--------------------------
Hidden Power Monthly
January 31, Vol.9
--------------------------

The Newsletter for Elements Users


--------------------------
In this issue:
--------------------------

BIG NEWS: Healing for Elements
Links
Long Answers (7)

A prevailing topic these past months has been which product
to use for image editing. I got a little carried away with
the answers I provided, and then turned it into an article.
You'll get the whole thing here, plus a word about creativity,
color correction, infrared and luminosity masks.

1. What program is best for image editing?
2. Elements can't do 48 bit editing.
3. Getting creative with Elements.
4. Adjusting Skin Tone?
5. What book do i use for upgrading to Photoshop CS?
6. A word about infrared
7. Clever Application of Luminosity masks?


Short Answers (12)

These short answers are all over the map, from questions
about the book and tools to getting serious about image
editing.


-------------------------------
BIG NEWS: Healing for Elements
-------------------------------

It may have been a long time coming, but my healing tool for Elements users=
is finally
here and ready for distribution. I call the new tool Mend and while it work=
s a little
differently than Photoshop's Healing tool, it has all the 'magic' and offer=
s some
opportunity for adjustment that Photoshop's Healing does not. It can make q=
uick
work of some corrections that would otherwise be difficult, and is great fo=
r removing
birthmarks, spots, scratches, damage, etc. If you always wanted to have bet=
ter
corrections than you get with the clone tool, and you have heard about the =
Healing
tool, now is your chance.

Get it here:
http://aps8.com/mend.html

The tool costs $10 and will be delivered by email within a week of purchase=
. Payment
is accepted through PayPal, which allows many different types of credit pay=
ment
options. I'll have some sample corrections up on the website in a few days =
so you can
see what healing can do. Purchase will entitle you to free updates that I m=
ay make
available for the tool, and helps support my interest in helping Elements u=
sers get the
most from their image editing.

Other than that, I finally finished working on my Photoshop book (http://ap=
s8.com/
hppscs.html), and it is great to have that finished. I'm starting to think =
about
updating the Hidden Power Elements book...But I think I'll be doing a few m=
ore tool
enhancements before that. If you have any suggestions, feel free to forward=
:
rl@...


--------------------------
LINKS
--------------------------

The Hidden Power website:
http://hiddenelements.com

The Hidden Power forum at RetouchPro.com:
http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/
forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&forumid=142

The Hidden Power newsletter archive:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hpe

Free Hidden Power Tools:
http://hiddenelements.com/freetools.html

Or from Adobe:
Mac: http://share.studio.adobe.com/axAssetDetailSubmit.asp?aID=7531
PC: http://share.studio.adobe.com/axAssetDetailSubmit.asp?aID=7516

Get the Hidden Power book:
http://aps8.com/hppe.html

Buy Elements:
http://aps8.com/elements.com

Get the new Mend tool for Elements:
http://aps8.com/mend.html


--------------------------
LONG ANSWERS
--------------------------
1. What program is best for image editing?
2. Elements can't do 48 bit editing.
3. Getting creative with Elements.
4. Adjusting Skin Tone?
5. What book do i use for upgrading to Photoshop CS?
6. A word about infrared
7. Clever Application of Luminosity masks?

-
1. What program is best for image editing?
-
> I read a lot about Photoshop and paint Shop Pro and Elements,
> and I can't figure out what the difference is. What program is
> best for image editing?

There is a lot of confusion and misunderstanding when it comes to choosing =
a
program for editing your digital images and what the differences actually a=
re between
programs. Time and again you will hear that Photoshop is "the best" and man=
y people
consider it the only choice for editing images. While this may have been mo=
stly true
in the past when there really was little competition, it is now inaccurate.=
The fact is
there are several good image editors and viable options for image editing d=
epending
on your level of use. There is no doubt that there is difference between th=
ese
programs which lies both on the surface (what features are included, how th=
ose tools
are implemented, and the interface) and behind the scenes (how the changes =
you
affect get calculated). But how that effects your image results beyond your=
technique
in using the different programs may be a lesser issue.

Advanced image editing programs share many common tools that you really nee=
d to
edit images. It is just common sense that an image editor worth using at al=
l will
incorporate the obvious: one manufacturer will know what is in the competet=
or's
tools, and can pick and choose which to mimic-time allowed. As that is true=
, virtually
any of the better image editing packages will do for 90% of users who have =
common
needs. Regretfully, many people who buy Photoshop on recommendation because=
it
is "the best" without knowing what it means to be "the best", and those peo=
ple may
never need the high-power, professional tools offered in Photoshop that rea=
lly set it
apart as an image editing program. It is the equivalent of putting a 14 meg=
apixel
professional digital camera in the hands of a beginner. They invest in Phot=
oshop
because someone tells them it is the best, or they think they need it to so=
mehow
make their images better, or because it is some type of status symbol. In s=
ome cases
the investment may turn out to be a strange way to proclaim vanity, rather =
than need
or expertise.

For those who don't prefer (or promote using) Photoshop, the program define=
d as
"the best" might end up as the one that they happened to prefer at the time=
they
started to get the hang of working with images. Their preference may actual=
ly have
been born of something less to do with one program actually being better th=
an
another, than seeing it that way because of familiarity. The catalyst may h=
ave been
something as simple as placement of the tools, design of the interface, pri=
ce,
circumstance or convenience.

