Latest Photoshop goes further down the AI path [as usual, this thread has expanded into a more general discussion on Photographic Matters]

[barman58]

One suggestion I would make to anyone who is starting out with digital photography as a hobby is to use your access to modern facilities.

This includes deciding what you wish to photograph, be that a specific subject area or a multiple areas or even a general non-specific range of subjects.

Today we have access to a wonderful resource to information, the internet which will teach you many techniques, tricks and ideas, you-tube is full of these topics. Another online resource I use all the time is Google especially google maps and the Street view option - if you are travelling to a new area for you, you can plan routes and even find access points for views - although try not to copy what existing images are shown for the location - develop your own style

 

[SIW2]

Prefer the original shot Nigel, it looks great.

 

[barman58]

Si, I used the image to show the AI system for deleting items that crossed other items that I wanted to keep, what I would have done if the image was being published I would have probably blurred and blended the new sky or left the original blurred background

 

[Ghot]

Si, I used the image to show the AI system for deleting items that crossed other items that I wanted to keep, what I would have done if the image was being published I would have probably blurred and blended the new sky or left the original blurred background

In post #14 ...I did a "selection" around his fingers and saved them as a new image.
Then I pasted the Adobe LR thingy in the pic, then pasted his fingers back into the pic.

 

[SIW2]

Si, I used the image to show the AI system for deleting items that crossed other items that I wanted to keep, what I would have done if the image was being published I would have probably blurred and blended the new sky or left the original blurred background

yes i know. Nice pic you took. I think it works well as it is.

 

[jimbo45]

Adobe are generally not too "Flash" with the AI functions in their front line applications - with the image I posted I could have achieved the same or similar results using the manual techniques available in the software from a few years ago - the issue with that would be that it would have taken much longer to do - Hours not minutes

Adobe are in the beta stage of their AI image generation software "firefly" where you type a sentence or two describing a concept for an image or a process or modification to an existing image and it will create or modify to meet your needs. at present it is at an early Beta stage but works well - I have just been accepted for the official beta program after several months of waiting after applying to adobe.

The firefly app works on line currently but will eventually be ported into the existing applications like Photoshop, Illustrator, Lightroom etc

The current Firefly app is working well, I entered a phrase " black cat watching birds through a window" and the result was so realistic that my own cat started hissing at the screen image

Anyone with an Adobe account can access the current Beta apps from the Beta section in the Adobe Creative Cloud App - you get full usable versions any adobe apps that you hold a licence for or a 30 day trial for those that you do not

Hi there
please post your experiences after you've got used to the software -- always interesting your ideas and suggestions on photography.

One problem I think is overlooked outside professional studios is that the Pro grade cameras are capable of producing very much higher quality images than even quite an expensive monitor will show. So for things like noise reduction A.I could be the answer as manually you might be satisfied with noise reduction but when printed out on a professional quality A2 printer - you can clearly see the defects you missed. !!!

One still can't get over the laws of physics -- whatever the size of sensors used in cameras, telescopes etc the more electrons that are "crammed" into that space the more noise is generated -- not going into quantum physics here but its a fact - one can google if interested. I'm happy to let good A.I do the best noise reduction it can. But I think even the best A.I would have difficulty coping with serious noise reduction when upscaling a mobile phone picture for even A3 size printing -- never mind A2.

BTW super plus for Lightroom. I only tried it a couple of years back after your suggestion so a big thanks there.

Cheers

jimbo

 

[barman58]

Jimbo,

in the pro side of the industry they follow the rules for display of images that are shot on appropriate hardware and use appropriate techniques to suit the method of consumption.
an image for use as a windows Wallpaper is simple enough as even the basic point and shoot camera produce images at a higher resolution than that required - even for 4K which is the current trending favourite

A pro will use hardware to produce the final image suitable for viewing at the intended situation - in a magazine or on a huge billboard - My own camera that is not that new has a resolution of 6000 x 4000 Pixels but I will often use multiple shots to form a panoramic image of a landscape, and multiple exposures for HDR images (I have been known to create HDR landscapes using multiple sets of exposures).

The printers used to print billboard sized output will be designed to print ultra high resolution images but interpolate the pixel count even further. Yes the man on the street does not have normal access to the hardware needed but it can be accessed for a price - quite often at a reasonable cost

EDIT
Came across the following Video explaining the facts about Pixel counts in cameras and the real world differences ... ...

anyway back to AI

A recent Video from Terry White at Adobe shows the state of their AI systems

 

[Dru2]

@barman58, I too am an Adobe Photography Plan subscriber. I first started with Adobe Photoshop well over 20 years ago. I too am an ardent amateur photographer and shoot in RAW. Today I mostly use Adobe Lightroom Classic for my photo processing. I like what Adobe is doing with AI in photo processing.

