Welcome new members. If you have been recently invited to join our forum, welcome.
Please take a few minutes to introduce yourself at The Meeting Room / General Discussions / Introduce yourself

Image ProcessingLearning the Tilt-Shift Blur Option in Photoshop CC 2018

Post-processing: Editing techniques, software, hardware and other resources. Chemical or digital.
From simple corrections to multi-layered edits, actions, tone mapping and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
Charles Haacker
Mentoris Primus
Mentoris Primus
Posts: 1900
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:20 pm
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: No, please do not edit my images
Contact:

Learning the Tilt-Shift Blur Option in Photoshop CC 2018

Post by Charles Haacker »

We've been talking a ittle about this regarding Dave Chinn's Big Kahuna, where he has been trying to get a believable blur in the background. I happened upon a tutorial on this (the stuff about the tilt/shift blur starts about the halfway mark) and decided to try it. Here is my progress report:

This one is the original Lightroom adjusted image. The problem is that even shooting wide open my 1" sensor still carries the depth of field too deep into the background so my buddy here doesn't stand out as I would have liked.
01.jpg

So this one was my first somewhat clumsy attempt at the tilt/shift blur. I made a bunch'a misteaks so it looks phony as a 3-dollar bill, but I learned something in the process...
02.jpg

This one I just did. I think it's a lot better. The falloff from foreground to background is more believable (I hope) and I backed off the overall blur since I thought originally it was too much.
03.jpg
[glow=red]BUT DOES THIS FOOL THE EYE?[/glow] (If you open these three in tabs and reduce the size to fit the screen you can toggle among them and see the effects.)
Friends call me Chuck. :photo:
This link takes you to my Flickr albums. Please click on any album to scroll through it.
(I prefer to present pictures in albums because I can put them in specific order.)
There is no light like back light. No, really. :)

User avatar
minniev
Mentoris Supremus
Mentoris Supremus
Posts: 6152
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:55 am
Location: Mississippi
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by minniev »

Thank you for sharing this Chuck, it's a technique I know I will find a good use for. M43 cameras have the mixed blessing and curse of holding LOTS in focus even at apertures of, let's say, 1.8. Sometimes I am trying to do exactly what you were trying to do here. You did it well, too, by the way.
"God gave me photography so that I could pray with my eyes" - Dewitt Jones

User avatar
Bob Yankle
Mentoris Peritus
Mentoris Peritus
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:53 pm
Location: Burlington, NC
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: Yes, you can edit but ask me first
Contact:

Post by Bob Yankle »

A useful tool, Chuck, and you got better at this with a bit of muscle memory. I liked the wood sculpture as well. I would be tempted to play with its lighting values with a bit of texture to make it even more dramatic.

User avatar
Charles Haacker
Mentoris Primus
Mentoris Primus
Posts: 1900
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:20 pm
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: No, please do not edit my images
Contact:

Post by Charles Haacker »

minniev wrote:Thank you for sharing this Chuck, it's a technique I know I will find a good use for. M43 cameras have the mixed blessing and curse of holding LOTS in focus even at apertures of, let's say, 1.8. Sometimes I am trying to do exactly what you were trying to do here. You did it well, too, by the way.

Thanks, Min. Micro 4/3 sensors have a crop factor of 2 (my 1" has a crop factor of 2.7), so that's what, half the size of a full frame? So yeah, it's harder to get that blur or bokeh. I was pretty happy when I went up from a 1/1.7, but like everything else sometimes that goes-on-forever DOF was useful, sometimes not.
Bob Yankle wrote:A useful tool, Chuck, and you got better at this with a bit of muscle memory. I liked the wood sculpture as well. I would be tempted to play with its lighting values with a bit of texture to make it even more dramatic.