Whatever the reason for the preference, the invisible line is drawn, and th=
us ensues
the great debate about some programs being better than others with staunch =

defenders of each camp. Some yodel from the hilltops, and some seek out a f=
ight.
The arguments of this sort are remaniscent of the mac vs. pc wars waged end=
lessly in
newsgroups, forums and listservs. They usually have to do with an extreme m=
iopia of
the user trying to defend their investment-often without really knowing muc=
h about
the other options. Reviews of a product are often tainted by ignorance of o=
ther
products and what those other products can really do.

Which is "the best", is, more often than not, flat out the wrong question t=
o ask. If you
have common needs for image editing, you can likely get results with any im=
age
editing program that you choose-you just need to learn to use it. That said=
, there are
key differences in popularity, price, and system requirements that may affe=
ct your
choice more than features-and these concerns might not matter one iota to t=
he
image results.

Several of the most popular packages for image editing are Photoshop, Paint=
Shop Pro
and Photoshop Elements. I'll use these packages to point out some of the ch=
oices you
have to be aware of to make the best solution for you. It would only confus=
e the
matter more to throw in additional high-level products such as Ulead PhotoI=
mpact
(PC only), GIMP and Photo32.


Price Gap

Price is something that is hard to ignore when you look at a comparison bet=
ween
Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro and Photoshop Elements. Photoshop retails for $65=
0, Paint
Shop Pro for $109, and Photoshop Elements for $99. This would seem to place=
PS in a
class of its own, leaving PSP and PE to battle it out on a different tier. =
At some level
(e.g., professional pre-press use) this may be true, but in reality may not=
be if the
user honestly considers the important features that will be used day-to-day=
.

Traditionally, high-end items tend to cost quite a lot more than even more-=
than-
adequate bretheren. It is a sort of luxury tax levied by those who achieve =
exclusivity.
A Rolls Royce may weigh in with a hefty price tag, but pales to an indy rac=
er whose
high level of sophistication makes it all but unuseable in daily situations=
(e.g.,
commuting). I would take neither out in a snowstorm to stock up on needed s=
upplies.
The investment in a rolls or indy racer would strike most as an absurd expe=
nditure
for a daily car unless one was so rich that it just plain didn't matter. In=
a similar way,
it is hard for some people to swallow the idea that a lower price in an ima=
ge editor
may not mean you get less than you need.

High cost in an image editor traditionally comes with something that people=

completely ignore: increased operating and hidden costs. It should be no su=
rprise
that future upgrades to a costly program will tend to cost more than upgrad=
es to a
less expensive program. More expensive, more robust programs may require gr=
eater
processing abilities, and in-turn have processing needs which require more =
robust
systems-at a greater cost in addition to the program purchase. In recent ye=
ars,
Adobe's attention to processing power for Photoshop has forced many Mac use=
rs to
purchase entirely new systems if they wanted to remain on the cutting edge.=
This
hidden cost of image processing can total multiples of the cost of the prog=
ram itself.

If you have an unlimited budget for image editing, then it is fine to ignor=
e the costs. If
you are on any type of budget, however, the upgrade expenditure that one ma=
y have
for updating to a new version of a program should be weighted against other=

opportunities. It may be that the investment can be put to better use elsew=
here, such
as in investing in an update for your system (more RAM, a second monitor, m=
ore disk
space, faster processor, a storage and archiving device, saving for a colle=
ge
education, etc.). Some of these updates may prove far more useful to you th=
an the
newest version of the program.


Upgrade Sidebar

Some people upgrade out of obligation (!), or the need to have the newest t=
oy first,
when the first consideration should be need. No single tool or function alo=
ne is worth
the price difference in an upgrade unless you will be using that feature ex=
tensively.
Upgrades should be looked at collectively; Read the release notes before up=
grading.
Hot new features should be looked at a little skeptically: they should add =
functionality
that cannot be duplicated in any other fashion (for example, this was not t=
he case for
healing and extract functions). A few interesting additions in the feature =
set may get
a bit of attention (by the manufacturer) as key features for a release, but=
may not
really much more than interesting interfaces to accomplish tasks, rather th=
an must-
have additions. For the most part, new tools are never really magic, and ju=
st about
any process can be mimicked or duplicated using the less expensive programs=
or
pre-upgrade versions. Snazzy features are often just a variation on using b=
asic tools
in conjunction.


More Features Doesn't Mean Better

The obvious assumption one might make about a program with more features is=
that
the program will be more robust, more powerful, and 'better'. However, a ne=
wer user
may not find having more features to necessarily be better: more features m=
ay just
mean you just have more choices to get something done, more potential confu=
sion,
more chances to use things incorrectly, and in the end: more features you w=
on't need
or bother to use. If the added features are essentially redundant you just =
have
additional menu items screens and options to remember. An important factor =
is not
always so much how many features there are, but how they are arranged and h=
ow
intuitive you find them as a user, and what they really (rather than propor=
t to) do.

