very nice bunch of pictures. anyone got any ideas on achieving colours like that without ruining an image? suggestions of tutorials, resources would be really appreciated. thanks

Though to me the colors look very oversaturated, they obviously are not posterized if the images are accepted.  A shot generally can take the most saturation without posterization when it has an even range of tonal values throughout the range. 

Most important of all however, is that the WB is spot on across the whole tonal range.  The global WB adjustment in a RAW editor or midtone color balance in PS is typically not enough, first adjust the highlight WB, then the shadow, then the midtone, this is usually enough, but not always (occasionally a local area will need its own WB correction).

If you look at the tone histogram for each of these images, it probably is quite well balanced without any big dips or troughs, from black to white the amount of luminosity is probably fairly even across the board.  As few shots are actually taken this way, in order to boost saturation to those levels first the tone curve has to be flattened. 

There are a number of ways to do this, keep in mind the goal as you do it, an even spread of tones across the whole histogram, which typically also makes for a pleasing image to look at.

From easiest to most difficult, depending on the image several techniques may be needed, some applied several times (like the levels and curves):

With the levels you set the white point and black point (right at the end of the range) and adjust the brightness for an even spread.

The curves are one means of boosting brights or darks to even things out, and adjusting local contrast, an easy tool to use, but difficult to master.

A contrast mask can even an image out overall, apply sparingly as the effect can be noticable if used to much, but it is a fantastic means of flattening the tone curve.

The highlight/shadow tool can be used to balance (increase or reduce) the light or dark areas, but use caution, this lightening dark areas brings out noise, and darkening bright areas adds halos, apply very, very sparingly, only for very minor corrections, it is quite easy to use however.

A targeted luminosity mask (once the mask is created (either the luminosity or its negative) the mask itself can have contrast, levels, and curves applied to target/highlight certain areas) on a contrast/levels/curves adjustment layer or image layer has the same effect as the shadows/highlights tool, but there is far more control and the results are much better, however it is time consuming and difficult to do.  These layers also can have the blending changed to further intensify the effect (then opacity reduced to balance)

The luminosity masked adjustment layer (or image layer with adjustments applied to it) can be taken one step further and areas on the mask masked out (painted black) to only target specific areas like a sky.  This is probably the most intense level of surgery that can be done on the tones of an image, and it can be extremely time consuming, but very good results can be obtained.  Same as above the blending of the layer can boost or be part of the effect as well, and opacity used to balance.

Some of my most intense work in this area had 20+ layers and took several hours to PP (probably a lot less now that I know what I am doing an it is second nature), but in the end the results were fantastic.  Once the tone curve is evened out and smoothed (if you go by how the image looks, in the end typically you find that the histogram evens out, it is pleasing to look at), overly bright areas are darkened and overly dark areas lightened (often when lightening a dark area with a mask, noise reduction should be done on that layer to keep down noise, as lightening makes noise more visible).  The smooth tone curve can then have saturation applied and it can take a lot more (making a more intense picture overall) before it starts to look goofy or posterize.

Any of these techniques are easily found with google for an exact tutorial.  The most intense stuff requires the full PS (any version is fine), I'm not aware of another program that can use targeted luminosity masked layers.

I don't know that multiple exposures were used, if the camera captured the full tonal range in the initial shot multiple exposures are not needed, the effect of an HDR can be created from any shot when its curve is flattened, and multiples of a single shot can be created in PS (a screen blending is equivalent to a bright shot, a multiply blending is equivalent to a dark shot, if the initial shot contained no white or black clipping, there is no difference if noise reduction is applied to the appropriate layers (the screen blended layer)).

As leaf mentioned LAB color space is worth looking into, specifically the technique that I know as LAB color popping, where the A and B channels have the tone curve slope increased (contrast raised), which intensifies colors in a different manner than saturation alone (basically applying a tone curve to the saturation, color can be made very intense this way)

Indeed a nice portfolio
His portfolio on Istock looks quite different from his Shutterstock portfolio:


http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=877446

But I see the same background again.

I don't know that multiple exposures were used, if the camera captured the full tonal range in the initial shot multiple exposures are not needed, the effect of an HDR can be created from any shot when its curve is flattened, and multiples of a single shot can be created in PS (a screen blending is equivalent to a bright shot, a multiply blending is equivalent to a dark shot, if the initial shot contained no white or black clipping, there is no difference if noise reduction is applied to the appropriate layers (the screen blended layer)).

thanks for the info waldo.

multiple exposure:... check out these three images
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-8943298-taj-mahal-palace.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-5053381-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4686271-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html

one taj mahal - three images. 

which makes me think that images like this
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4884196-group-going-along-hill-on-sunset.html

even though it is totally possible to take - it is probably a merge of 2 images - one of people walking on a sand dune, and a nice sunset.

