I recently came up with this macro shot and I was curious how to take photos like this where everything is blurred out and extreme macro is in focus. I am assuming there is a lot of post processing involved. If possible, I would be really glad if some can share some expertise on some of the post ...
I keep seeing the term "workflow" in relation to post-processing being used here and on other sites. What does it actually mean though?
To me it sounds like it means you do A, then B, then C every time you edit a photo. But that seems strange: no two edits are alike for me and I do find that I ...
@jrista yeah I can see it bringing in many from google too
If the water droplet photo was a hugely complex and interesting shot that required special equipment or setup it would be fairly interesting. I personally don't even find the image interesting. The amount of blue and teal is off-putting to me along with the boring background, center composition, etc
Maybe I just find questions raised on the site annoying if they are "viral" topics
Last week we had the question about "color runs" or "colored dust" or whatever and how to protect your camera. That story was picked up by nearly every photography related blog/site that I read. Then seeing it on this site was equally annoying as it gained huge interest
@dpollitt - LOL, I didn't vote on that one simply because I thought the answer was blazingly obvious...
@jrista - The problem I have with shots like the first one is that I have a hard time calling that photography when your finger isn't on the trigger. I do drop shots all the time, but I don't use devices that time the drops and fire the camera and flash without a human, for some reason I like to know a human initiated the capture I guess.
@dpollitt A good question, but a dumb one at the same time. Most regulars in PhotoSE know the word and never see a reason to upvote such question, while most newcomers have so many good questions and answers to read that they feel they can't vote everything thus not voting much of anything.
it was the same, when I asked about IQ. You know, everybody who has spent any time reading and writing about photography do not read the letters I and Q when they see those letters together. In their mind they automagically read "image quality" and never think about it.
But for a beginner those letters are what they are, two odd letters put together. What does IQ mean? Having no idea, they google it (as one comment suggested and as what I had already done) and found out about Intelligence Quotient.
Surely this IQ does not mean that, when used in photography site, does it?
And all the oldtimers went to answer to another question, "What is image quality?" because that was how they read the question. But it was not that one. The question was "What does IQ mean?"
..hmph, I'm losing my point here. The point was, a question is not what it reads, but how it is read by the person with his personal background and experience and prejudices playing interference.
@JohnCavan thanks for confirming what I just wrote to @dpollitt ;)
@Rafee ok, so did you try what I suggested about using a preview output from Photoshop's Export To Web option (Gimp's Export to jpeg option will also work if you don't have Photoshop). I just confirmed that my answer works for both Gimp and Photoshop
I took a file that was 20k and made it take up half a meg
by increasing the image size (number of pixels) and then exporting as a high quality jpeg
I started with computers at the age of 3 on a suitcase computer (think it was a Tandy) that my Dad would bring home from work
the green on green screen and dual 5 1/4 floppy drives
but yeah, when they were introducing the other elementary school kids to how to use the turtle paint program I was writing code in the command line that I found when I didn't put the disk in the Apple IIe
and by 4th grade, I was hacking past the security software that the school had on the computers to prevent access to things like being able to program
it's a little luck and a lot of trying everything that I can
occasionally you end up trying things that turn out well
and a lot of times things you spend time on end up being a total waste
I learned a lot about that while working with Wiicafe.com and helping them with reporting on the video game industry. Went to E3 4 or 5 times between 2002 and 2006 as press, which you would think would be awesome, except that what it really means is that you get to try all the really great games that never actually come out
and while most people may be sad the game didn't come out, I actually got to play parts of them
and know exactly what I'm missing out on since it didn't come out
Huxley, Starcraft Ghost, two different Stargate video games are among the cancellations I was the most frustrated by
and even the time I put in to that site in general eventually ended up closing down this past year after it hadn't been updated anymore for a couple years
though it wasn't a total loss because I was able to host my personal stuff off their server for a number of years