Wedding

[jaydi]

Hi,
I hope you can help me, This is a pic of friends I took at their wedding on my husbands bike, they would like to frame it.
I think B&W conversion would look great and have tried editing it my self but as usual go OTT.

Looking forward to seeing what you guys can do.
Thanks

2469

[Kaye]

Hi Cathy,
You really should send your original shot in original size for edit - would be better I think for this occasion.

Anyway, I did a fairly quick edit in B&W. I am not a specialist in this area.
I also made a couple of minor alterations.
Some of the other B&W "specialists" may be able to get better tones....
Please let me know what you think.
Your original on left.

2475 2476

[jaydi]

Kaye,
Great job Thanks....not sure what you mean by original size, I just uploaded it from my pics on computer.

Is it just me or are the faces overexposed in my pic.

[Kaye]

Personally, I don't think they are overexposed.
(Just his white tooth which I dulled down a bit!!)

[mrdoug]

Here's a couple different B&W concepts, jaydi.
I'm not a traditionalist when it comes to photo's
on Harley-Davidson motorcycles. Let me know
if I can help out in further editing these... just incase.

Doug

[julimucca]

here are my edits.
I added backlight to give the trees and stone more detail, and to even the light in their faces, I also used the tint option in picasa, I used the noise reduction, provia filter in photoscape, and sepia and black and white, and also added some contrast and some vignetting.
Hope you like them!

[Kaye]

I really like the sepia one!

[jaydi]

Hey Julie, Doug and Kaye,

What a talented bunch you are, I love everyone of them and all unique in their own way.

Am gonna save them all.

Thank you so much for taking the time out to do this for me....am totally humbled.

Thank you sooooo much again.

[Pat]

Hi Cathy.
The first thing I did with your wedding pic was crop a wee bit off the right side to balance things up a bit, though not exactly, as I believe symetry is vastly overated.
In #1 I gave it just a touch of HDR followed by a noise reduction via Noise Ninja in Photoshop. For #2, I evened the light out a little then placed a sepia layer on top of an Ortonised (http://pcin.net/update/2006/11/01/the-orton-effect-digital-photography-tip-of-the-week/) black and white layer using a "Darken" blend mode.

[Kaye]

Pat, can you tell me what is Noise Ninja?? I only have Photoshop CS2. Perhaps it does not exist in this version..??
To reduce noise, I must go through "Filter".

[Pat]

Hi Kaye. Noise Ninja (http://www.picturecode.com/) is a photoshop or equivelant (accepts .8bf plug-ins) plug-in. It can also function as a stand alone program.
Here's a trick ( http://tricks.onigo.net/guides/2005/09/noise-reduction-step-by-step.html) you might try as an alternative.
I keep my ISO set to 100 (as low as it will go) instead of "auto" as a general rule.

[vman]

I just bought Elements a few days ago, so I thought your pic would be a good way to experiment.

[jaydi]

Thanks all for your hard work....much appreciated

[coffee]

Kaye, NN plug-in for PS will also accept 16 bit images as well. And Pat is right. Keeping your ISO at the lowest possible settings will reduce the noise in most cameras. But... you can't always stay at ISO 100 if in low light situations, because what will happen if you take a shot at ISO100, and it's underexposed because you don't have the proper light, then correct the exposure in PS or other, you will bring out the noise that's there, and it's a wash really.

There are a few other things to remember. First, pictures will AWAYS have noise. It's just a matter of how much, and how easy it is to see. I have a 40d, and it's handles noise of. No better or worse than any other mid-level camera. I shoot mostly at ISO400 unless I'm with flash. In that case I might lower it to 100, but mostly 200. I also shoot in ISO800, if I'm low on light. But proper exposure in camera is more important than what ISO you are at.

I get less noise at ISO800 at proper exposure, than I get if I'm at ISO400 or even 200 sometimes and have to up the exposure in PS. So proper in camera exposure is vital to reducing the noise level.

Noise Ninja I use all the time for images I sell on stock sites. I find that filtering through NN with a touch of sharpening, then reducing the noise further with a PS filter is sometimes necessary to get the noise at a level that is acceptable at these stock sights. This is because these images are reviewed at 100%. At that level noise is very prominent, so low noise is necessary. Also, if you crop an image, the noise and artifact are more noticeable. If your images aren't being scrutinized like that then, and you aren't viewing them at 100% which most of the time you won't be, then just a small amount of noise elimination is fine.

There are other variables in keeping noise at bay, and that is a larger aperture. But that isn't always possible if you need a certain amount of Depth of field and sharp focus.

1. Proper exposure.
2. The lowest ISO but still retain proper exposure.
3. Use PS N.Reduction, or a third party program to reduce noise if nessesary.
4. Shadows will show noise before highlights, so you can always reduce noise only to selective parts of an image with the brush tool in either NN or PS. This way you won't lose any sharpening to the subject in the event noise doesn't show on the main subject. You can also use N. Reduction on the entire image, and use a mask to brush away where you don't want to reduce the noise for sharpness sake.
4. Reducing noise will also reduce how sharp the image is. It's a fine line to walk sometimes.

Hope this helps.