Thanks Bob. I think I tend more to "straight" photography, a documentary approach. I love what you do (!!) and of course I have no compunction about changing or blurring a background or swapping a face, but I just can't seem to get into more creative PP. (Doesn't mean I won't... :D )
Friends call me Chuck. :photo:
This link takes you to my Flickr albums. Please click on any album to scroll through it.
(I prefer to present pictures in albums because I can put them in specific order.)
There is no light like back light. No, really. :)

User avatar
davechinn
Mentoris Magnus
Mentoris Magnus
Posts: 2082
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Ky
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: No, please do not edit my images
Contact:

Post by davechinn »

Charles Haacker wrote:We've been talking a ittle about this regarding Dave Chinn's Big Kahuna, where he has been trying to get a believable blur in the background. I happened upon a tutorial on this (the stuff about the tilt/shift blur starts about the halfway mark) and decided to try it. Here is my progress report:

This one is the original Lightroom adjusted image. The problem is that even shooting wide open my 1" sensor still carries the depth of field too deep into the background so my buddy here doesn't stand out as I would have liked.
01.jpg
So this one was my first somewhat clumsy attempt at the tilt/shift blur. I made a bunch'a misteaks so it looks phony as a 3-dollar bill, but I learned something in the process...
02.jpg
This one I just did. I think it's a lot better. The falloff from foreground to background is more believable (I hope) and I backed off the overall blur since I thought originally it was too much.
03.jpg[glow=red]BUT DOES THIS FOOL THE EYE?[/glow] (If you open these three in tabs and reduce the size to fit the screen you can toggle among them and see the effects.)


Yes, I think #3 is believable Chuck !!! It's spot on to my eyes. Now I think its time to get back to the Big Kahuna. Thanks for the link to the tutorial.
Dave

User avatar
St3v3Murray
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 5041
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 am
Location: 35,000 feet
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by St3v3Murray »

I still find it amazing the things you can do it in post. It's as amazing as it is scary I guess. Thanks for explaining another tool! S-
"Take photographs, leave footprints, steal hearts"

User avatar
Charles Haacker
Mentoris Primus
Mentoris Primus
Posts: 1900
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:20 pm
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: No, please do not edit my images
Contact:

Post by Charles Haacker »

davechinn wrote:Yes, I think #3 is believable Chuck !!! It's spot on to my eyes. Now I think its time to get back to the Big Kahuna. Thanks for the link to the tutorial.
Dave

You're welcome, Dave. See below...
St3v3M wrote:I still find it amazing the things you can do it in post. It's as amazing as it is scary I guess. Thanks for explaining another tool! S-

You're welcome, Steve. As it happens I am getting ready to join the discussion on ethics in photography, and coming back to this image makes me think about the ethics of it. I wanted to better isolate and highlight the main subject, just as Dave does with his Big Kahuna. But my background was too sharp, and while sure there were ways I could have mitigated it in camera, probably best by moving back and using a longer focal length (I was already wide open at f/2.8), I didn't do that, but I have the tools and developing (no pun) skill to mitigate it in post. Do I have to tell every person who looks at the "shopped" picture that it's not how it first looked? As it happens I have the series up on my Flickr so it's "fully disclosed," but... (?)
Friends call me Chuck. :photo:
This link takes you to my Flickr albums. Please click on any album to scroll through it.
(I prefer to present pictures in albums because I can put them in specific order.)
There is no light like back light. No, really. :)

User avatar
St3v3Murray
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 5041
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 am
Location: 35,000 feet
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by St3v3Murray »

Charles Haacker wrote:You're welcome, Steve. As it happens I am getting ready to join the discussion on ethics in photography, and coming back to this image makes me think about the ethics of it. I wanted to better isolate and highlight the main subject, just as Dave does with his Big Kahuna. But my background was too sharp, and while sure there were ways I could have mitigated it in camera, probably best by moving back and using a longer focal length (I was already wide open at f/2.8), I didn't do that, but I have the tools and developing (no pun) skill to mitigate it in post. Do I have to tell every person who looks at the "shopped" picture that it's not how it first looked? As it happens I have the series up on my Flickr so it's "fully disclosed," but... (?)

I'm learning so much here and am always thankful when we help each other, thank you for that! And ethics you say? I'll have to look into that! S-
"Take photographs, leave footprints, steal hearts"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests