I've been a serious amateur(fine art-gallery) and semi pro shooting architure for the last 7 years. I have all the lenses and bodies, I have some good printers, I use CS3. The confession------------------I don't use layers and have no idea why i should, nor do I know how to!!
That said, I use some Nik plugins and some contrast plugin and get by fairly well. I haven't tried HDR but my real question is that one should be able to seperate parts of an image to apply different correction with out using the "magic wand" or the "lassos", which don't usually leave a clean line of sepereation that is not noticable-------------------and I don't know how to do it.
I have some of Kelby's books but it's usually something like let's put a flower behind the subject. OK---not looking for a lesson just a point in the direction--thanks, ron s.
Hope you respect me in the morn :d

Here's a quick example:

Shot taken with a combination of direct/bounced flash. Screen, Multiply and Soft Light adjustment layers used to even out the fall off of the lighting and selectively enhance contrast:

This link may be of some help....
http://www.johnpaulcaponigro.com/downloads/technique/technique.php

Check out the articles under the Masking section. I've been reading these the last several nights and found them very informative. Have found some newer and easier processing skills.

Ansley

Stick with your Nik plug-ins. They are fantastic. Since I purchased the entire suite, I rarely need to dive into layers and masking.

I've been very happy with the nik plug-in, of course they are just using cs3's layer power but I have to admit that I feel very "weak" when it comes to doing or even getting a grip on it. I might have even spent the money on an advanced session at an artist gathering but there was a requirement "need to be experienced with photoshop".
I think I do all right with the tools i have, but it kinda like having some chisels and not being able to sharpen them--you just won't get the full use out of them. That's what I get for living all alone out here on the Kansas prairies, well not alone--my wife gives me a patronizing nod once in awhile---ron s.

ron_9 wrote:
The confession------------------I don't use layers and have no idea why i should, nor do I know how to!!

In calling this a confession, you obviously understand that it is a failing on your part. But why are you telling us?

http://www.niksoftware.com/viveza/en/entry.php?info=viveza/intro/viveza2_announcement.shtml

mask/ layer like a pro ;o)

Peano2, Yes what I put up there is a bit flakey. I'm embarassed but honestly I have not been able to figure out how to use layers in anything. Mostly what i see folks doing is using layers for graphics, and that's not where I'm at, so I'm at a bit of a lost.
Why am I telling/asking you/us this --in the hopes that I get some imput as to where to find a good source for using layers in fine photography, or has layers become dated with the advent of combo programs, etc.
I don't imagine that I'm alone in this and there probably is a lot of confusion out there. Where I live there isn't, to my knowledge, anyone that uses photoshop and what I have learned and use is from stumbling around by rote and application. This is my way of judging where I'm at, what might be out there, what people are using etc.--thanks ron s.

Peano2 wrote:
ron_9 wrote:
The confession------------------I don't use layers and have no idea why i should, nor do I know how to!!

In calling this a confession, you obviously understand that it is a failing on your part. But why are you telling us?

It's not really a failing. Layers and masking are just a few of the many tools available in the post-processing toolbox. They are not necessary to make a great looking photo. Obviously if you have a software like Viveza or even Lightroom, the majority of your edits will be possible without invoking layers or masking.

As you can see in cgardner's example, the photographer applied 3 layers with many minute adjustments and you can barely even tell a difference between the before and after shots (no offense to the photographer since the photograph was fine to begin with). Those adjustments could have been made by making one simple change in the levels control without using layers. Work smart, not hard.

mdude85 wrote:

As you can see in cgardner's example, the photographer applied 3 layers with many minute adjustments and you can barely even tell a difference between the before and after shots (no offense to the photographer since the photograph was fine to begin with). Those adjustments could have been made by making one simple change in the levels control without using layers. Work smart, not hard.

You are missing the point of masking I think. The sliders in any editor control are "global" in the sense they affect all similar tones everywhere in the photo.

What masking affords is localized correction. I can change the tone on one face and not the other, or in the case of my example darken the slightly over lit one in the foreground and slightly under exposed one in back. When shooting I knew that fall off would occur and the degree I could correct it with adjustment layers so I exposed in the camera for "normal" exposure on the guy in the middle.

The editing in my example was to correct the flash fall off front to back which is noticeable to me in the original (YMMV), but do it so in a way that didn't shout "retouched". It appears from your reaction I was successful

Chuck

I'll chip in my 2 cents. It's not a cut-n-dried sort of issue in that layers can be used for so many things but at the heart of it I think is the philosophy of "bruise" as few pixels as possible. Layers are geared towards allowing the artist to mix-n-match, contain multiple versions, reverse bad decisions and isolate processing (as in Chuck's example). Layers are your friend and I will give one example and possibly you'll see why - retouching skin. Create a new layer set clone to work with all layers and clone on the layer. You can do all sorts of nifty things with this correction layer, vary the opacity, blur it - but the point is it's on it's own layer and you can turn it on and off to see your changes a great way to do an A/B compare. As Chuck mentioned - add a layer with the blend mode set to soft light and fill with a soft light neutral color (gray). Now you can paint with white to dodge and black to burn. Again no pixels in your original have been altered. Add another layer and see what effect burn the corners looks like. Hate it? Drag the layer to the trash - no harm, no foul. Want to enhance eyes and lips separate? Lasso them, copy, paste. They will be on their own layer so you can play to your heart's content. Ever markup your test print? You can do that in photoshop - add a layer and comment to your hearts content - hide the layer when you're done. Seriously fella - put some imagination into it and all sorts of applications/reasons will make themselves known to you.

