Tag:luminar Ai
Facial Editing
For some time now I have been using Luminar 4 to replace skies, and it does an amazing job. This week, however, Photoshop added some new tools in the V22.0 update for sky replacement and facial editing.
New to this version is Neural filters. You’ll find them under filters in the top menu bar. At the moment there is smoothing and blur for faces, plus a host of beta filters. The smoothing and blur work great for portraits. The beta filters, however, need a lot more work. When trying the happiness filter I ended up with ghosting around the lips and double eyebrows. Trying the head direction left ghosting around the edges of the face. Great idea, and I hope once it is no longer a ‘beta’ release it will work as it should.
To use the Neural filters click on filters and the new screen will open up. Click on skin smoothing to activate it and you can then move the sliders to your liking
The beta filters are activated by clicking on the little science beaker. The first time you use it you have to download them and they are installed and ready to go in one step. They really aren’t release ready yet though. I found them highly inaccurate.
Sky replacement
The sky replacement does work a treat. It’s easy and quick to use, accurate, and saves having to go over into Luminar to perform a basic sky replacement. To change the sky you simply click edit then scroll down to sky replacement
Once you click on sky replacement the next window opens and it starts working straight away swapping in the sky that’s open at the time. You can click the down arrow beside the thumbnail to choose a different sky. Another neat feature is by clicking the little sprocket icon you have the ability to import and use your own skies should you wish to.
I found the sky replacement very accurate with no halo’s or ghosting even through the trees and fine details in the structure at the top of the silo.
The sky replacement in Photoshop would certainly give Luminar a run for its money as it works great, and for skies that don’t have water in the foreground, it will definitely save me swapping over to Luminar to change the sky. Would it not be for the new Luminar Ai coming out soon that does sky replacement and reflects into the water for more realistic waterscapes I probably would stay solely in Photoshop.
But with the added water reflections feature in the upcoming Luminar program I will still be upgrading to the new Luminar Ai. For those who don’t have Luminar, the new sky replacement tools in Photoshop is definitely a great addition.
Should landscape photographers manipulate images? (take vs make an image) Manipulating an image, is it acceptable? I would have to say, straight off the bat, that I am firmly in the camp of making the image. While I hope for a great sky or light when I shoot, I am not against swapping in a new sky or adding light to create a better image. When the circumstances or conditions have given me lemons, I make lemonade.
Straight from the camera?
I also realise that some of you are throwing up your hands in horror and reminding me that this is totally unacceptable when entering competitions. However, I don’t enter competitions, and should I enter one, I wouldn’t use an image that has been heavily manipulated. Apart from that, I love manipulating an Image. Painters don’t necessarily paint what they see. They take artistic license – and people accept that as normal. With photographers, though, there is a large school of thought that the image should be as it was photographed, without adding or removing elements. So I tend to regard myself as someone who paints with a camera. I guess I could call myself a creative or ‘fine art photographer’ as it seems that you can change elements in fine art.
This school of thought seems to apply almost exclusively to landscape photography, and to a lesser degree, portraits. For an image that is obviously a composite or more in the digital manipulation section, adding or removing elements is not only acceptable but part of the process.
Changing a sky
Back in January, back when the world was still chugging along, oblivious to the oncoming pandemic and associated lockdowns, I enjoyed a quick overnight trip down to Portland where we stayed at the Cape Nelson Lighthouse. Coming back, we stopped off at a lavender farm. The sky was a bland white; the lavender wasn’t a lovely purple without sunshine. Had we been there in perfect conditions – I could have gotten the shot I wanted. However, at home, with Photoshop and Luminar, I edited and created the image that I could have gotten had the conditions been right… as a painter could without criticism.
Making the image doesn’t mean every image I take is manipulated, but I am not against having it in my bag of tricks. I also believe that if an image does have a swapped in the sky, it’s a bit dishonest to pretend it’s not. But, at the end of the day, my images are for me. I don’t sell them (no one wants them, LOL). I don’t enter competitions. They are just for my enjoyment, so I am not cheating or fooling anyone.
With the new Luminar Ai due out before the end of the year, this topic will not go away. Full disclosure, I have already pre-ordered my copy. What are your thoughts? Do you take or make an image?