By Jodi Friedman of MCP Actions: Photoshop Actions and Training

There are literally dozens of ways to saturate your colors in Photoshop. For this post I am going to focus on one way to pop colors using “Channel Mixer” adjustment layers.

To start with, locate an image that could benefit from more vibrant color, overall or in selected spots. Of course, you likely will want to correct exposure and white balance prior to working on color. At this point, we will pull up a “Channel Mixer” adjustment. In CS4, you can use the adjustment panel – in CS3 and below, use the layers palette and go to “Channel Mixers.”

Once you pull up the adjustment layer, you will adjust settings in the dialog box. You will adjust all three output channels: Red, Green, and Blue. Use the same relationship for each. You want all numbers to total 100%. The higher your number for the output channel you are working on, the more saturated the colors will be.

Dave Hill is a genius. Period. I could look at his images all day long and his behind the scenes videos are strangely addictive. Naturally, thousands want to create his hyper-real, painterly, utterly hypnotising look on their images.

The first observation one can make about his method is the painstaking attention to lighting during the shoot. In the final product, the lighting and contrast make the images what they are. This can’t be done without interesting lighting.

Of course after being engrossed in his work for far too long, I said, “I MUST know how he does that?!” I didn’t find anything from him personally, but there are plenty of photographers out there tearing the method apart and sharing their findings. The first tutorial I ran across was for PS using high pass filters. I got stuck at the end with the masking layer since I’m still only using PSE.

But have no fear PSE users! I found a really great method for creating the Dave Hill look in Lightroom from, who else, Scott Kelby. The following suggestions are his. My additions are in italics.

{SETTINGS}

• Recovery = 100
• Fill Light = 100 this doesn’t always work at 100 it depends on the image – you’ll have to experiment
• Blacks = Drag this slider to the right until photo looks balanced again, because setting the Fill Light at 100 will wash the photo out big time. In our example, I dragged it to 24. I haven’t been able to get the blacks all the way up to 24. In the example image, I went only to 17
• Contrast = 100
• Clarity = 100
• Vibrance = 100
• Saturation = -81 (basically what I do here is drag the saturation all the way to the left, to -100 (which removes all color, making it a black and white image), and then I slowly drag back to the right until some of the color starts to return to the image. In my image, I took it down to -61, leaving it a bit more colourful than suggested. I just love the red of the pushchair.

A Guest Post by Chris Folsom.

One of the great new features of Aperture 3 (get an upgrade from previous versions here) is the ability to add location data to photos and then display those photos on a map based on where they were taken. While similar features were previously available from plug-ins and add-ons, none of them handled geotagging as easily and elegantly as the native Aperture 3 Places system does now.

Getting Started

To enable the Places view in Aperture, simply click the Places button near the upper-right hand corner of the photo browser.

Doing so will display a map in the upper window where you normally view photos. The map is contextual to whatever project or album you are currently viewing. If the selected album or project doesn’t have any map data, it will default to a world map. If there is location data, a map will be displayed for those specific areas.

Adding Location information to your photos

Chances are, unless you were already using a geotagging plug-in, most of your photos won’t show up in Places. The one exception might be photos taken with a GPS equipped smartphone (such as the iPhone). The GPS data added to those photos will appear in Aperture 3 without any additional work.

But what about other non-GPS equipped cameras? Aperture 3 gives us a few options…

The first option is to open the Places view and do a search for a particular location. For this example, I’ll search for Fort Worden State Park in Washington State where I took some photographs a couple of years ago. I didn’t have a GPS device with me at the time but I would still like my photos to appear on the Places map.

?As I am typing, Aperture 3 presents me with a couple of location options and Fort Worden is on the list. Selecting it will immediately zoom the map in on that area. Now it is a simple matter of dragging the photos to the area on the map where they were taken. It isn’t quite as accurate as having true location data, but it is an easy solution for when a GPS isn’t available.

If you do have a GPS logger, Aperture will work with that too. If you aren’t familiar with GPS logging devices, they are small systems that can be clipped to a belt or camera bag and will track your location as you move around. Alternatively, if you own an iPhone you can download an app like GeoLogTag which will provide the same functionality on your phone. After the GPS logger has captured some data, it will create a text file that can be imported into Aperture 3.

