frizzylee
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 170 
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by frizzylee on Jul 14, 2018 7:44:47 GMT
I have an image of my cat (who passed about a month ago) that I would like to use. The quality is very, very poor. It's 6.307 x 4.793 inches 300 ppi. I've tried filters to smooth out the fur, but cannot find any combination of blurs and so forth that work. I had one other photo similar to this and somehow got it to look semi-okay but cannot remember how I did it.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Pat
 |
|
frizzylee
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 170
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by frizzylee on Jul 14, 2018 7:47:38 GMT
The photo that appeared when I posted just now actually looks better that what is currently printing out. Maybe I'm just being too critical, but it sure looks "pixelated" to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Jul 14, 2018 13:25:23 GMT
Hi frizzylee, wow, you sure don't make it easy  I had a quick play with your photo and tried a few basic edits and hopefully the result is at least on the right track to what you would like, but still needs a lot of editing, especially around the edges of the cat, to clean up the image a little more and to get the colours correct. A summary of what I did using PSE 14 and Elements+ is: 1. Applied the Smart Blur Filter to smooth out the fur but masked the eyes to keep them as original and reasonably sharp. Blurry eyes on animals (and portraits of people) is a no-no. 2. In Elements+ I opened up Raw Corrections lowered the exposure and highlights and increased the vibrance a little. 3. In PSE used a Levels Adjustment Layer to set the black, white and grey points. All of the above settings can be tweaked to suit what you are aiming for.
Before
After
(Click image to view enlargement)
I hope this starting point gets you closer to what you would like. |
|
|
|
Post by hmca on Jul 14, 2018 14:45:01 GMT
Frizzylee, I used the NIK plug-in and applied the glamour glow filter for the first one and then used the clone tool to clean up the edges:  You could probably get a similar look using an Orton effect if you don't have NIK. After applying the glamour glow filter I decided to give it a painterly effect and used the sandstone filter in the filter gallery: Scaling 67% Relief 4 Top Right for light  |
|
pontiac1940
CE Members
Posts: 6,357
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Jul 14, 2018 15:05:37 GMT
Sorry about your cat. Just de-noised a couple of times to soften it a bit ... but protected eyes and nose from the process. And lightly increased vibrance. Clive  |
|
frizzylee
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 170
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by frizzylee on Jul 14, 2018 15:11:28 GMT
To bailey and Helen
Thank you both so very, very much. I am printing out both solutions so that I will have a guide to help me get this right. It's unfortunate that such a cute pose turned out to be the one I really want to use but the photo is so poor.
I am very appreciative of your help. I was totally stuck but now can move on, I believe.
Pat
|
|
frizzylee
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 170
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by frizzylee on Jul 14, 2018 15:16:53 GMT
To Clive
Wow. I never thought about de-noise. Not sure where "vibrance"is located. I use PSE 14, mostly. Can't wait to give this a try, too.
You folks on this site are so great!! It can get so frustrating when I hit an issue like this, but it's wonderful to know there is help.
Thanks so very much.
Pat
|
|
|
|
Post by hmca on Jul 14, 2018 15:42:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Jul 14, 2018 15:45:10 GMT
Not sure where "vibrance"is located. I use PSE 14, mostly. Pat, here are two ways to do a Vibrance adjustment in PSE. Take your pick!
Via Quick Edit:
1. Go to Quick Edit > Color section.
2. Click on the Vibrance tab.
3. Adjust the slider. (You can also click on the preset thumbnails.)
4. Switch to the Expert mode to continue your editing.
Via the Raw Converter:
Using the Camera Raw Converter in Photoshop Elements
|
|
pontiac1940
CE Members
Posts: 6,357
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Jul 14, 2018 16:13:48 GMT
Thanks frizzylee... you are welcome. (Thanks Helen.) The photo is "difficult" but it is important for you to preserve this. Good luck. De-noising (and then resharpening which I did not do here) can improve poor-quality jpegs. I reduced noise in PSE 18. Yes, what Helen said works to increase vibrance. Perhaps you all know this.  There is a "more powerful" way to manipulate jpegs including vibrance. Not sure how many people adjust jpeg images in ACR. Works very well. In PSE 11 it was under "open as" and you have some options as to file type, and you "open as camera raw." In PSE 18 that option has a separate drop down window, "Open in camera raw." If you do that with with an out-of-camera jpg and process it in ACR and then open in PSE you immediately rename the adjusted file (as either jpeg or PSD) so the original jpeg is preserved as shot. It is a "myth" that once you adjust a jpeg that the original is lost..yes, if the file name is overwritten. Not true if renamed immediately when opened. Using ACR for jpegs is handy and powerful. Depending on camera/image quality and lighting, a good jpeg is almost as good as a raw file. Hard to tell the difference between a high-end, noiseless jpeg shot in good light and a raw file of the same scene. Another story. Using ACR on jpegs allows you to make all (most) the adjustments you can make to a raw file and super handy. Hope this helps. Clive |
|
|
|
Post by kdcintx on Jul 14, 2018 20:30:26 GMT
Clive, Thank you for this explanation about editing jpegs in ACR. Very helpful since I shoot jpegs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Jul 15, 2018 1:27:21 GMT
To bailey and Helen Thank you both so very, very much. I am printing out both solutions so that I will have a guide to help me get this right. It's unfortunate that such a cute pose turned out to be the one I really want to use but the photo is so poor. I am very appreciative of your help. I was totally stuck but now can move on, I believe. Pat No problem and you're welcome frizzylee You now have plenty of ideas (food for thought) from this thread. I hope you are able to get an image you will be happy with. Also, last night for some unknown reason the link to the "After" image in my previous post came back saying the web page could not be reached, so I removed the link. I tried the link gain this morning and it works, so I put the link back in case you would like the full sized image. I can only assume imgbb were experiencing some problems last night. |
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Jul 15, 2018 3:04:22 GMT
Clive, Thank you for this explanation about editing jpegs in ACR. Very helpful since I shoot jpegs. Hi kdcintx, Clive has provided really good information and advice. The only thing I would add is that for anyone currently shooting jpegs as their norm and considering using ACR as part of their default workflow, then it might be worthwhile considering to also change to shooting raw and/or raw+jpeg if they really want jpegs as well. The huge advantage of raw is that you are processing largely unprocessed sooc data. The processing/editing you do in a raw converter is to a very large extent the processing your camera would do to produce its jpeg according to the settings you set in camera. Obviously, doing the processing yourself in a raw converter gives you much, much more flexibility in how the edits are applied and the benefits of having a hugely larger dataset (raw file) when compared to the relatively small dataset of the jpeg file. Editing raw data generally yields better results, especially when compared to editing problematic jpeg files. The only "negative" of raw, if you can call it that given disk space is so much cheaper nowadays than historically, is that they are much larger files than the equivalent jpeg. But that it is to be expected given there is very much more data in a raw file. Anyway, just some food for thought |
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Jul 15, 2018 3:09:17 GMT
Just de-noised a couple of times to soften it a bit ... but protected eyes and nose from the process. Clive To Clive Wow. I never thought about de-noise.
Pat, I never thought about it either.
Clive, great idea. Very effective results! Definitely adding this to my "bag of tricks". Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Jul 15, 2018 3:24:44 GMT
To Clive Wow. I never thought about de-noise. Not sure where "vibrance"is located. I use PSE 14, mostly. Can't wait to give this a try, too. You folks on this site are so great!! It can get so frustrating when I hit an issue like this, but it's wonderful to know there is help. Thanks so very much. Pat Another option to edit vibrance in addition to the already mentioned PSE's ACR and Quick Edit mode is Elements+ (which is what I referred to in my original post) It unlocks a large number of features/functions available in the "big brother" Photoshop that are currently "hidden" in PSE. It's price is extremely budget friendly (I really don't know how @andrei Doubrovski, member here, does it) and I can highly recommend at least having a look at it. Just some more food for thought |
|
There is a "more powerful" way to manipulate jpegs including vibrance. Not sure how many people adjust jpeg images in ACR. Works very well. In PSE 11 it was under "open as" and you have some options as to file type, and you "open as camera raw." In PSE 18 that option has a separate drop down window, "Open in camera raw." If you do that with with an out-of-camera jpg and process it in ACR and then open in PSE you immediately rename the adjusted file (as either jpeg or PSD) so the original jpeg is preserved as shot. It is a "myth" that once you adjust a jpeg that the original is lost..yes, if the file name is overwritten. Not true if renamed immediately when opened. Using ACR for jpegs is handy and powerful. Depending on camera/image quality and lighting, a good jpeg is almost as good as a raw file. Hard to tell the difference between a high-end, noiseless jpeg shot in good light and a raw file of the same scene. Another story. 