Regretfully, learning the features of any program is a process. Some red-ey=
e repair
feature you found in a freebee program you got with your digital camera may=
or may
not be called a red eye tool in another package as it may have different
implementation and/or broader purpose. This makes a one-to-one comparison o=
f
features all but impossible. It is helpful to look at and compare programs =
by
exhausing their demo possibilities. All of the differences between packages=
may not
become apparent in a short-term trial offered in a 30 day demo, as even wit=
h
dilligence, it is likely that you will only be becoming familiar with the p=
rogram at that
point. However, actually working with the program when possible will give y=
ou a
credible means of comparison-and a better one for determining your need. If=
you
can't find a feature by name, don't necessarily assume it isn't there.


A Market Leader with Platform Awareness

Between Photoshop and Photoshop Elements, Adobe is clearly the market leade=
r when
it comes to image editing. This probably shouldn't mean much to making a de=
cision
between programs, but like the effect of hidden costs it can cause an overw=
helming
influence below the surface. While some of the circumstance that leads to b=
ecoming a
market leader may be little more than hype (by the company or users of the =
product),
there are specific advantages to being a market leader. This extends beyond=
Adobe's
great beta testing program, Adobe's ability to invest substantially in rese=
arch and
development because of their success, and the power to incorporate developm=
ents
from other resources (e.g., programs and plugins) readily.

As Adobe is the market leader, there are many Adobe users, many users famil=
iar with
the package, and a great number of people capable of making information ava=
ilable
on program use (e.g., through books, magazines, DVDs, tutorials, articles, =
websites,
etc.). While this information can vary in value and usefulness, it is far e=
asier to get
knowledgeable (if not merely well-intended) help in using the Photoshop pro=
gram
and features than it might be to find competent help for Paint Shop Pro. Th=
is
availability of users and experience may prove useful when seeking help on =
a project.

As Elements has many features from Photoshop (in fact, many more than adver=
tised,
see: http://hiddenelements.com ), Elements users can enjoy similar support-=
if not
directly as tutorials for the program, by interpreting steps. Elements is q=
uite similar in
function to Photoshop-In fact, Elements is built directly over the Photosho=
p engine,
and the results had using settings for Photoshop tutorials in Elements shou=
ld achieve
the same results. Elements users have let me know, for example, that they c=
an
successfully employ techniques from Photoshop Restoration and Retouching (E=
ismann
and Nelson) with the help of the tools from my book (The Hidden Power of Ph=
otoshop
Elements 2). In other words, with minimal investment, Elements users can do=
almost
all of what Photoshop users can to correct and manipulate photos. This help=
s
Elements users open the doors to an enormous cache of information that alre=
ady
exists for Photoshop. While Paint Shop Pro users may be able to intuit the =
differences
between the tools and interface, needed settings may prove dissimilar enoug=
h to
cause cross-referencing frustration. On the other hand, should the need eve=
r arise,
the Elements user can make adjustment to the Photoshop interface without mu=
ch
trouble at all, where moving from Paint Shop Pro to Elements or Photoshop m=
ay prove
a bit less friendly. The suggestion here is that the new user can more than=
get-away
with Elements as a starter program, develop enough skills to warrant an inv=
estment in
add-ins (http://aps8.com/hppe.html), and if there is finally a need to upgr=
ade to
Photoshop, may have a smoother transition than if moving from PSP.

One of the greatest advantages to Adobe products is that they are almost al=
ways
cross platform. The product you work on on a Mac will be nearly the same as=
the
same program used on a PC. This means that you can go from one type of comp=
uter
to the next, change jobs or buy a new cost-efficient system and not have to=
worry
that you will need to relearn the program you use for image editing-though =
you may
need to purchase another license. A real drawback to the professional using=
Paint
Shop Pro would be that job opportunities may actually be limited to shops t=
hat use
PCs. This is regardless of the level of expertise achieved using PSP. While=
the cross-
platform advantage may make no difference whatever to the home user, it is =
almost
certain that the availability of information will be a boon to those going =
at it in
relative isolation at their home computer.


Side-by-side Comparison

As mentioned earlier, a side-by-side comparison of features between these p=
rograms
is difficult or impossible. A specific feature by a specific name may not e=
xist in one
interface, but the same results may be possible none-the-less. The real dif=
ference
lies in core abilities of the programs, rather than the features themselves=
.

Photoshop is probably the most full-featured, professional program in the g=
roup that
includes Paint Shop Pro and Elements. However, that means is it has the mos=
t fringe
tools: high-end, professional tools and functions that you will need in a p=
roduction
environment, and short-step, duty-specific tools for common procedures. Cus=
tom
CMYK separations, broad 16-bit support, extensive color management options,=
on
screen proofing, layer comps, animation (Image Ready), large images, non-sq=
uare
pixels, slices and HTML exports are all examples of hardcore, high-end need=
s
included with the recent Photoshop CS release. These are exactly the tools =
that home
users may never use or care about individually. Tossed into the mix are a f=
ew hype-
tools that may grab user attention and imagination, but that may not perfor=
m the
magic they suggest (e.g., healing, extract, panorama and even channel mixer=
). The
key features that determine a 'need' for Photoshop would almost always be t=
hose
high-end tools listed. The drawback to supporting the broad range of user t=
ools-
from the merely flashy to the more production based-is that the Photoshop i=
nterface
is hugely complex, often with screens buried behind other screens behind bu=
ttons
depending on selected options. Just through sheer bulk, the new user will o=
ften be
daunted - and might find a steep learning curve awaits. It really isn't "th=
e best" for
everyone.