The importing process is fairly easy. Highlight the project you wish to geotag and then switch to the Places view. Click the “GPS” button and then “Import GPS Track”. Find the GPS file on your computer and click “Choose Track File”.

First of all, I have to thank Darren, and this wonderful DPS community for supporting our family through the illness and death of our son. We are deeply and profoundly grateful to each of you. THANK YOU. Not really a way to segue from that. I won’t try.

This post is all in the name of good fun. These are over the top SNL esque examples. Please don’t be offended.

1. Don’t buy photoshop right out of the gate.

Nothing concerns me more than “photographers” who delve into photoshop around the same time they delve into photography. These are what we call “photoshopographers.” I’m certain I didn’t invent the term. It floats around the industry like crazy. For example, “How’s her work?” Response: “She a photoshopographer.”

If you jump into photoshop (or any other editing software for that matter) too soon, you run the risk of not mastering your technique as a photographer. You’ll quickly form the habit of masking otherwise poor work with excessive editing and that will hold you back from learning the proper technique to begin with. As I once heard photographer extraordinairre Zack Arias say, “If you find yourself out shooting a client and you’re sayin’ in your head ‘oh I’ll just fix that later in photoshop’ stop what you’re doing and slap yourself as hard as you can.’”

I didn’t purchase photoshop until after 2 solid years of paid work as a photographer, and I still don’t know how to use it. Truth be told, it’s literally embarrassing how very little I know.

2. Processing fads rhyme with “stay away for the love of all that is holy.”

One of my main qualms with post processing is the color fads. These could be tonal, selective color (more on him later) or any et cetera. Anything that will likely not be popular in 5 or 10 (likely 1 or 2 in reality) years should be avoided. My goal for my work is timelessness. If an image is processed in a way that says: “wow! that was shot in 2009!” I’ve got a problem.’

Some of these things MIGHT be appropriate in moderation (not selective color. ever).

If wild tones are your selling points to clients and you’re booking well and getting paid bucketloads. . . then there’s obviously no reason to rethink your strategy! But as a general rule, if you’re going to do anything with tone: LOW OPACITY is the rule of thumb.

3. Radioactive eyes are so last season/

4. Skin should not look like it was grafted from Barbie, Ken, or Skipper.

I’m all for giving eyes a little pop-o-la! But let’s try to keep it real. No one’s eyes are PERFECTLY white, nor do they emit a glow in a dark room.

Quite frankly, pictures with eyes that are over worked: creep.me.out.

I’m happy to touch up people’s blemishes, but there are certain features of someone’s face that are permanent. Part of who they are.

For regular portraiture (I recognize that fashion work is a different animal entirely), I would never completely remove someone’s wrinkles (unless they asked specifically that I do). Soften them? Probably. But remove them completely? No. It’s their face. It’s what they look like. Moles? Same story. Scars? Same, same. You know, you could actually offend someone by removing a “blemish” like a scar or a mole from their body. Unless they ASK (and trust me, if they want it gone, they will), I don’t go there.

In my work I’m going for real and genuine, and plastic skin? Well, it’s neither.

5. A heavy vignette does not a professional photograph make.

A heavy vignette does not make a photograph look more professional. (Tail between my legs) I used to think so too.

The opposite is in fact true. Ask any TRUE professional photographer and they will tell you, a heavy vignette is a sure fire sign of an amateur trying to go pro.

Often when you’re working in Lightroom you will want the images to be sorted in the order that you want to see them, not in as order such as capture date which is one of the Lightroom sort options.

You may want to do this when assembling images for a slide show or for printing, for example as the order of the images in the filmstrip will affect how the images appear in a print template and in the slideshow.

You can control the order of images in a Lightroom folder by dragging and dropping an image from one place to the other in the filmstrip view. To do this, grab the image in the middle and drag on it until you see a black bar appear between two images. If you let go the image it will drop into the indicated position.

This drag and drop process works in most instances but there are some exceptions to be aware of.

The first is that this will not work if you are in a folder where there are images in a subfolder below it which are also visible. You can see if this is likely if you open the fly-out for the folder in the Folders panel in the library. If there is another folder the one you are working on, chances are that the images in the subfolder are included in the filmstrip and so you cannot arrange the images by dragging them into position if this is the case.