Monday, 29 July 2013

DPP-Part 4; Exercise 1

  
Exercise; Correction

Wow…where do I start!?, it’s been a roller coaster of a few months for me, I have moved up to London, got a new job where I’m working 12 hour days 6 days a week and I won a weekend away to Barcelona, which I managed to take, only to badly sprain my ankle at the airport on the way back!, so trying to take photographs has been a bit difficult, however, I have used some of the images that I took in Barcelona and some afterwards, were I Managed to hobble around!.

So, the object of this exercise is how to correct an image that is technically “faulty” the first in this exercise is dust specks. I have chosen an image that I took in Barcelona. I unfortunately didn’t realise until I got back, how any dust specs there actually were, it does however, work for this exercise.

Part One;
This is the image with the dust specs.

1/320 seconds at f/25.0

As there are birds in this picture, I have attached a magnified image to be able to see a bit clearer which is which.




Here is the magnified image.

 
 
 
This is the final edited image, with all the necessary corrections made.
 
1/320 seconds at f/25.0
I used the spot healing brush tool to correct all of the dust spots, the tool worked so well, I had no need to use the clone stamp tool.
 
In the exercise it poses a few poignant questions, firstly, is using the clone stamp tool as innocent as using the spot healing tool?.
I have used the clone stamp in the next image and in the past on a number of occasions, I think, for me personally, I see no difference in using the spot healing brush tool to the clone stamp tool, in both cases you are still correcting/altering the image in two different ways, which leads on to the next question; - is this speck real from the scene, or caused by dust on the sensor – should you remove it and does it bother you?.
I would like to answer this with personal feeling, as this is a question of personal/moral values, I feel that the specks are different from the scene and only an artefact caused by dust on the sensor, which, no matter how many times you try to correct it, by cleaning all the time and taking it to a professional to get cleaned, can’t be helped, therefore, I have no problem in removing that speck from the image.
On the other hand, with regards to the clone stamp tool, when using it, I sometimes feel guilty!, especially when I am replacing sections of an image to improve it, for example, after I have cropped an image by rotation, and the shot would look better if it had the top, bottom or sides of the image, rather than another crop, I will sometime replace the corners, that’s when I think, I should have taking it correctly in the first place. Then there are times when I feel it is necessary and not a moral issue, if it improves the image due to circumstances out of your control then I feel it is justified.


Part Two;
I had to use an image that had a polygon flare and use the clone stamp tool to remove the flare. Here is the original image, taken at sunrise on the Bonneville Salt Flats in Northern Utah.

1/160 seconds at f/8.0

 
Here is the edited image.
 
1/160 seconds at f/8.0
 
I have stated my thoughts about the clone stamp tool in part one of this exercise. I think with this particular image, I prefer the flare, it makes a great lead in line and gives the sense that you are actually there, it adds to the image. I think that a flare should be left in some cases and some cases, maybe not, it is all to do with personal preference and if the image lends itself to it.


No comments:

Post a Comment