Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

What's the technique best emplyed for this confetti?

Apr 29, 2012 9:01 AM

Lastly, I have been asked by the lovely b&g to render the image in b&w (which I can do, no problem) but the confetti wants to remain in colour.

 

I thought this would be very time consuming with an eraser brush, doing each piece of confetti, but is there as way of doing this with maybe (?)  the Colour Replacement Tool?

I've not found a tutorial today that really gets to grips with multiple items in multiple colours that I can bring "back" from a b&w image.

 

Thank you again in anticipation!

WEB ENQ.jpg

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:29 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    I should think it would be easiest to use a B&W image of the bride and groom that has no confetti in it and add fake colored confetti with a scatter brush.  I realize that is not what you want to do ...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:53 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    One approach is to change the image to B/W  with an adjustment layer and then on top of that add several new layers, one for each color. Use your favorite tool for selecting the color areas. With the red confetti selected, for example, use the history brush to paint over the image to produce the red confetti. Any red items not confetti can be erased out. Do the same for the other colors. Here is an example of what can be done quickly - more time will give you better results.

    Capture.PNG

    Paulo

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:53 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    but the confetti wants to remain in colour.

     

    I hope they are prepared to pay $$$ for the time it's going to take to "properly" do that effect. There are simply WAY too many colors and tones to rely on any selection tools. You are going to have to do this manually. Place a b/w copy of the image on top of itself and mask out the b/w areas of confetti.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:55 AM   in reply to acresofgreen

    What you could do using this image is:

    Convert it to B&W with an adjustment layer

    Hide the adjustment on individual pieces of confetti by selecting the mask and painting over the most prominent pieces of confetti with a black brush.  

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:58 AM   in reply to Paulo Skylar

    That might be ok if the couple doesn't mind the confetti's color shifting. Assuming they are going to want these printed, any little shift in color will be noticeable (like if a piece of confetti's edge doesn't match the overall color - sort of like fringing). I still think (unelss the couple isn't too concerned about accuracy), this will have to be quite manual.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 10:40 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    The confetti is very saturated compared with everything else in the image. And the saturated confetti is what you want to highlight. So convert a version of the image to LAB, and use AB curves like below to kill the color in the image except in the saturated extremes. Then, use an edge mask (you can google that) to create a mask like the one below to pull out more of the confetti. Then manually brush out the color in the edges of the faces, the blue light, the exit sign. Very little manual work, and pretty good effect.

     

    screen.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 11:05 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    but that seemed very labour intensive

     

    When you figure out and add up all the time you've wasted looking for the "easy way out", you could have already been half way done doing it the most accurate way. The video you saw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjUWPRvpjhI&feature=related is going to be your best bet (as this is how I suggested) and will give you the most accurate result.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,972 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 4:00 PM   in reply to pat agonia

    Have they got a similar shot without the confetti?  If so, use that and add the confetti with a suitable brush.  I bet there are confetti brushes already out there with scatter and colour jitter.  Yep.  There are dozens!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 4:03 PM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    I doubt the couple wants a recreation of this image, but a color splash effect as described above.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 5:27 PM   in reply to pat agonia

    pat agonia wrote:

     

    …I think what I've done will suffice for the mo' and then if they want "more" then I can work on a couple of the other techniques mentioned here…

     

    I agree with you.  If anything, you can add a Vibrancy adjustment either to the whole flattened document or just to the confetti layer.

    confeti+v2-1.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 5:37 PM   in reply to station_one

    Crappy focus, what about that?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 7:26 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    You should stop trying to candy-coat stuff Lundberg, and just say what's on your mind. 

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 7:32 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    Crappy focus, what about that?

     

    I've noticed a lot of your comments are crass replies rather than trying to help the OP's issue. What's up with that?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 8:36 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    Vintage Lundberg02! 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 2:03 PM   in reply to pat agonia

    Unaware of what technique?

    Topaz InFocus, in case you are unaware of that technique.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 3:16 PM   in reply to pat agonia

    Well, on my planet, we like to provide album photographs that look like they were taken on purpose.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 4:58 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    Well, on my planet, we like to provide album photographs that look like they were taken on purpose.

     

    That's great! Now post some of your stuff online so others can criticize it too (since your skills apparently far outweigh others). It's so easy to criticize those who may not be as experienced as you, so let's just see how good you are at pressing a button on a camera (because that's basically all it is, right)?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,972 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 7:38 PM   in reply to Shan-Dysigns

    Shan-Dysigns wrote:

    Well, on my planet, we like to provide album photographs that look like they were taken on purpose.

    That's great! Now post some of your stuff online so others can criticize it too (since your skills apparently far outweigh others). It's so easy to criticize those who may not be as experienced as you, so let's just see how good you are at pressing a button on a camera (because that's basically all it is, right)?

     

    We are not supposed to promote our own work on these forums, but I absolutely agree that folk should put up or shut up. I am happy to share my stuff, but I don't have any out of focus poor quality shots in my flickr stream  —  I take a few, but have got more sense than to show them to other people.