NOTE: I think Photoshop CS is the best release of Photoshop by adobe in a w=
hile, so
I'm not putting down the program. Too many people spend a lot more than the=
y need
to, and I hate to see that.

Paint Shop Pro has virtually all of the every-day tools found in Photoshop,=
but lags
behind somewhat, perhaps in polish (e.g., vector handling) and a few of the=
more
recently added advancements found in Photoshop (e.g., 16-bit support). At t=
he same
time, Paint Shop Pro adds its own flavors to the mix, in such popular featu=
res as
nozzles (which act something like a paintbrush full of pictures; some PSP u=
sers collect
and trade these). But, practically speaking, a side-by-side comparison may =
show few
differences that effect daily use and the home user working with photograph=
s. JASC
has been effective in updating Paint Shop Pro in attempts to keep up with A=
dobe's
lead. With the cost advantage, it might seem obvious to any PC user that PS=
P would
be the clear choice because of the abundance of features in comparison to p=
rice (or,
rather, compared to the price of Photoshop). The Mac user is left totally w=
ithout an
option here as the program is PC only, but it does offer a viable, much les=
s expensive
alternative to Photoshop for the PC user. While it is a program that should=
be taken
more seriously in professional circles, it doesn't have the general accepta=
nce of
Adobe products.

NOTE: I worked on a project with Jasc for PSP6, and have not had much oppor=
tunity to
work with the product since, but even at the time found few things that wer=
e
impossible to do in PSP or that were inherently inferior. Jasc might do wel=
l not to
leave Mac users out on their ear by developing a cross-platform market to e=
xpand
their credability and acceptance.

Photoshop Elements is an adaptation of Photoshop meant to address and attra=
ct the
croud of users who would otherwise be looking to Paint Shop Pro (or other l=
ess
expensive program) because of the strong feature set and attractive price. =
While
removing some of the access to higher-end features, Elements (as per the na=
me)
retains the core functions of Photoshop, and goes one step further to attem=
pt to
simplify the interface. The result is a powerful package with core abilitie=
s that rival its
sister program Photoshop. Note that I suggest it is a 'sister', rather than=
a 'simplified',
'dumbed down' or 'limited' version as I often see it referred to. Elements =
is not really
made to be a program that is subservient to Photoshop: it is intended to be=
a
different product entirely that focuses on digital photography and basicall=
y an RGB
workflow. Adobe chose to hide some of the features in the interface (e.g., =
Curves,
Channel Mixer, Color Balance, CMYK, channels, calculations and running acti=
ons â€"
all of which are all possible using work-arounds from my book). This can ei=
ther be
seen as an attempt by Adobe to distance the product from Photoshop, or, and=
it
seems more correctly, as a means of keeping the interface easier and more
manangeable. The program has an easier structure than Photoshop and is more=

friendly to new users because there are fewer tools on the surface, but tra=
nslating
that to somehow inferior is incorrect. The guts of the program are the same=
as
Photoshop, and the user can enhance the interface along with their growth a=
s a user.
It serves both the purpose of an introductory package, and in some cases, p=
otential
as a professional one. Certainly it can work as a partner with Photoshop to=
behave as
a less expensive second license: just build actions you need in Photoshop a=
nd install
them in Elements to create solutions to production needs.

NOTE: As for tools it is said to be missing from Elements, most all of thes=
e can be
devised using the right techniques. For example, I'll be releasing a healin=
g tool for
Elements users, and can easily create an extract tool using existing functi=
onality. It is
all a matter of employing core tools to define technique.


Which to Buy?

The scenario I have tried to build here is that there is not one correct ch=
oice in image
editing for every user. An honest evaluation of what you need should point =
you in the
right direction as to what program you should buy and use. This evaluation =
should
include a practical look at your individual needs, moreso than how well you=
can
impress your photo-club buddies by what you can afford to buy. In many case=
s, the
honest answer for what program to use may look to one of the less expensive=

options. Just to say: I have used Photoshop in a professional setting since=
1992.
Faced with the opportunity to budget a purchase of Photoshop (using someone=
else's
money) at my current job, I opted to purchase Elements instead and save the=
rest of
the budget for system upgrades that would better suit my purposes. This dec=
ision
was based on the budget, the reality of needs, the production volume, and a=
vailability
of additional resources.

For the true graphics professional, there may be no substitute for Photosho=
p. The
qualification as 'professional' can vary, however, and this may not continu=
e to be the
case as other products catch up and are released. In the sense I use it her=
e, a
graphics professional is one who deals with a mixed bag of graphics on a
professional level, needing to provide images extensively as part of profes=
sional
services in graphic design (e.g., desktop publishing, web design, etc.). In=
other words,
while many professional services may have graphic needs (e.g., real estate =
in
processing images of homes), the professional need in all instances may not=
be so
demanding or varied as to warrant need of Photoshop. However, if there is a=
feature
used even once a month that is 'Photoshop Only' necessary to provide profes=
sional
results that can't be achieved in other ways, it may be worth the investmen=
t to
maintain clients and production times. Currently Photoshop remains recogniz=
ed as a
standard tool for the graphics professional, and those who are serious in t=
he field will
often be required to have intimate knowledge of the program. It will be the=
common
program of choice in a professional or business setting, and perhaps a less=
common
choice in a private one-unless you are really demanding in your graphics ne=
eds or
want a license at home to hone up on and practice using the program.

