Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About PLShutterbug

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. OK. I looked again at the HDR tutorials and see what I was missing. When I click the tool at the left edge (i.e.: the overlay brush) I am creating a new Overlay Brush overlay. Then I can do stuff with that, and when I move back to the tone map tab anything I do only affects that overlay. If I then click back in the Master overlay I'm now looking at and manipulating the whole image. More experimenting to do, but I'm on the right track now.
  2. Firstdefence, I don't understand how this is supposed to help. I don't see any "try this" in what you say. Here is the HDR image as first displayed in the Tone Mapping persona: Note the sun is completely blown out. Now I select Overlay Paint, set my brush width to about 200 pixels and paint around the sun. Here is what the screen looks like now: Note that the sun now is no longer totally blown, and I can see the star pattern that my furthest-underexposed image shows. Fantastic! But. How do I apply this adjustment? There is no "Press Enter to complete Overlay Paint", or any other way to make the red go away and leave that beautiful sun as I want it. At least not that I can see. The only "make it happen" action I can see on the screen is to click Apply. So I did. The result was the original HDR image, with the blown sun, but now I'm in the Edit persona. How do I make that Overlay Paint adjustment "stick" while I'm still in the Tone Mapping persona? There must be something I'm missing ... Serif cannot have added the capability to start an effect but no way to complete it. I looked at your later suggestion to use the gradient rather than overlay paint, but the same problem exists: there is no way I can see to complete the effect. What am I overlooking? Thanks.
  3. Hopefully this is the right place to make this suggestion. I’m a photographer who uses Photo in Windows. I am also trying to monitor the forums to gain knowledge. I also occasionally post questions but always search first. The problem I run into when browsing or searching is that search results may result in threads for other than Photo, and these are never relevant to my needs. I’m sure that for many Publish or Designer users, Photo threads are not useful to them. Will you please consider creating separate forums for each product? It will make life easier for me, and I’m sure there are others who would also appreciate this. Thanks for listening.
  4. John, Thanks for replying. I'm uploading these files so you will see exactly what I'm working with, but in general this is a question about how to reveal details in the underexposed image of an HDR set that are currently hidden in more-exposed areas of other images in the set. That is not specific to me - I am absolutely certain others have seen and possibly solved this same issue before with vastly different image types. Any time you have a huge differential in exposure from essentially a point light source you want to render in the final image as a point light source, you have this problem to solve. The original .NEF images are 55MB each and I don't think it is really necessary to have full res, so I've downscaled the images to 2000 x 1333 JPGs. I'll appreciate any advice you can lend. Thanks.
  5. Hi, Photo 1.65 in Windows, starting with raw images from a Z7. Trying to figure out how to get a nice effect from the sun in an HDR merge. I shot 3 frames each 3 stops different: 6 underexposed, 3 under, finally at meter. The first is so far under I only get a nice sunburst from my f/22 aperture. The "at meter" shot has nice rendering of the midranges. Then I use HDR merge to put these three together, but I don't see the nice sunburst. Not sure how to get there. I discovered Overlay Paint in the HDR persona, and when I paint over the sun I see that nice sunburst come through the reddish overlay, but then ... what? I don't see any way to complete that Overlay Paint action. If I press Enter, nothing. If I choose "Accept" then AP returns to edit persona but the starburst didn't "stick" - it looks like the original merge image. How do I end up with a nice sunburst image in an HDR? Thanks in advance.
  6. Let me add my name to the list of people who cannot get a Canon Pro10 to print centered. Using 8-1/2" x 11" paper, new document set up with 1/2" margins and no changes to the driver, the print comes out with 3/8" on the leading edge and 5/8" on the trailing edge. The document in Photo has 1/2" margins. This has been reported for over a year now. Why hasn't it been fixed?
  7. v_kyr - "... looking at them made me now just having cravings for such fancy chocolates" My daughter just started a business making these chocolates. If you happen to live near Port Townsend, WA in the United States she'll be happy to whip up a dozen or so for you. I get to help her by sharing my three lifelong passions: photography (semi-pro hobby), product marketing and promotion (profession), and eating (joy!).
  8. Wondering if I've done something wrong or if I've seen a bug. Copying an edited photo to anther window seems not to preserve at least the Depth of Field Blur position. Per the Affinity Photo video tutorial on printing, I took an edited photo, selected all layers, copied it and then pasted it into a new document the size of the print I want. See the attached screenshot of the two photos side-by-side. The left one is the printing image; the right is as I edited it. Look carefully at the front piece of chocolate's front-left edge. It is blurred. Now look at that same piece in the edited image and you see it is sharp. I did not flatten the image as I copied it to the clipboard ... but I would still expect everything in a source image to be kept in a copied image. I also shrinked the image to fit on the printer page - but again I would expect that any adjustments I make to an image would be respected as proportional when resized. Any thoughts on what is happening? Thanks.
  9. Thanks for the responses. Seems what I figured. Cropping: goes a bit to whether the edits are to create an “I will never change it again, including aspect ratio” final image or if I want the option to print as 4:3 or 16:9 or whatever at some point in the future. But I realize that is just my preference, and I can live with some operations taking a bit longer because I’m leaving wiggle room for later. The comment about artifacts (you and I will have to remain friends despite our language differences) is exactly what I was looking for. What are the editing steps that, if done earlier, adversely affect what I might do later? It appears that sharpening is the primary issue in this regard.
  10. If this has been covered before, please help me with a link. I looked but didn't find anything in this forum. I've had Photo for about a year now and prior to that years of other photo editors. As a hobbyist photographer I don't use these tools every day and frequently find myself asking if I'm being the most efficient. My question: is there a suggested order to follow when editing a photo? Will performing some actions earlier make following actions faster, or dramatically slower, or affect those following actions in some adverse way? Things I tend to need to do: sharpening color correction levels, contrast, brightness correction cropping CR and fringing corrections local changes such as dodging and burning preparing for printing Another question is, which tool to use for some of these actions when tools are duplicated in different personas? The Develop persona has global controls for some of the above actions but so does the Photo persona. The Photo persona seems to offer more control with individual tools and in some cases the names for similar tools are different in Develop vs. Photo (i.e.: in Photo the unsharp mask uses pixels for the Radius slider but in Develop's Detail Refinement area it is percent). What do y'all tend to do in the Develop vs. Photo personas? I realize this will probably start a war between the "sharpen first" vs. "color correct first" factions, but I'll appreciate any suggestions. Thanks.
  11. PLShutterbug