You may wish to take a look at some of the tutorials on Lynda.com, specifically Layers in Depth by Jan Kabili. This is not free, however.

cgardner wrote:
mdude85 wrote:

As you can see in cgardner's example, the photographer applied 3 layers with many minute adjustments and you can barely even tell a difference between the before and after shots (no offense to the photographer since the photograph was fine to begin with). Those adjustments could have been made by making one simple change in the levels control without using layers. Work smart, not hard.

You are missing the point of masking I think. The sliders in any editor control are "global" in the sense they affect all similar tones everywhere in the photo.

What masking affords is localized correction. I can change the tone on one face and not the other, or in the case of my example darken the slightly over lit one in the foreground and slightly under exposed one in back. When shooting I knew that fall off would occur and the degree I could correct it with adjustment layers so I exposed in the camera for "normal" exposure on the guy in the middle.

The editing in my example was to correct the flash fall off front to back which is noticeable to me in the original (YMMV), but do it so in a way that didn't shout "retouched". It appears from your reaction I was successful

Chuck



True, but if you can make an edit without adding an additional layer, then you should probably do it, since it cuts down on processing time, reduces file sizes (if you are prone to saving your PSD files during post), and is a simpler workflow. I don't have any problems with layers (I use them all the time), but they should be used when they are necessary but given a second thought as to their use if they are not necessary. I see tutorials all the time where people make a 2-step process into a 10-step ordeal. I'm just trying to make sure the OP knows that the 10-step ordeal is not necessarily more right than the 2-step one

Nik U-point technology based software allows localised edits without cumbersome selections and mask. It gives superior results quickly.

No need for layers and masks anymore. I used to be a PS (layers and masks) fanatic but am a U-point convert.

My name is Kaj and I am a U-point addict.

Actually, I really appreciate Ron asking this question first as it has been bothering me for quite some time. I've used PS for a long while and have reasonable success as a photog but have always been put off by layers and masks because they seem to require an incredible amount of time and hand work to apply effects to separate parts of an image.

In looking at Chuck's example, I see that he equalized the light front to back. This is a result of the screen I'm assuming. I also note that the white blouse in the front and the white shirt are much more 3D. They have shadow and peaks. The face of the woman at the back has more line and character. Chuck, does this mean that you selected her face separately in another layer to act on?

For me the problem isn't so much layers as it is selecting things within layers.

Robert

ron_9 wrote:
Why am I telling/asking you/us this --in the hopes that I get some imput as to where to find a good source for using layers in fine photography, or has layers become dated with the advent of combo programs, etc.

I can't imagine editing images without using layers and masks. Until you become proficient with those, you're still in preschool.

Try www.lynda.com for tutorials. Or just Google photoshop layers tutorial. There are tons of them available.

mdude85 wrote:
It's not really a failing. Layers and masking are just a few of the many tools available in the post-processing toolbox.

I have to disagree. Layers/masks aren't just another tool in the box. They are fundamental to using most of the tools selectively (as distinguished from globally), and nondestructively (as distinguished from direct changes to image pixels).

Dodge and burn where changed in CS4 to act more like screen and multiply. In previous versions they just changed the value not the color saturation which resulted in terrible looking skin tones if burned in, which is way I used screen and multiply layers instead.

I created an action to add the adjustment layers. Unlike duping layers the Levels adjustment layers don't significantly increase file size (thanks Peano1&2 for that tip) and I flatten before saving my master edit. The whole process usually takes about 5 min per photo, the same amount of time I would otherwise spend using the burn and dodge tools.

OntheRez: in my example by looking at the thumbnails of the masks in the first shot it can be seen where I applied each effect.

Screen: lightens
Mulitply: darken
Soft Light: adds contrast

As they say, "your mileage may vary" but this works for me. I did Zone System B&W and made my own prints and like the control of selective editing. Being an old school programmer (my first computer system in 1978 didn't have a disk operating system so I wrote my own) and frugal I don't buy plug-ins for things I can create myself.

Chuck

Peano2 wrote:
mdude85 wrote:
It's not really a failing. Layers and masking are just a few of the many tools available in the post-processing toolbox.

I have to disagree. Layers/masks aren't just another tool in the box. They are fundamental to using most of the tools selectively (as distinguished from globally), and nondestructively (as distinguished from direct changes to image pixels).


The OP says he uses Nik plug-ins, I suppose he also has Viveza. Viveza gives smarter, faster and higher quality tools for most localized adjustments without actual "layers and masks in PS". It is another way of doing it and it is also nondestructive.

It seems to me the OP's post was tongue in cheek.

ron_9 wrote:
...my real question is that one should be able to seperate parts of an image to apply different correction with out using the "magic wand" or the "lassos", which don't usually leave a clean line of sepereation that is not noticable-------------------and I don't know how to do it...

Using the magic lasso and the pen tool and stuff to make selections is not something I usually find necessary when editing photos. Yes, I know that when combining parts of different images, these tools are pretty much essential, but for just editing a single image, then copying using the marquee tool works just as well. Feather your selection and use the mask to erase the parts of the image you don't want on the new layers. You don't need hard and sharp edges normally. This method is quick and easy as you won't spend an hour doing an outline on just the part of the image you want to edit like you would when editing on just a single layer. Layers also allow you to switch them on and off to see the changes better.

Using layers, masks and blending modes was the single biggest advance I made with learning to post-process my work in photoshop.

Here's what I meant Ron. The layer here is not an adjustment layer and so it does add bulk to the image size that adjustment layers don't, but for quick and dirty edits, it works fine. Just copy the whole layer like I did here and then use the mask to hide the parts of the image that you don't want to affect with your edit.