Quote from: Waldo4 on March 25, 2008, 08:55

I don't know that multiple exposures were used, if the camera captured the full tonal range in the initial shot multiple exposures are not needed, the effect of an HDR can be created from any shot when its curve is flattened, and multiples of a single shot can be created in PS (a screen blending is equivalent to a bright shot, a multiply blending is equivalent to a dark shot, if the initial shot contained no white or black clipping, there is no difference if noise reduction is applied to the appropriate layers (the screen blended layer)).

thanks for the info waldo.

multiple exposure:... check out these three images
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-8943298-taj-mahal-palace.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-5053381-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4686271-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html

one taj mahal - three images. 

which makes me think that images like this
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4884196-group-going-along-hill-on-sunset.html

even though it is totally possible to take - it is probably a merge of 2 images - one of people walking on a sand dune, and a nice sunset.

For most of his work it seems he has a nice stock library of skies, and just adds them in PPing, the results are stunning (I've done it before too, not for stock however).  Two different pictures merged into one is very different the multiple exposures merged to HDR.  I wish that I could get that mileage out of my shots  , looks like the initial capture of the Taj has made him a couple of bucks, I'm sure that each shot is a decent seller, they all are stunning.

Thanks guys, thats some quality advice. I've been watching tutorials by Dan Margulis on LAB colour correction in CS3 via Kelbytraining.com which i highly recommend btw.

yeah quite agreed, at kelbytraining it seems like they have some good tutorials.  I have only watched the free videos but from that they look pretty nice.

thanks for the info waldo.

multiple exposure:... check out these three images
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-8943298-taj-mahal-palace.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-5053381-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4686271-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html

one taj mahal - three images. 

One small problem with these images, Taj Mahal faces south...

The sun could never be in this position

Cheers

mollypix

Deleted

Interesting...

The way you speak of LAB it is as if you have no idea what it really is, it is a color mode, not a technique, no different than RGB or CMYK.

I fail to see why bracketing would be used.  It is useful if you shoot in auto or don't meter well, but if your cam can meter well and you shoot in manual (which I would expect that pros do), what is the point of bracketing?  I would expect a pro to be able to read the light meter reading and adjust the exposure accordingly depending on conditions and have no need to bracket, maybe take a half stop lower safe shot as well, but bracket?

Every shot is photoshopped whether it is done by the processor in the camera (.jpeg shooters), the RAW converter, or an image editing program like photoshop.  An unprocessed shot is nothing more than film in a cannister.

Photoshopped in the terms you describe seems to imply faked, as in combining multiple sources, or deleting major parts, or somehow warping the image, which neither layers (almost everybody that is any good at PS does all adjustments on their own layer) nor LAB mode implies.

And I do believe that reviewers for most sites are required to be contributers themselves.

Highly processed meat?

"The way you speak of LAB it is as if you have no idea what it really is, it is a color mode, not a technique, no different than RGB or CMYK"

I beg to differ with you sir;

http://microstockpix.com/forum/lab/lab.html
http://microstockpix.com/forum/haze/haze.html
The MIZ

http://microstockpix.com/forum/haze/haze.html

I always wondered why you work on curves here and not with the USM. Narrowing curves can amplify noise.
For changing color tones, I prefer adding a soft layer. By definition, that one is noiseless.

Well LAB is just a mode of course, not a technique. But LAB allows techniques that aren't possible in RGB like sharpening in the lightness channel only.

Just my 5 cents (I prefer Eurocents)

Quote from: rjmiz on March 27, 2008, 17:35

http://microstockpix.com/forum/haze/haze.html

I always wondered why you work on curves here and not with the USM. Narrowing curves can amplify noise.
For changing color tones, I prefer adding a soft layer. By definition, that one is noiseless.

Well LAB is just a mode of course, not a technique. But LAB allows techniques that aren't possible in RGB like sharpening in the lightness channel only.

Just my 5 cents (I prefer Eurocents)

Thank you, hence it is accessed under the MODE menu and not adjustments or filter, and anything done in it requires the use of something else in the adjustment or filter menu.  Whether LAB color popping (which the haze technique is a subcategory of), impossible colors, adjusting the WB like the RAW editor does, mapping color variation, or luminosity sharpening, it allows things that aren't possible in the other modes, but it still is a mode.

To cut through haze like that (in lab) I just use the contrast. It is my understanding of contrast that it is exactly the same thing as the straight line curve that you are using, the width (slope) being adjusted by the contrast slider and midpoint adjusted by the brightness.  No?

I usually do it though by targeting the haze via masked layers (doing a global fix for the foreground, and a targeted layer for increasing distance), and contrasting the blue channel and slightly darkening (to exactly balance the bright shift to keep from changing the WB), and using a high radius USM on the channel.  Sometime I use the color balance.  Usually the atmosphere (haze) creates a lot of excess dark and mid blue, not enough light blue (very counterintutitive, but fix an airline window shot, you need more top end blue to make it look best), and the same thing with green but about 1/3rd to 1/2 of the amount as blue.

This darn American money just keeps getting worse by the day.