The settings were on my Olympus OMD-1, handheld, 1/1600 (to eliminate shake), f4.5, ISO 1000.
I took the original into LR and adjusted the whites and blacks. I cropped it behind the frog and angled it slightly forward. Then in PS, I increased the vibrance a bit. But then I decided it needed a light source, since you could set some light hitting him in the side closest to the camera. I did this with a gradient, very crudely. Then it looked too yellow overall, so I brought the yellows down a bit back in LR. Finally, I decided to eliminate the rock in front of him...it felt too much like it was blocking his way. So back into LR. After that, I went into NIK Color Efex and brought up a little greyish vignette and about a 12% increase of detail/sharpness on the frog.
One other thing--not liking how my yellowish light affected the clarity of my frog (who was actually quite sharp and clear SOOC), I copied and pasted him in an additional layer. Then I went around his edges with a cloning brush to just soften the lines in a few places where my selection felt too false.
This round’s discussion is now closed! 11 comments posted
Stuart Ord
Lots of processing, but a successful outcome I think. All your work has improved the result. You've even got a nice catchlight in its eye. Super. Posted: 05/16/2023 15:37:28
Carol Sheppard
Thanks, Stuart. Originally I left the rock in and it really felt like that last scene in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. But I felt the rock was distracting as thought he had nowhere to move into. Posted: 05/16/2023 20:54:31
Gloria Grandolini
Hi Carol, very nice and super sharp image , your frog looks to me almost as a painting. I really like what you achieved with the colors. The one area that distracts my eye a bit is the surface just before where the rock was. I wonder if it would help to clone the same texture as the the surface on the right side. As always I learn from you a lot on options to improve an image. Posted: 05/23/2023 16:42:07
Carol Sheppard
That is great input; thank you! It has been disturbing me, too! Posted: 05/24/2023 20:19:45
Tom Pickering
(Groups 0 & 53)
I think the rock AND shells are distracting from the great shot of the frog. Here's my take on it. Thoughts? Posted: 05/27/2023 11:58:05
Carol Sheppard
It does change the story...now it is just a frog hopping along. Perhaps it is a "for the image archives" image?
Posted: 05/27/2023 16:33:29
Keith Au
Carol, thanks for sharing the processing you have gone through. If it were me.. I might have been adding too much contrast or vibrance. You have done it just right. But I think the white shell may be a bit distracting.. Suggested dimming it a little. I think Tom's version does mean changing the story of the image. The original image gives some lively feeling. Great shot and post-processing. Posted: 05/27/2023 23:47:06
Carol Sheppard
Thank you for your input on this question. The compromise would be to dim or minimize the shells. This is the value of our feedback to each other! Posted: 05/28/2023 10:51:38
Carol Sheppard
Thank you for your input on this question. The compromise would be to dim or minimize the shells. This is the value of our feedback to each other! Posted: 05/30/2023 22:57:09
Fran Nunn
Great frog, Carol. Thanks for discussing all your processing- more than I normally do, but you brought out a nice image. I like that you removed the rock to give him a way out. But the shells do add to the story- I like them. Posted: 05/29/2023 14:23:27
Pat Glenn
Carol, frog is a great subject - clarity & texture - agree -I would probably have been trying to pop the color of the spots and texture of the skin to see how far I could go. background is a tough one. the shells do give it a story but they might not be the ideal background but shooting live you take what you get - shells give a reference point - I lean to keeping them in. Tom's fix makes sense but then it is more sterile. [ps sorry I'm late due to vacation and leg injury] Posted: 05/29/2023 21:59:32