Yeah, I've been using Photoshop since version 5, but really didn't start getting into it till version 7. Today I'm also a subscriber of the photography plan which includes both PS & LR.

Anyway, I only shoot in RAW as well. Lightroom is my base editor for the RAW files. Photoshop is my finalizer.

 

[Dru2]

A recent Video from Terry White at Adobe shows the state of their AI systems

Love Terry White's videos.

 

[Steve C]

Just ditch your camera and ask AI to generate photos to your spec!

 

[barman58]

The FireFly project that is in early beta from Adobe, is not far away from that very option, Though as has been said, here on this thread, the AI is still a long long way from an artistic brain

 

[jimbo45]

Just ditch your camera and ask AI to generate photos to your spec!

But AI couldn't deliver those to a market for publication -- and unless you wire your brain to anothers by the wonders of the latest updated release of wireless Windows neural networking in Windows 2974 Quantum Galactic edition (Please download the latest update from the nearest fastest galactic server to you via your latest hardware quantum entanglement device from the server location just outside Procyon B) you won't be able to share them.

Serious AI has a long way to go for this type of stuff but for essentially reasonably routine things like noise reduction it's very good at. It's also good for repeatable routine operations and should be able to improve a lot of cumbersome workflow. There's no getting round the fact that smaller and higher density sensors generate more noise however good the hardware is -- it's just the law of physics. Space telescopes operate at very low temperatures which reduces the noise on their sensors but just have a look at the complex gear and work those people at JPL / NASA etc have to do. In low light and using high ISO rates on domestic cameras even high end ones will exacerbate any noise generated by the sensor.

I can't say this often enough but the one item (and it's cheap) that can improve your photography at any level is to use a tripod where possible and lowest sensible iso - and unless fill in --avoid flash especially on tiny cameras. - Again unfortunately the laws of physics mean that the best quality ones have to be sturdy, rigid and stable -- and that usually means heavy -- but good exercise.



Cheers
jimbo

 

[barman58]

One word of advice - I agree with @jimbo45 that a Tripod will massively improve your photography, however do not bother with cheap tripods, these are likely to actually make your images worse - you have your camera on your cheapo tripod, so you can reduce the shutter speed - unfortunately I have seen cheap tripods and some have been as stable as a drunken duck on a frozen pond.
First thing to do is to learn a stable stance hold the camera correctly and be relaxed but stable
I personally use a number of different supports for my camera - My main tripod costs more than a good quality compact camera but will take my not inconsiderable weight

One option for landscape photography, for support is the old wall or gate etc, even better if you have a decent support clamp Also try to use the delayed trigger for the shutter lets the setup stabilise before the shutter fires

 

[jimbo45]

One word of advice - I agree with @jimbo45 that a Tripod will massively improve your photography, however do not bother with cheap tripods, these are likely to actually make your images worse - you have your camera on your cheapo tripod, so you can reduce the shutter speed - unfortunately I have seen cheap tripods and some have been as stable as a drunken duck on a frozen pond.
First thing to do is to learn a stable stance hold the camera correctly and be relaxed but stable
I personally use a number of different supports for my camera - My main tripod costs more than a good quality compact camera but will take my not inconsiderable weight

One option for landscape photography, for support is the old wall or gate etc, even better if you have a decent support clamp Also try to use the delayed trigger for the shutter lets the setup stabilise before the shutter fires

My last word in this thread - but a few months ago I was on a car Ferry going from the UK to Dun Laoghaire (just near Dublin in R.O.I) and there was this photographer setting up a tripod on the top deck with howling winds and a massive Sea swell !!!! -- "Only the Irish" -- but beautiful friendly country.


Cheers
jimbo

 

[Steve C]

But AI couldn't deliver those to a market for publication -- and unless you wire your brain to anothers by the wonders of the latest updated release of wireless Windows neural networking in Windows 2974 Quantum Galactic edition (Please download the latest update from the nearest fastest galactic server to you via your latest hardware quantum entanglement device from the server location just outside Procyon B) you won't be able to share them.

Serious AI has a long way to go for this type of stuff but for essentially reasonably routine things like noise reduction it's very good at. It's also good for repeatable routine operations and should be able to improve a lot of cumbersome workflow. There's no getting round the fact that smaller and higher density sensors generate more noise however good the hardware is -- it's just the law of physics. Space telescopes operate at very low temperatures which reduces the noise on their sensors but just have a look at the complex gear and work those people at JPL / NASA etc have to do. In low light and using high ISO rates on domestic cameras even high end ones will exacerbate any noise generated by the sensor.

