's Built-in Flash
Using an External Flash
External Flash Accessories
Controlling Flash Exposures
- Flash Exposure Compensation
- Flash Exposure Bracketing(FEB)
- Flash Exposure Lock(FEL)
Using Continuous Lights
- Stands
- Reflectors
- Bulbs
Using Strobes
Connecting the Camera and Lights
- Hot Shoes
- PC Terminal
- Wireless Remote Flash
Understanding Hard and Soft Light
Using Fill Cards and Reflectors
Using Diffusers
Other Lighting Controls
Choosing a Background
- Background Materials
- Background Lighting
Supporting the Camera
Collecting Studio Stuff
Creating the Studio
Positioning the Camera
Positioning Lights— Introduction
The Main Light
The Fill Light
The Background Light
The Rim Light
Getting Ready— Cleaning the Item

CHAPTER 3. CASE STUDIES FROM THE DIGITAL DESKTOP STUDIO

Thinking about Your Photograph
Case Study— The Road Runner
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Kodak Truck Bank
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings

Case Study— A Neon Flamingo
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Reflective Stainless Steel Coffee Holder
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Textured Leather Battery Wallet
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— Two Dimensional Flat Art
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— Objects Behind Glass
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Reflective Silver Chalice
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Translucent Bottle
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Transparent Crystal
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Part Opaque and Part Transclucent Mineral
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Product With its Packaging
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Chinese Porcelain Vase
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— An Animated Object
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Turquoise Necklace
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings
Case Study— A Snapping turtle
- Composition
- Lighting
- Camera Settings

Welcome to
Digital Desktop Studio Photography
The Complete Guide To Lighting and Photographing Small Objects with your Digital Camera

DIY Light Tent (text & photos)

2007-12-28T00:19:00.001+10:00

clipped from photography-on-the.net

I spent a rainy Saturday morning making a cheap, home made light box. Here's my ghetto set up. Build pictures were taken with my wife's P&S.

Comments or criticizims always welcome.

The build...

The parts list..

The test...

Get Clipmarks - The easiest way to email text, images and videos you find on the web. It's free!

Rocky Snapper

Rockhampton Photography Club Google Calendar

Whiten teeth and eyes in Photoshop

Smoke Art

Time Lapse Photography

Time Lapse 101: An Overview

Step #4: Edit your Photos

Step #5: Start Making Your Movie

Step #6: Add titles, music, and effects

Piclens - immersive slideshows for Flickr

How to add photo to discussion or as a comment

Creating Stunning Monos 3

Contrast increasing using USM

Creating Stunning Monos 2

Sky Editing plus Channel Mixer settings to imitate film responce

Creating Stunning Monos 1

Multi Raw editing plus Dodge and Burn technique

Tutorial: Create Your Own Planets

Selecting a Panorama or Photo for Your Planet

Simple Sample: Planet "San Francisco"

Step 1: Convert the photo into a square image

Step 2: Rotate by 180° and apply the polar effect

Step 3: Rotate and clean up

Advanced Sample: Planet "Venice"

Step 0: Cropping and Straightening

Step 1: Convert the photo into a square image

Step 2: Rotate by 180° and apply the polar effect

Step 3: Rotate and clean up

Want more samples?!

What's next?

Software I use

About the author

Smooth skin with a facial scrub & foundation in Photoshop

Smoother skin in Photoshop

1. Remove blemishes

2. Smooth skin

HDR Tutorial - Photoshop

HDR Tutorial - Photomatix

HDR Tutorial: How to create 'High Dynamic Range' images using Photomatix

Contents

What's New?

Aims of this tutorial

What is HDR?

Tools Needed

Step 1: Source images

Step 2: Generating a HDR image

Step 3: Tone Mapping

Real World Examples

Issues

Extras

Generating a HDRI from a single RAW file

1 RAW vs 3 RAW's

Photoshop vs Photomatix

HDR from JPGs

Removing EXIF

Conclusion

Credits and Links

Killer Headshots The Cheap Way

High, Mid and Low-Key Lighting

Photographers' Rights

Australian street photography legal issuesby Andrew Nemeth BSc (Hons) LLB

URL Reference: <http://photorights.4020.net>

Your right to take photographs

No Bill of Rights

High Courts "approve"

Photography is not (yet) a Crime

Limitations on photo rights

Private Land

Weekend Markets — caution

But malls, markets etc. are public space!

What about railway stations?

Victoria?

Sydney Harbour and foreshore

Sydney Luna Park

Assaulting Photographers

Note: Forcing deletion of digital files

Assault by Police

Why the anti-photo angst?

Common Law

The "Kidman Defence"

Australian street photography legal issues
by Andrew Nemeth BSc (Hons) LLB