Slow Breath

[DanK]

I agree with Andre. The starting point isn't a tool. The starting point should be "how would I like to change the appearance of this photo?" Then you have to find a tool that makes that particular change. Often, there are several different ways to do it, some better than others.

I often find that once I have a general idea of an alteration I want, the first tool I pick turns out to be the wrong choice. Or, it does what I thought I wanted, but when I see the change done, I don't like it and have to go back to the beginning.

Or, to fit with Andre's example, one might start with something very general, not "I think the grass should be desaturated", but something more like "I want to emphasize the trees, so I have to make them stand out more from the grass." Then there are a number of options: changing tonality, changing saturation, lessening detail, etc.

That takes me back to the beginning. I thought Andre's crop was a big improvement. But you then desaturated the grass. My reaction was that doing this decreased the separation between the trees and the grass. I wasn't thinking at all about HOW you desaturated the grass.

[AntonioCorreia]

André, thank you for your words as they were truly welcome and gave me something to reflect on.
Perhaps I didn't explain myself as clearly as I should have, and I’m sorry if it came across differently from what I intended. Sometimes, written words don’t quite capture what we truly mean to say. Mainly in not our native language.

I want you to know that I never questioned the spirit of this space, quite the opposite.
I fully understand that every comment and suggestion here is offered with the sole aim of helping photographers go further, to better express what they have in their minds and hearts.
That’s exactly why I’m here and why I try to contribute with enthusiasm and dedication.

When we master our tools and know how to use them with purpose, everything becomes clearer and closer to what we imagined.
As you rightly said: “Nothing is technically correct if the resulting photo does not reflect the photographer’s vision.”

Exactly that—I couldn’t agree more.

[AntonioCorreia]

Thanks, Dan! I’ve only just seen your comment, it completely escaped me when I replied to André.
I think our posts must have crossed paths and I didn’t notice… it happens!

To be honest, I have to agree with both of you.
All of this, Curves, masks, selections, etc., they're just tools, yes, but they only truly work when they serve what we’re trying to do.
They don’t work magic on their own, but they’re incredibly helpful when we know what we’re aiming for or imagining.

Lately, I’ve been grouping a few photos by theme and writing a few notes to publish on my website.
I know it’s not going to make much of a difference in practical terms, but it helps keep me active and connected to the process.

And this photo—what do you think?
It’s true that after a small Curves adjustment, it really came to life.

Thanks to both of you for your attention and for the comments, always helpful and motivating !

[DanK]

I think the highlights are too bright. The white is essentially blown out, and parts of the statue have L values of 95 or so.

I would drop the white point less (move the top point less toward the left). I'd probably start by not moving the white point at all, starting instead with a more modest upward movement of the curve closer to the middle. I might then add a tiny change to the white point. Since I don't have the original, I can't test that, but you could try it.

I came back to this later because I realized I hadn't pointed something out. Look at where you moved the white point on the original histogram. Just follow the vertical line down from your right-hand anchor point on the curve. You will see that while there aren't many pixels at that point and above, there are some. All of those pixels are now blown out because your anchor point determines where pure white is.

It depends on the image and your taste, but as a general guideline, it's often a good idea not to have any pixels above 250 or even 245.

So, my reading of the histogram suggests that it is more harm than good to bring down the white point. Instead, I would have started by pulling the curve up a bit somewhere between the midpoint and the 75th percentile, as a way to start exploring.

[Round Tuit]

I assume that your intent with this photo was to capture the interaction between the statue and the woman. If that is the case then the woman is not just part of the background but is an integral part of the scene. One thing that works very well to bring attention to the woman is the fact that the statue is looking directly at her. Our eyes will naturally follow the gaze of someone,or something, to see what they are looking at.

Because she is important, I would dodge her front side to almost match the brightness of her back. I would also consider subtilly raising her overall brightness. The key word being subtilly. I would also crop in from the left side to remove 1/3 to 1/2 of the carpet an down slightly from the top.