Paint Shop Pro is a very good choice for the PC user who wants power on a b=
udget
while getting a little more feature-wise than Photoshop Elements will provi=
de. This
user should be somewhat self-reliant, able to concoct solutions from Photos=
hop-
centric materials (because of thinner supply of PSP-centric materials), and=
should fear
no rebuke or reprimand for using something other than Photoshop by choice. =
Almost
exclusively a home-user pick for PC.

Photoshop Elements is a good choice for home use tool for those on a budget=
, or
professionals who don't have pre-press or other volume imaging demands. It =
can
function as a second Photoshop license to some degree and can be useful for=

processing images using actions and batch functions. It can be a learning t=
ool for
those newer to digital images, and provides room to expand. It can be a log=
ical
choice for those who use Photoshop at work as a less expensive home license=
option.
It is bi-platform, so is friendly for both Mac and PC users, and it allows =
users to tap
the broad base of information available to Photoshop users with more confid=
ence.
Though lacking in some features available in Photoshop and PSP (e.g., pen t=
ool), it
has just about all of what you will need for image processing (lacking a fe=
w things
such as 16-bit functionsâ€"though it will open 16-bit images as 8-bit). a g=
ood pick
for most users on many levels.

The thing to keep in mind is that it is not the package that makes the imag=
e. Much of
your image processing should be done in the camera. It sometimes takes year=
s to
master image editing (using any program) to the point where you are comfort=
able
with and good at what you do...it is like learning any art. Depending on yo=
ur
background you may have some insight to make the learning go faster, but as=
I've
said elsewhere, a more expensive hammer will still only drive the nails. El=
ements,
Photoshop and PSP *are* comparable, and the difference is not so much that =

Photoshop would be a nailgun compared to a hammer. If you aren't much beyon=
d
using Autocontrast, the choice of programs won't make your images much bett=
er.
Each program has many useful production featuresâ€"most all that you will n=
eed in
common situations. To me, if you aren't doing high-volume CMYK, working in =
16-bit
and writing your own actions, owning Photoshop won't matter much...a less b=
road
tool may be "the best" for you.


-
2. Elements can't do 48 bit editing.
-
> Your truly excellent book notwithstanding, for me the most
> important function that Elements 2 (as well as prior Photoshop
> versions) can not do is support of 48-bit color (16-bits per
> channel) in all image editing and processing operations! Without
> that, Elements is no good to me.

48-bit was not even supported (fully) in Photoshop until Photoshop CS (http=
://
aps8.com/pscs.html), which was just released. So if 48 bit is that importan=
t, what
program were you using?

I am not privvy to such information, but i would expect Elements (http://ap=
s8.com/
elements.html) will not be handling 48-bit but in a cursory fashion in futu=
re versions
(allowing users to open 48-bit files by converting to 24). While 48- bit ma=
y be
valuable for some archiving purposes and in some corrections, the proper co=
rrection
techniques (non-violent ones) should really get similar results for almost =
all
purposes. Output cannot even really make use of 48-bit color at this point.=
..and it is
difficult to assess the difference between millions and billions of colors.=
Of all things,
I would think grayscale is where one profits most. Even there, conversion t=
o 24-bit
will currently be the end point.

To me, 48-bit is a professional need -- something that most users will neve=
r look
for. In several years it may be a standard, who knows. In any case, it does=
not render
Elements invalid (nor 24-bit images). I never suggested there was no need f=
or anyone
to get and use Photoshop. However, I also stand by that for the grand bulk =
of users,
Elements will more than cover what most users need or want to do with digit=
al
images...with or without 48-bit support. My book (http://aps8.com/hppe.html=
) adds
to those possibilities without the $600 price differential. Even a fraction=
of that
difference can allow users to upgrade their systems significantly in ways t=
hat may be
more valuable: such as adding a second monitor to increase desktop landscap=
e
(http://aps8.com/monitor.html ; you will usually need a second video card h=
ttp://
aps8.com/pcicard.html) or adding RAM (http://aps8.com/RAM.html), or even ad=
ding
another storage device. In other words, I don't think 48-bit is the only co=
nsideration
-- you'll need roughly double the handling power in your system...and other=

additions may prove more valuable to your work and workflow than 48-bit. Pr=
esently.


-
3. Getting creative with Elements.
-
> It seems to me you have to go into Elements with
> something in mind, or else I just don't know what
> to do. I find Elements boring and not as creative
> as i thought it would be. Will your book help with
> that?

I have taught creative writing and creative imaging, and perhaps this isn't=
what you
want to hear but 'boring' is in the eye of the beholder. If you are going i=
nto Photoshop
to do something, it isn't the program that you will have to expect to perfo=
rm tricks or
keep your interest. YOU have to provide the interest, and perhaps that is o=
ne of the
hardest things to come to terms with. If I am writing a story and it turns =
out boring, it
is either because I was unable to do something interesting or just having a=
bad
creative day...I'd be hard-pressed to blame that on MS Word (no matter how =
delightful
it might be).

