|
|
Post by Bailey on Sept 30, 2018 1:03:36 GMT
... Maybe it's time to bite the bullet so to speak and figure out how I can ise Elements+ to automate clicking on 50 images just to change the locked layer into a simple layer0. ... Ok, I think I understand now. The good news is that you can script what you want to do. This is what I did as a quick test using Elements+ 1. Opened 3 RAW images in the PSE editor via ACR. (These images are still 16 bit. To unlock the BG layer it needs to be 8 bit, at least in my PSE 14) 2. Started recording a new macro using E+ 3. Clicked on the first image in the photo bin. 4. Selected Image->Mode->8 bits/channel 5. Clicked the padlock icon in the image's layer to unlock it 6. Clicked the next image in the photo bin and repeated steps 4 and 5 7. Clicked the last image in the photo bin and repeated steps 4 and 5 8. Clicked Save Macro and saved to a file name in MyMacros. I then closed all 3 images (without saving) and opened 3 different images. I confirmed they were still 16bit and had locked BG layers. I then ran the script created above and it converted all 3 images to 8 bit and unlocked the BG layers of each. So in theory, you could create say 1 script to handle 10 files and then run it 5 times on your opened images with the appropriate starting point image for each run.
[offtopic]
This E+ scripting is new to me as well. One immediate beneficial use for me is that I can now create a script to convert a batch of 16 bit raw images to 8 bit immediately after bringing them into the PSE editor. Support for 16 bit in PSE 14 is very limited. Up till now I have been converting to 8 bit one by one which was not a huge task but still a bit of a nuisance.
[/offtopic]
|
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Sept 30, 2018 2:16:51 GMT
[offtopic - sort of] In addition to my previous script, I see the scripts are coded in Javascript. If you are familiar with Javascript (all web browsers support javascript) you can customise, to some extent, the script generated by Elements+. Especially if running a long script, it might be useful for a popup window to appear to let you know the script is completed. I have created a script to convert up to 20 images from 16 bit to 8 bit. By default, the Elements+ scripts you create are stored in simple text files in C:\Elements+\14.0\Scripts\MyMacros. (replace 14.0 with your version number)
You can edit these javascript text files using any text editor. To my 16bit_to_8bit_20images.jsx javascript file I have added the javascript code:
alert("Script Complete");
after the last line of code.
When the script has completed running, the popup window in the image on the right pops up. [/offtopic]
|
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Sept 30, 2018 23:01:27 GMT
What I would like is the ability to select all or some files in the photobin and drag and drop them as layers on to the canvas, which is only possible one by one. If so, you would only have to select all and drag 50 files at the same time as layer on your canvas. Edit: I have posted this as a feature request in the feedback forum: You may add your vote.
Michel, I would like the same as well. Thanks for starting this feature request! ( Adobe, take note!) |
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Sept 30, 2018 23:33:45 GMT
Thanks for everyone's input. I need to qualify somewhat: * 50 raw files opened in ACR no adjustments made * click select all and open images * 50 images now exist in PSE editor - all have 1 locked background layer
I need to unlock 49 layers with one locked background providing a base for Element+ noise reducing script. or maybe I'm missing something obvious 
Hi Peter,
After viewing Andrei Doubrovski's video on the Elements+ Noise Stacking Script, I am not sure why you have to unlock the BG layers. The video doesn't mention unlocking BG layers at all,
For a test, I loaded 2 raw files into the PSE editor via ACR. In the PSE editor, the images come in as 16 bit with a locked BG layer.
I then ran the E+ Noise Stacking script and it worked fine. It converted the images to 8 bit and ran successfully, no errors.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peterj on Oct 1, 2018 0:39:03 GMT
Hi Peter,
After viewing Andrei Doubrovski's video on the Elements+ Noise Stacking Script, I am not sure why you have to unlock the BG layers. The video doesn't mention unlocking BG layers at all,
For a test, I loaded 2 raw files into the PSE editor via ACR. In the PSE editor, the images come in as 16 bit with a locked BG layer.
