Nature Maybe I should have deleted this one.

**Tonytee** · 07-13-2016, 08:23 PM

This shot was taken at 43mm. Admittedly this photograph was a lot of work with cloning, healing, noise reduction and exposure levels. I am still not that happy with it, perhaps I could solicit some assistance for improvement.

Thanks so much for viewing and please feel free to offer comments/suggestions/solutions.

Antonio

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

automorphism · 07-13-2016, 09:19 PM

What was the cloning for? Was there something really weird in the green area?

**Tonytee** · 07-13-2016, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by automorphism

What was the cloning for? Was there something really weird in the green area?

There were some ugly branches that I felt were cluttering up the scene.

Antonio

virusn3t · 07-13-2016, 10:42 PM

It look weird on the top, too much purple/green removal? Beside that, in that angle look like a hoovering flower for me.

**Tonytee** · 07-13-2016, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by virusn3t

It look weird on the top, too much purple/green removal? Beside that, in that angle look like a hoovering flower for me.

Yes, I believe you are correct. Many thanks,

Antonio

BrianR · 07-16-2016, 08:26 PM

I'd work on 'pre-processing' instead of 'post-processing'. Try tying offending branches back, pruning away foliage or spent blooms you're unhappy with (ask before pruning if it's not your garden

), or just looking for more photogenically located subjects. The less stuff you have to clean up in post, the more realistic the result (unless you're a photoshop wizard).

This isn't to say editing on the computer is bad or in anyway wrong, but if you're spending hours on touch-ups that are still somewhat visible in the end result you might want to rework your process.

**RGlasel** · 07-16-2016, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by BrianR

I'd work on 'pre-processing' instead of 'post-processing'.

I'd second this suggestion. The nice thing about flowers is that they don't move until they fall off, so going back a few days later to do a retake is a lot more feasible than retaking a wildlife shot or candids at a special event.

**Kerrowdown** · 07-17-2016, 01:57 AM

Originally posted by Tonytee

There were some ugly branches that I felt were cluttering up the scene

A chainsaw saves time in PP.

**Tonytee** · 07-17-2016, 02:25 AM

Originally posted by RGlasel

I'd second this suggestion. The nice thing about flowers is that they don't move until they fall off, so going back a few days later to do a retake is a lot more feasible than retaking a wildlife shot or candids at a special event.

I also agree. I should be more discriminate and less indiscriminate. I feel that every so often I must feed my addiction to red roses.

).

Thanks for all the help.

Antonio

**Kerrowdown** · 07-17-2016, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by Tonytee

lot of work with cloning, healing, noise reduction

Just a thought for you... perhaps with a wee bit of Gaussian Blur applied to background, the PP work would less obvious.

**Tonytee** · 07-17-2016, 06:35 AM

Originally posted by Kerrowdown

Just a thought for you... perhaps with a wee bit of Gaussian Blur applied to background, the PP work would less obvious.

I had that blur feature when using GIMP, however overall the program was very cumbersome to use. I think I am ready to spend some Cash,(which is just as good as money) on some quality PPE.

Thanks very much for your comment.

Antonio

07-16-2016, 08:26 PM	#6
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	I'd work on 'pre-processing' instead of 'post-processing'. Try tying offending branches back, pruning away foliage or spent blooms you're unhappy with (ask before pruning if it's not your garden), or just looking for more photogenically located subjects. The less stuff you have to clean up in post, the more realistic the result (unless you're a photoshop wizard). This isn't to say editing on the computer is bad or in anyway wrong, but if you're spending hours on touch-ups that are still somewhat visible in the end result you might want to rework your process.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I just bought three lenses, I should really sell one, but which one...	dmbaile2	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	01-27-2015 06:42 PM
I should have gotten an ID bracelet sooner. Anyone know where I can find a good one?	ASheffield	General Talk	9	07-27-2014 03:52 PM
Not Work-Safe Maybe I won't get this one removed	angelo9978	Post Your Photos!	19	02-11-2011 06:33 AM
How should I have taken this night image?	philbaum	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	10-09-2009 09:24 AM
maybe i should have been a food photographer instead of a neuroscientist . . .	SailorsKid	Post Your Photos!	12	06-01-2009 06:48 PM

07-13-2016, 09:19 PM	#2
automorphism Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Ontario, Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 791	What was the cloning for? Was there something really weird in the green area?

07-13-2016, 10:37 PM	#3
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,468 Original Poster	Originally posted by automorphism What was the cloning for? Was there something really weird in the green area? There were some ugly branches that I felt were cluttering up the scene. Antonio

07-13-2016, 10:42 PM	#4
virusn3t Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 676	It look weird on the top, too much purple/green removal? Beside that, in that angle look like a hoovering flower for me.

07-13-2016, 11:33 PM	#5
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,468 Original Poster	Originally posted by virusn3t It look weird on the top, too much purple/green removal? Beside that, in that angle look like a hoovering flower for me. Yes, I believe you are correct. Many thanks, Antonio

07-16-2016, 08:33 PM	#7
RGlasel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Saskatoon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,228	Originally posted by BrianR I'd work on 'pre-processing' instead of 'post-processing'. I'd second this suggestion. The nice thing about flowers is that they don't move until they fall off, so going back a few days later to do a retake is a lot more feasible than retaking a wildlife shot or candids at a special event.

07-17-2016, 01:57 AM	#8
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	Originally posted by Tonytee There were some ugly branches that I felt were cluttering up the scene A chainsaw saves time in PP.

07-17-2016, 02:25 AM	#9
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,468 Original Poster	Originally posted by RGlasel I'd second this suggestion. The nice thing about flowers is that they don't move until they fall off, so going back a few days later to do a retake is a lot more feasible than retaking a wildlife shot or candids at a special event. I also agree. I should be more discriminate and less indiscriminate. I feel that every so often I must feed my addiction to red roses. ). Thanks for all the help. Antonio

07-17-2016, 02:47 AM	#10
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	Originally posted by Tonytee lot of work with cloning, healing, noise reduction Just a thought for you... perhaps with a wee bit of Gaussian Blur applied to background, the PP work would less obvious.

07-17-2016, 06:35 AM	#11
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,468 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kerrowdown Just a thought for you... perhaps with a wee bit of Gaussian Blur applied to background, the PP work would less obvious. I had that blur feature when using GIMP, however overall the program was very cumbersome to use. I think I am ready to spend some Cash,(which is just as good as money) on some quality PPE. Thanks very much for your comment. Antonio