I, for one, very rarely find that there is nothing I can do in Photoshop to=
make
something interesting. My direction might be as stupid as running a few fil=
ters on an
image, or opening an image at random and playing with it to achieve some
interesting results. In writing as with images, teaching creative stuff was=
always a
matter of getting students to realize it was OK to play. My guess is you do=
n't see it as
a game anymore, but as work where something is required, you expect to perf=
orm at
a specific level, and have led yourself to an impenitrable wall of disappoi=
ntment.

My books (Elements: http://aps8.com/hppe.html; Photoshop: http://aps8.com/
hppscs.html) don't really get into teaching creativity...and the reason for=
that is it is
too user-centric. A user would buy a book that told them they would become =
more
creative with the expectation of becoming more creative, and, well, that is=
a tall order
to put on myself as an author. I can teach techniques, and even techniques =
for
creativity, but I can't promise to make a reader creative if they have no
capacity...Again, it isn't the tool or the book or the inspiring object tha=
t makes us
creative, it would still be the sense of play.

My perscription would be to go into the program without expectation. Open a=
n image
and start by doing some basic things like dust corrections and other perhap=
s
mechanical procedures like color correction until you see something in an i=
mage that
might be interesting to explore...then start playing with it.


-
4. Adjusting Skin Tone?
-
> I have recently started doing digital touch up and color correction
> for wedding photographs and am finding that it is realatively new
> waters that I am in, as far as adjusting for skin tones. When
> looking at an image, I can tell if it is too greem or pink and
> such, but when I go to take the slightest green out, I see the
> magenta go in and I think it looks too magenta. When I take a bit
> of blue out, I see the yellow go in and it looks too blue.
> It also happens with the wedding dress. In the shade the dress
> takes on a blueish cast, but when I take the blue out, I get too
> much yellow it seems.

The touted solution by some experts and such seems to be in targeting the s=
kin tone
adjustment, like so:

>> An average, middle-of-the road caucasion skin tone reads:
>>
>> magenta: 40%
>> yellow: 50%
>> cyan: 16%
>> black: 0% (You should never have any black ink reading.)

I have tried to make such recommendations in books in the past but also inc=
lude a
disclaimer that suggests such targeting can't be accurate. These are suppos=
ed to be a
guideline...but inherently fail because of the problems inherent in the dif=
ferences
between skin tones. The number of exceptions outweighs the validity of the =
guideline
(e.g., what about rosacious skin, what about yellow skin, black skin, etc.)=
. You can't
possibly measure the skin tone with accuracy: or, rather, you can measure w=
hat is
there, but only guess as to what it should be. Guessing, I think, is not ac=
curate. The
most troubling part about the recommendation is that you never have black i=
n the
skin tones. I think this is just incorrect. Shadows happen, skin tones run =
the gammut,
and there is no way to say: no black.

The real solution I would look at, ESPECIALLY for the original question (co=
rrecting
wedding images) would to forgo correcting the skin at all (!!). If you corr=
ect for the
grays, which CAN BE MEASURED, you will get far better color (if accuracy = =
better).
The idea would be to neutralize the grays and as a result, the color will n=
aturally fall
into place. In the case of a wedding photo, your grays are really built in:=
you will want
to correct the tone of the tux (black, white or gray will work) and various=
areas of the
normally white gown. If you correct white and black points (lightest and da=
rkest in the
image) and then various tones throughout the range (say 25%, 50% and 75% gr=
ay),
your skin tones will correct NO MATTER WHAT SKIN TONE the subject may have.=

Grays will be predictable in that the Red, Green and Blue values will be eq=
uivalent
(128, 128, 128 is medium gray). Gray values are far less tricky to work wit=
h than skin
tone.

Once the image is correct, then might be the time to change the skin tone t=
o make it
more pleasing (pleasing is not always correct/accurate). Another thing to k=
eep in
mind is not to necessarily correct to what you see on screen but to correct=
by the
numbers. This can take your color settings out of the loop--If your monitor=
is
presenting wrong and you change the image to be a little less yellow when y=
our
monitor presents a little yellowish already, the result might be far too bl=
ue. Trust the
measures, not what you see on screen.


-
5. What book do i use for upgrading to Photoshop CS?
-
> I've just purchased the Photoshop CS upgrade but
> haven't installed it. Frankly, I'm still a beginner
> and use Photoshop mainly to improve my digital
> photos for printing. I have about 6 books on
> Photoshop 7 (most of the ones mentioned here)
> and haven't yet gone through all of them.

I would suggest that if the books are decent ones, you should be able to ap=
ply the
techniques from PS6 and PS7 to PSCS. For example, Katrin's book has no vers=
ion
number, I believe for good reason: it will be applicable for most of what y=
ou want to
do -- regardless of the tools. The only real difference between 6 or 7 and =
CS is that
you will not have the new CS features/advantages, and some of the tools/fun=
ctions
may be somewhat different/enhanced, or may be located in a different place.=
As a
beginner, you will mostly be using more common tools in the interface that =
have
been around for a while.

I would not be looking to buy new books if you haven't digested the old one=
s. Though
there may be better books coming with better techniques, and I am glad for =
those
who help support authors (!), you should have quite enough source material =
to keep
you chained to your computer for a while.