Two more things require attention. The first is the bright strip below the statue's feet. You have lost detail there; probably because you moved the white point too far to the left as mentioned by Dan. Moving it back would probably bring the detail back. Once restored, burning that area would help reduce the distracting effect of its brightness.

The second is the white wedge from the alcove that lands right on the statue. I would clone this to either the dark grey from the alcove or the ochre from the wall. Preferably the former.

Here is a very quick edit done with my finger on the trackpad of my laptop. (Not the way to do it!)

[Round Tuit]

Taking a closer look at the woman, I notice that her right hand seems to come out of her leg and is not connected to her right arm. I don't know how or why that edit was made but it renders the whole picture useless in my opinion.

P.S. NOT an edit; This is an AI generated image!!!

[DanK]

Perhaps the rest of her hand is covered by the dress, although the base of the thumb looks fat.

[Round Tuit]

Perhaps the rest of her hand is covered by the dress, although the base of the thumb looks fat.

Sorry Dan, too many things don't add up.

Unless her hand is completely detached from her arm, you can't get the angle of the thumb and that of the arm to match the picture. There are other inconsistencies. For example her shawl is focused on her right shoulder and out of focus coming around the left side of her neck; yet the carpet is focused all the way to the wall. Same with her face which is out of focus, yet her hair at the back appears in better focus. Even the far wall in the alcove is focused except for the top square which is out of focus. If you look carefully, you can see "vestigial" feet coming out of her knees.

I am convinced that this is AI generated.

[DanK]

Now that I look closely, there are some other odd things. The statue isn't standing on plinth, but off to one side of it. There is an odd cylinder sticking out of the top of the plinth. The two sides of the archway to whatever that is at the back are different colors.

Antonio, can you explain?

[LenR]

I am inclined to agree with Andre on this one. There are quite a few anomalies in the image.....

[AntonioCorreia]

I am preparing a long answer, guys.
Please wait. meanwhile...

[AntonioCorreia]

I spent some time circling around, observing, trying to understand how I could frame the praying woman in a way that truly pleased me.
I took several shots — many more than the four I’ve already shown you — all in that same moment, but from different angles, positions and distances.
This one, above all, felt the most balanced and drew me in the most, especially for its wide framing — that wide-angle view I’m so fond of.

I know it’s not a perfect image, but it’s one of those where intention outweighs limitation.
And while we’re on the subject: yes, gear does matter.
Of course it doesn’t make a good photo on its own, but it helps a lot when you want to bring out detail or handle light in the shadows, simply because the foundation is stronger.
If I had had another camera with a different lens — like the one I use now — maybe the technical result would have been cleaner, more “editable”, with greater editing potential.
Here, the noise in the dark areas is more than obvious, and I chose not to fight it.
I kept the silence in the shadows because what truly mattered was conveying that atmosphere.

The light enters from the left, off-frame, crossing the space and touching the walls, the floor, and the woman’s shoulder with a delicacy I wanted to preserve.
I pointed the lens at her as the central figure in what is, paradoxically, an off-centre composition, without worrying whether her face would be clearly visible or not.
In that moment, she was deep in prayer — and that is obvious from her posture. You don’t need to see her face to perceive it.

The blue tunnel on the left feels like a passage into the unknown, and it was precisely that contrast between shadow and light that caught my attention.
In the background, almost in the centre of the frame, there’s a small oratory that quietly draws the eye, and then, at the top right, a golden rectangle — a suggestion of hope or symbolic wealth — floating just behind the goddess.
It was a detail I only noticed later, but there it is, reinforcing the meaning of the image.

This darker, more atmospheric version was a path I chose consciously and deliberately.
I let the light reveal itself where it mattered most and left the rest as it was.
This is a photograph born of trial, of adjustment, of deliberate choice.

And no, for the record: this image was not generated by AI. Not a chance.
The only image I ever made with AI, I admit, was of Santa Claus with a pot of honey — which I used to label some jars I plan to give away at Christmas.
And even that one I’m not sure I should have made, since the figure could almost have been me, which adds a slightly comical touch.
But this image — this one — I saw, I framed, I processed, I made.
With limitations, with doubt, yes. But with intent.