    Photo Managment?

    Sorry to be argumentative, but they absolutely, positively DO NOT have to use the cloud. They could use a shared drive on a server.
  12. OK, more results. I dropped by Costco yesterday and they made me a screaming deal on a display-model Dell XPS 8930, Core i7-8700, 16GB DDR4/2666 RAM, Win10/64 and NVidia 1050ti graphics card. Loading the same ten images as above for a focus merge, this beast took only 2:11. Cleaning up the image after the merge was significantly faster as well. I picked up a 500GB Samsung 860 EVO SSD. I'll try that next to see what other performance gains I might get. Is this interesting to the crowd?
  13. @srpx: how can a processor be loud or quiet? a big da
  14. @stokerg, thanks for responding. Regarding RAW vs. develop: you seem to be implying that I can develop the files and then save them as some other format prior to performing merge operations. However I don't see any option to do that from the Develop persona. It only allows me to cancel my work or hit "Develop" which opens the developed image in the Photo persona. Since "New HDR Merge" or "New Focus Merge" requires files as input, somehow I need to save the developed files. Are you suggesting a batch operation with macros on stack or HDR filesets that ends up saving the files as another file format that Photo can more easily use? What format would that be? Second question: once RAW files are merged, should manipulating the different source files in the stack be slower if they originally were RAW than if originally they were that intermediate format, or does Photo do some magic during the merge that makes the source file list now work the same regardless of original file format? Thanks.
  15. @myclay, no reason at all, I just don't know much about AMD. I've been working with Intel for many years but have not done anything with AMD, though I know they are very reliable and as a second offering behind Intel they offer a lot of features at a very good price. Looking at a couple of sites I see competitive offerings with either 2700 or 2700x processors. The 2700x offers a bit more speed but its specs show it uses almost twice the power: 105 watts vs. 65 from the 2700. Is there some performance increase that I'm not seeing on the AMD site that accounts for its almost doubled power consumption? Regarding SSDs: yes, I'll probably go that route sooner or later but the pre-built PC I looked at didn't offer it.