I have to ask as I am curious: why did you upgrade the program for casual u=
se of
Photoshop when you weren't already sure of the differences? I would imagine=
the
program serves its purpose as version 6 or 7, and wonder if you have upgrad=
ed out
of habit rather than real need? Before committing to an upgrade be sure the=
new
features are something you need -- and at that point the potential differen=
ce
between the books dedicated to any version should be evident. Your request =
suggests
you might not be clear on the advantages first, and that might be a tactica=
l error...


-
6. A word about infrared
-
Just a word about infrared.

While there may be filtering or means of creating an infrared effect (some =
of these I
have seen as plugins are really pretty mediocre), this would be a complicat=
ed process.
Though I have a section on doing this in my new book, the effect only mimic=
ks the
real outcome. The reason for this is IR is outside of the spectra of visibl=
e light. In
normal circumstances and in an sRGB color space, IR will not be recorded/re=
tained
(this is not to say some sensors do not have sensitivity to the IR spectra =
-- that is two
separate issues). If IR light is not specifically recorded, you will not ta=
ke visible light
and make an accurate adjustment to mimick IR. It would really require rebui=
lding the
effect.

That said, the process would need to take many factors into account to achi=
ve an
effect, such as image brightness and filtering per color (IR photography in=
B&W filters
out blues and greens depending on color, you will find that starting with t=
he red
channel is a good jumping off point). The best results may be had by forcin=
g shifts in
greens toward red so that you get whitened foliage...but that even by examp=
le only
addresses a portion of the complexity which is the infrared spectrum and ho=
w it has
traditionally affected film.

Some digital cameras like the Rebel (which has a sensitivity to infrared) w=
hen used
with IR filter seems like a more realistic way to produce these effects...a=
nd then there
is always using IR film in an analog camera.

Sometimes there really is no substitution. A similar problem occurs in unde=
rwater
photography where everything at any significant depth turns blue -- as othe=
r
wavelengths peter out. You can only record the light that is there with equ=
ipment and
media that can actually handle the information.


-
7. Clever Application of Luminosity masks?
-
> In a previous newsletter, you mentioned 'clever use' of
> luminosity masking. It was the "cleverness" in applying
> (a presumed) knowledge of masking to luminosity that I
> was seeking hints.

There are many ways to achieve this, including loading the composite channe=
l as a
selection, creating a luminosity layer and converting it, duplicating the i=
mage,
converting to LAB and copying out the Lightness channel, and making an acti=
on to do
your favorite of these. As loading the composite is perhaps the easiest, tr=
y these
steps:

1. View the image as you want it to load based on brightness. Transparent a=
reas act
as white. White areas will be selected 100%, black 0%, and grayscale varyin=
g with
brightness.

2. Command/Ctrl + click the composite channel (the upper-most channel: RGB,=

CMYK, Gray, Index, Bitmap, etc.). This will load the brightness as a select=
ion. At this
point you can use this as a shadow mask by applying it in a layer mask as f=
ollows:

3. choose the layer you want to mask.

4. choose Layer>Add Layer Mask>Reveal Selection

If you want to apply as a highlight mask, you can invert the selection befo=
re using the
shadow mask steps, or just choose Hide Selection.

There may be situations where you will want to adjust the luminosity maskin=
g to
specific tonal ranges. For example, say you wanted to isolate the shadows, =
you could
adjust the mask using the following steps:

1. Adjust the image to how you want to base the luminosity mask (as in step=
1
above).

2. Create a new layer at the top of the layer stack. Name it Luminosity Adj=
ustment.

3. Press Command+Option+Shift+E / CTRL+ALT+Shift+E to copy the content of t=
he
image to the new layer.

4. Adjust the image using curves and set the points (using percentage mode)=
to: 0,0 ;
49,0 ; 51,100 ; 100,100 .

5. Command/Ctrl + click the composite channel (RGB, CMYK, Gray...). This wi=
ll load
the brightness as a selection. Brightness will be enhanced by the correctio=
n in step 4
so that the luminosity selection loads 100% strength between what is 0-49% =
black in
the image.

6. Shut off the view for the Luminosity Adjustment layer.

While the selection outline of these two sets of steps will look the same, =
they will do
very different things, both based on luminosity. There are many additional =
ways to
adjust the tone before creating your mask -- some quite precise, and others=
that can
save hours of work time in creating more complicated masks based on tone (o=
r color).

I cover quite a lot of similar stuff in my new book: The Hidden Power of Ph=
otoshop
CS, out in stores in the new year. Find it on Amazon here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0782142559/newwriting/



---------------
Short Answers
---------------

-
1
-
> I seem to remember that when I originally installed the Hidden Power
> Tools from the CD, there was a filter that allowed for turning an
> image to sepia. I seem to have lost that filter.  What is the best
> way to get it back?

There are several methods for achieving Sepia effects using the techniques =
in the
book. I am not sure what filter you are referring to. see pages 123-129 in =
Hidden
Power.


-
2
-
> Was your book written for PC's?  Is the CD for PC platform?

As i work on mac and PC, I have written the books for both platforms...actu=
ally the
image editing thing is quite independent of platform, in my estimation. The=
CD works
for both platforms and for Elements 1 and 2. I use it on both mac and PC pr=
etty much
every day, and there is very little difference. Adobe has done some great w=
ork in
attempts to keep the programs the same. The interface may look slightly dif=
ferent
because of the wat things are drawn by the platform...I don't know that the=
re is
enough of a difference there to really effect what you do.