I can't say this often enough but the one item (and it's cheap) that can improve your photography at any level is to use a tripod where possible and lowest sensible iso - and unless fill in --avoid flash especially on tiny cameras. - Again unfortunately the laws of physics mean that the best quality ones have to be sturdy, rigid and stable -- and that usually means heavy -- but good exercise.



Cheers
jimbo

I'm still using the last paid for version of Lightroom & Photoshop so no annual subscription to pay! All works fine in Windows 11. I'll have a problem when I buy a new camera which would be unsupported but a workaround is to update to the latest version of camera RAW which is free. You can import photos from the new camera into the old version of Photoshop, then save the file and edit from there or in the old LR version.

 

[jimbo45]

I'm still using the last paid for version of Lightroom & Photoshop so no annual subscription to pay! All works fine in Windows 11. I'll have a problem when I buy a new camera which would be unsupported but a workaround is to update to the latest version of camera RAW which is free. You can import photos from the new camera into the old version of Photoshop, then save the file and edit from there or in the old LR version.

Hi there

But can you "retrofit" latest camera RAW formats into older versions of photoshop especially if you use new things contained in EXIF data for cataloguing and storing your pics.

Currently if your camera RAW format is supported --OK but the trend is for better algorithms to still have lossless compression but with greater efficiency -- i.e smaller files even though the resolution of the picture is much higher.

Unlike Music where the current .flac standard has been around for ages and gives excellent lossless compression the human ear isn't capable of benefiting from music with higher resolution than current CD standards -- very few would be able to appreciate a top of the range SACD recording and you'd need pro grade studio gear to hear it anyway -- but with video there's quite a long way to go before the eye can't discern any improvement especially when the pictures are blown up to very large sizes. Remember also that in Monochrome (yes it's still fun shooting in monochrome from time to time) there's an infinite gradation between white and black unlike colour which is digitilly limited by the number of pixel's of RGB or is it RYB s you can get on a sensor. Producing a really high quality Monochrome print is not easy !!!!! especially if not using film as the camera firmware still has to "make intelligent guesses".

Cheers
jimbo

 

[barman58]

Photoshop does, not and never has, processed raw images the task has Always been performed by adobe Camera Raw, [ACR] and then passed to Photoshop to perform "destructive" editing and to produce an output file in a totally different non raw format. These format changes are not advertised to the user

whereas I can take a raw image into ACR or Lightroom and complete the required processing, and come back after a period of time hit reset and start again from scratch. this is not possible if using Photoshop ... Of course any Photoshop pro will use backups, and versioning for creative control to protect their work .

I have a workflow for images that I have used for many years, I first convert the Cameras Raw File, [In my case Sony Raw] into Adobe DNG, [Digital Negative), when imported to lightroom any further processing outside of lightroom is performed on the DNG but output to another suitable non raw format retaining the original "negative " as was the standard with film

 

[jimbo45]

Photoshop does, not and never has, processed raw images the task has Always been performed by adobe Camera Raw, [ACR] and then passed to Photoshop to perform "destructive" editing and to produce an output file in a totally different non raw format. These format changes are not advertised to the user

whereas I can take a raw image into ACR or Lightroom and complete the required processing, and come back after a period of time hit reset and start again from scratch. this is not possible if using Photoshop ... Of course any Photoshop pro will use backups, and versioning for creative control to protect their work .

I have a workflow for images that I have used for many years, I first convert the Cameras Raw File, [In my case Sony Raw] into Adobe DNG, [Digital Negative), when imported to lightroom any further processing outside of lightroom is performed on the DNG but output to another suitable non raw format retaining the original "negative " as was the standard with film

I meant of course that you could use RAW in photoshop but just assumed that ACR was an integral part of the process.

Thanks for all the tips !! I saw a few good articles on Adobe dng format and processing years ago on some photography forum sites - but I think those have long since gone.

Lightroom for workflow really does save a huge amount of time doing essentially the "Drudge things". !!

Cheers
jimbo

 

[barman58]

Probably 80%+ of my images are completed in Lightroom only, Where I do use Photoshop or an alternative it's for images that need major changes - Sky Replacement or merges that are beyond Lightroom [at present ]

 

[barman58]

One thing Lightroom's latest AI noise reduction creates a new .DNG version of the original Raw file, so in the unlikely case where you are not happy with the result you can re-run the Noise reduction with different settings until you find what you are looking for you can also, of course use one of the alternative denoise applications and plugins