I then ran the E+ Noise Stacking script and it worked fine. It converted the images to 8 bit and ran successfully, no errors.
Hmmmm I never received any error indications
whenever I ran the script I had multiple images (ghosting) in the results, when I unlocked the background layers for all but 1 the image produced was singular without ghosting.
So thank you Bailey ... I'll revisit the script so I can uncover my failures! =====================update===================== my memory of the script was correct ... perhaps I just messed up
=====================update#2=====================
I believe the reason for ghosting resides with subject motion - the moon travels fast. When opening 50 images the moon's motion exceeded the scripts capability of aligning.
The results are promising for the goal to capture as much detail as possible during total lunar eclipse.
screen shot: on left noise stack psd created by noise stacking results of 3 stacks; middle single raw file exposure; right my control shot for comparison at iso 100
 |
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Oct 1, 2018 4:29:05 GMT
Hi Peter, I'm just wondering if perhaps you might be trying to "over science" photographing the moon by using Nose Stacking to remove noise, especially since the moon is a "moving target". Imho and fwiw, I would think you should be able to capture at least reasonably sharp, albeit with some noise, images with just single raw captures and then remove any noise and add a little sharpening in ACR or any other decent image editor. I have no idea what exposure settings you used apart from ISO, which imo is not the most important setting for photographing the moon especially if using a tripod. Generally, the smaller the aperture, the sharper the image up to around the len's sweet spot (around 2-3 stops from wide open). With photographing the moon from a tripod I found that around 1/30s shutter speed and certainly slower, I would see some motion blur. So under no circumstances would I go slower than 1/30s. So adjusting aperture and shutter speed becomes a bit of a juggling act. I found when using a tripod ~F10, which is a small enough aperture to maintain detail and sharpness and ~1/100s was a fast enough shutter speed when zoomed to 600mm to "freeze" the moon's motion. This equated to an ISO of 200 - 400. These 2 single shot images below were then processed in ACR and PSE. Even with ISO 400, the noise was easily and completely removed in ACR. I am convinced I would not be able to get a sharper image and without noise using Noise Stacking in this case. The risk with the noise stacking technique in this case, is if your shutter speed is too slow, you might have problems aligning the images due to motion blur and/or the time it takes to capture sufficient images for noise stacking to produce acceptable results. It would be a pity to miss out on at least one good "keeper" of the lunar eclipse due to attempting to take too many images for noise stacking. Anyway, just some food for thought in your planning  |
|
|
|
Post by Peterj on Oct 1, 2018 5:14:58 GMT
Bailey, Thanks, and yes if I'm just attempting to shoot the best quality moon possible for my equipment I've think my standard for comparison is about the best I can accomplish.
This entire exercise was simulating exposure values required to take detailed shots of a fully eclipsed moon. My research indicated that exposures longer than 1/100 will result in blur. My goal is to help the folks in my photo club to achieve nice images. My experiment captures were: * standard for comparison: 600mm, ISO 100, f/4, 1/200 * reduced light simulation : 600mm, ISO 3200, f/4, 1/200 nd.6 + nd.3 used to reduce light, auto ISO used to reduce the experiment time.
So at first glance I'm guilty of "over science" photographing however I wanted to provide reasonable alternatives for folks about exposure and have them set reasonable expectations for their equipment. My results last year were very good even if I do say so myself, but I won't be able to be at everyone's side to help them. |
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Oct 1, 2018 8:08:22 GMT
ok no problem Peter |
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Oct 1, 2018 11:15:47 GMT
... My results last year were very good even if I do say so myself, but I won't be able to be at everyone's side to help them.  source: hotlink to actual image from your "results" link. last year?......aaahh, you got me thinking. It was this year actually, 31 Jan 2018.......but who's counting  As I now recall from your post, it was a composite of the photos you and your photograph partner took. Hopefully in Jan 2019 you and your partner can reverse roles. I hope you get a clear night |
|