And with all that said, I nearly forgot to thank you for your always valuable, helpful and kind feedback.

[AntonioCorreia]

Detail

[Round Tuit]

Antonio,

Judging from your description of the photo, I conclude that you have created a faithful rendering of your vision and I want to congratulate you for this achievement. When that happens, the rewards make the effort that we put into it worthwhile.

Having said that, you will not be surprised that I don't share your enthusiasm about this photo. You use metaphors to describe your picture. The problem with metaphors is that they mean different thing, if anything at all, to different people. You see a yellow square as a symbol of hope, I see it as a distraction pulling my attention away from the main subject while someone else might see it as a symbol of hate.

To me, this picture is about a devout woman praying to a powerful goddess in an austere temple. We don't know if she is giving thanks or begging for help as she crouches on the floor but we should be able to feel the intensity of her faith. For that to happen, we need to make her much more prominent and eliminate distracting elements such as the yellow square or the bluish corridor.

Someone else might view the picture in an entirely different light than your or my interpretation. That is as it should be. What matters most is that YOU are happy with your creation.

Well done.

P.S. I find the low key rendering very appropriate for the setting.

[DanK]

Antonio,

Thank you. The detailed shot shows that some of the things that seemed odd in the first image aren’t odd at all. For example, the darker areas in front of her are not vestigial feet.

So I’ll narrow my focus back to the specific question of how to use the curves tool. Ultimately, he answer is “however gives you the result you want.” However, my main suggestion is “less is more.” Unless you want to clip highlights or shadows, try not to get the black and white points too near 0 and 255. Start with a slight S-curve, and play with where you put the two anchor points on the horizontal axis.

Note that after you set the black and white points with any tool, they may move again with other edits. So watch out for clipping that arises later.

Dan


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AntonioCorreia]

@André
Thank you so much for these thoughtful lines you wrote, especially regarding this image and the topic it raises.

I fully respect your opinion, expressed in this sentence:
"To me, this picture is about a devout woman praying to a powerful goddess in an austere temple. We don't know if she is giving thanks or begging for help as she crouches on the floor but we should be able to feel the intensity of her faith. For that to happen, we need to make her much more prominent and eliminate distracting elements such as the yellow square or the bluish corridor."

I completely understand your point of view. You’re absolutely right — but I also think it’s up to the viewer to interpret whether she’s giving thanks or asking for something, and to decide whether that yellow patch is disturbing or not. It’s simple, and at the same time, personal.

In this specific case — and because I was there — I know, from what I saw and heard, that the woman was in a moment of despair. But as we know, this is photography, not cinema. The image doesn’t explain — it suggests. And each person, within their own culture and experience, will read it in the way that feels most natural to them.

As for what you mentioned at the beginning of your reply, I completely agree: this image didn’t really excite you… and it didn’t excite me either.
I actually mentioned that in my previous post, when I talked about equipment. It’s true that gear isn’t always decisive, but in this case, I felt it would have made a difference.

Or maybe it’s just that I still haven’t quite mastered the right settings to make the most of this image.
These are limitations I recognise, and as you know, I try to overcome them every time I pick up the camera.

Once again, thank you for your comments — they’re always appreciated, helpful and kind.
Cheers !
-
@ Dan
Thank you for another great tip !
Cheers !
-
@ André and Dan,
So, didn’t you find the Santa Claus funny ?

[Round Tuit]

Antonio,

I believe that we are now basically saying the same thing using slightly different language. So I will say thank you for an interesting discussion. A final comment; I don't know what Santa is drinking from his jar but it does not look like moosemilk!

[AntonioCorreia]

André, this is just a side note in the flow of our conversation.
At the end of each year, I always offer a small jar of honey to a close circle of friends, and this time I decided to make this sticker to place on each one.
People enjoy receiving gifts at Christmas. You're just a bit too far away… otherwise...

[selig1656]

Last capture is the icing on the cake. Well defined .