     

    Hey, I was contacted by a lady from our National Archive in Wellington yesterday, asking to use some pictures I took at our Anzac Day parade and service last Wednesday.  She liked how the pictures told stories about the people, and I didn't like to tell her that I made most of it up. First rule of Photojournalism... Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 9:27 PM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    We are not supposed to promote our own work on these forums

     

    I wasn't literally asking him to promote anything. But, there is nothing wrong if there is a link in our profile that contains examples of our work. What's wrong with that?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 9:58 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    Shan... I have no desire to provide you with a link to my body of work since it is drawing to a close in its current form.

     

    What? You must have flipped your wig? I was taking up for (you know, standing by your side) - I was suggesting Lundberg02 to provide a link of his work since his tacky comments stated he was better than thou.I even quoted HIS last statement when I wrote that. Maybe you need to slow your roll and stop being so defensive (especially since you can't read a post properly).

     

    I will remember to let you fight your own battles from now on...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 3:44 PM   in reply to pat agonia

    Aboard Hornet, affectionately known as the One Two Maru, fifty years ago. Kodak 35mm, f/11 at 1/250, 400 speed daylight.  I don't do this kind of work anymore either.routine patrol.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 5:59 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    With only the best intentions:

     

    confetti.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 6:18 PM   in reply to JWadical

    Confetti needs motion blur - then it would be priceless!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 6:46 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    Lundberg02 wrote:

     

    routine patrol.jpg

     

    Geez, did *SOMEONE* have some trouble holding their camera level?  Or pointing it at the actual subject instead of the deck?  Hm?  

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 11:28 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Actually I think the composition is pretty good, kind of an inverse rule of thirds.

    40 knots wind over deck and pitching.

     

    Love the confetti version. It's kind of what your brain does when they shoot you off a carrier.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 11:53 PM   in reply to Lundberg02

    Can we put this thread to rest already?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,972 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 2, 2012 3:52 AM   in reply to pat agonia

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 2, 2012 10:39 AM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    To bed.

     

    As you say: to bed.

     

    <soapBoxRant>

     

    No, not really... you can't just go on a random rant like that and not expect some type of response. Everything about anything is strictly a guideline to proper procedure. If all you do is go by the book, there is no room for creativity. People forget (anything and everything is RELATIVE and SUBJECTIVE). Art is the same, Photoshop design is the same, life is the same. All these "rules" about design and layout mean NOTHING if there is no creativity backing it up. I know these forums are filled with very educated people about the software, but couldn't create a simple design to save their lives (which is ok I guess, but book smarts doesn't always trump street smarts).

     

    Anyway, I think it's just a waste of time for people to try and justify their work, decisions, techniques, etc. There are a million and one ways to get to the end - sometimes we learn more efficient ways to get there by doing it the long and laborious way. I'm self taught, so I think I've gained a better education by learning a lot by trial and error. Sometimes one can learn more about "how not to do it" than being told the fastest way to get it done. All these years I've been on these forums (even beyond 2009 under a different name), I see posturing in about 25% of the threads I read (like an online version of "my thing is bigger than yours"). For some reason, people think just because they've gone out and downloaded a hacked version of Photoshop (not accusing anyone here), a professional in them that makes. It's the same with people who buy a digital camera worth more than they make in a month, but yet flood the market pertending to be a professional photographer. These people are killing the freelance market. These fresh out of high school kids using website templates to quickly put a bunch of garbage together thus cheating the customer (and somehow getting more money out of the client than what professionals would charge).

     

    It's also the same with people who own a video camera - they think they are a YouTube star and start making what they call tutorials (which more than likely are filled with incorrect information and uneducated teachings), then they try to have as many followers as possible (as this is obviously what makes them feel alive - random people "liking" their video). It's the same thing with Facebook - I don't know how many people add friends they don't know just to bump up their numbers - kind of like some people in these forums just respond to random threads and know absolutely nothing about the topic or the software just to bump up their numbers... wow, I've strayed here... let me jump back.

     

    My point is this: we are all students to the game, so let's keep the posturing out of trying to help others. Yes, I admit there are those in here who do need a little bit of lashing now and then (when they keep creating threads basically asking others to do their work for them). I've probably most known for being involved with heated threads (I think Noel got caught in a few of those, haha), but usualy that happens when someone starts posturing to me (and I don't take that for a minute).

     

    Remember, most people in here are really trying to learn - not come in here to be told their work is not so great.

     

    </soapBoxRant>

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 2, 2012 11:15 AM   in reply to pat agonia

    Quickest way to pump life into a thread is to ask that people stop posting in it.  So STOP ALREADY!  And KEEP STOPPING! 

     

    Yeah, once in a while I like to stir $#!+ up.

     

    In all seriousness, let's all try to be positive and keep learning here.  And we can all ignore the occasional rants of a certain flyboy, because...

     

    It's kind of what your brain does when they shoot you off a carrier.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 2, 2012 5:25 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    One more, and that's all you can have before dinner.Cunningham gets a drink.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points