Reverse Engineering: Day 37
Wednesday, August 12th, 2009I was asked to explain the post-processing steps to Day 37, so I chose to do the self-portrait side, since it has the most done to it. And in a bid to show just what post-processing can do, I decided to explain it backwards :) I hope that this works out, and if it’s confusing or nonsensical, please let me know! I also decided to not do the side-by-sides, since my diptych-software does some pretty bad artifacting. Hopefully it all still makes sense.
First, the final, heavily-processed photo:
And now the original:
You’re probably thinking, “Wow, this photo has had a lot done to it!” To be fair, the original is pretty heavily underexposed, but I find that it’s best for a backlit shot to either start really underexposed or really overexposed; there is usually no middle ground (or “perfect exposure”) for a backlit shot, just due to the nature of the lighting situation. But in this photo, almost EVERYTHING from the original photo was changed during the post-processing: the white balance, the colors’ saturation and hues and luminances, the contrast and the exposure settings. Split toning and vignetting was added as well. So how do those changes effect the outcome?
If we take the final shot with all the other edits but keep the white balance the same as the original, we get this:
As you can see, the white balance made a pretty important difference. The original white balance reflects the sunny day, with all the golden hues you can expect. But I changed it to a cooler, more tungsten white balance. Blues in general tend to make my eyes take on a shimmery look, and while I like the gold tones, those can be added with split toning. In fact, they were added with that step. If we keep all the other edits the same (so we’re using the edited, cooler white balance) and take away just the split toning, we get this:
Now, with that underexposure, we obviously needed some way to lighten up the photo. We could do this either with curves or with bumping the exposure. I pushed the curves part almost to the max, bringing up the “lights” to 88 out of 100 (but pushing the highlights themselves down so that the photo had that flat, vintagey look). This seemed to do the trick. Without those changes, even with the exposure pushed, we get this:
In fact, I pushed the exposure +1.43 stops, but if we take away that step and keep all the other edits the same, we get this (so basically, this is without the exposure being pushed at all). Here you can see what those curves I talked about above really did:
I also fiddled with the colors. Overall vibrance (which I’m going to be honest and say that I don’t really know what it does: I just know that it affects the colors without affecting the saturation) was pulled back. For individual colors, I brought up the luminances in the yellows, oranges, reds, and blues. So if you look at the final photo with the color settings of the original, it looks like this:
That’s pretty much it. I actually did crop off a bit from the top and I cloned out some really funny hair that had strayed across my upper lip, making it look like I had a moustache, but otherwise, what you see is what you get :)