-
3
-
> I am considering a new computer and can't decide on whether
> to get a Mac or PC. Do you prefer PC to Mac and why?

Oh, no...platform wars. I work on both and own both. If you have computer
experience, it is often comfortable to stick with the platform you know. If=
you have a
previous computer, just changing platforms isn't always that easy -- you ha=
ve to
consider the software investment you have made. For example, I have about 2=
0k in
software for mac in the closet...I don't see making that investment again s=
oon. On the
other hand, I work on a PC at my regular job, and have a PC laptop. If eith=
er is better,
I have a hard time telling which. Either has their charms and fortes. If I =
appear to have
a preference for mac, it is mostly because of the investment I have made in=
it as my
primary workstation. Traditionally, Mac has had more room for lots of RAM, =
and had
done more with dual processing and multiple monitors, but most of this diff=
erence
has been wiped away in recent years.


-
4
-
> Will the HPAIII tools allow any Photoshop Action to be run
> on Elements or only the custom ones you make available?

The instructions explain this in more detail. In theory, any action can be =
run in
Elements. In practice, it has to do with how the actions were recorded. I a=
m of the
impression that ANY action can be adjusted. I have been known to help with =
these
adjustments when asked.


-
5
-
> What is a flattened image? I'm new to photography and Photoshop
> Elements 2 and I need to learn.

A flattened image is one where the layers have all been merged into the bac=
kground.
You can flatten an image by choosing Flatten Image from the Layer menu
(Layers>Flatten Image). Images that you get from your camera or scan are al=
ready
flattened.


-
6
-
> If I adjust a photo using levels along with the options, would you
> ever see a need to a highlights/shadows adjustment, and what steps
> would you take for it?

Yes. Please see the hiddenelements free-bee actions in there is a highlight=
/shadow
masking tool. You would use it for images where you take separaate exposure=
for
highlight and shadow and then combine the result. You could also use one of=
the
masks to make an adjustment while leaving the other part of the image maske=
d. For
example, if there are some details you want to enhance in the shadows, mask=
the
highlights so they aren't changed by alterations you make to the image. Tha=
t's the
short answer.


-
7
-
> I'm trying to learn how to write actions myself. Is it an absolute
> MUST that they be written in Photoshop CS (in which case I have 29
> more days to do it) or can they be edited in another program?

Actions can be written in PS6, PS7 or CS. I believe the PS6 demo is the bes=
t to get
because it should not expire (and should continue to allow you to save acti=
ons). There
was a link in the last newsletter to PS6 demos for Mac and PC. This demo do=
esn't
expire.

Editing them in other ways is POSSIBLE (e.g., text editing, and another mea=
ns I was
fiddling with), but at the same time perhaps so labor intensive and difficu=
lt that I
don't know that i would recommend it.


-
8
-
> Having just moved to Elements, one thing I really
> miss from my previous package is the ability to
> store/load selections. is there a work round for
> this in Elements?

If you have Elements 2, the save for selections is right in the Select menu=
(Select>Save
Selection).

If you have Elements 1, there are work-arounds in my book, and a tool for s=
aving
selections specific to the Elements 1 installation of the tools included on=
the CD.


-
9
-
> I'm new to digital photography and hope to
> use Photoshop eventually in a number of different ways.
> What is the best way to start with Photoshop? 

If you haven't yet made a Photoshop purchase, you might consider looking in=
to
Photoshop Elements (http://aps8.com/elements.html). This program along with=

Hidden Power (http://aps8.com/hppe.html) will probably do everything you ne=
ed and
save you money so you can upgrade your system.


--
10
--
> I want to get serious about editing images. What do I need?

If you are really serious I recommend getting a lot of drive space and as m=
uch RAM as
you can afford.

RAM: http://aps8.com/RAM.html

I would also consider a second monitor -- especially if you only have a sma=
ller one.
This will allow you to increase your desktop landscape, treating both monit=
ors as one
larger one.

Monitor: http://aps8.com/monitor.html

You will probably need a PCI card for the second monitor. Without this ther=
e may be
no way to plug in the second monitor.

PCI Card: http://aps8.com/pcicard.html

As far as I am concerned these additions are worth more than whether you us=
e
Elements or Photoshop.


--
11
--
> Is there a History Brush in Elements?

The History Brush is included in the tools that come with my book -- or at =
least a
simple work-around. There is a tool that lets you set up the function and i=
t is actually
easier to apply than Photoshop's history brush. It is based on simple maski=
ng and
stamping visible. All you'd do manually is:

1. make the history state as you want it to look
2. create a new layer
3. stamp visible
4. add a layer mask and hide all
5. paint on the mask to reveal the history state


--
12
--
> Hope the Healing Brush is going to be our Christmas present.

Um, well, uh...it is available for valentines day!


--------------------------------------------------------
Do let me know about questions and comments, and let me
know what you think about the newsletter. rl@...
--------------------------------------------------------

Brought to you by Richard Lynch
in conjunction with The Hidden power of Photoshop Elements 2

http://hiddenelements.com

Copyright © 2004 Richard Lynch
------------------------------