UFO-Cloud (UK) Photo ENHANCED (June 2018)

ATS uploader won't work right for me, so I can't post all the images that I'd like to.

However, the uploader will let me upload one version of the original photo.

Here it is. I think it's the second-darkest version.



There it is, the original image with its light and dark colors increased. No contrast adjustment involved. You guys can download it and zoom in and study it.

But it would be more simple if you just download the original photo, and use Picasa (free easy program), and use the simple sliding bars to increase the "fill light" and increase "shadows."

That's exactly how the images were made.

originally posted by: peacefulpete
ATS uploader won't work right for me, so I can't post all the images that I'd like to.

However, the uploader will let me upload one version of the original photo.

Here it is. I think it's the second-darkest version.

There it is, the original image with its light and dark colors increased. No contrast adjustment involved. You guys can download it and zoom in and study it.

But it would be more simple if you just download the original photo, and use Picasa (free easy program), and use the simple sliding bars to increase the "fill light" and increase "shadows."

That's exactly how the images were made.

Filling light and increasing shadows is guess what?

No contrast adjustment involved.

Really?


So what is

increase the "fill light" and increase "shadows."

if not adjusting the contrast of an image?

^If your input has devolved into arguing semantics then there's really no point.

I'll just point out that the other guy was arguing that adjusting colors is DIFFERENT from adjusting contrast.

That's implicit by him arguing that it was one, and not the other.

Essentially, you're arguing the opposite of his argument, because now you seem to be arguing that the two processes are the same thing.

You are also at odds with the photography website that I linked to, which defines the two processes as different.

Saturation is similar to contrast...

^quote from the website that you don't seem willing to glance at lol. "Similar" means that they're not the same thing, they're only similar.

www.steves-digicams.com...

That same link has a full explanation of what "contrast" means. It's a handful of processes, all at once:

...increased brightness, contrast, saturation, and sharpness simply by adding contrast

Note the part that says that increased contrast includes increased sharpness.

That is the big difference with the photos having their colors increased ONLY. The big difference is that the image never had any sharpening, or any other edit that would change its actual image.



Picasa also has a "sharpen" feature which is probably what you are thinking of, re: contrast-adjustment. It wasn't used, as it creates artifacts, which change the image.

This is also why it's an important distinction that the photos were only color-manipulated, because that leaves the image otherwise exactly the same as the original.

Here you go no messing about with Picasa done using Lightroom so I didn't have to mess about with the whole image looks like 2 clouds one in the foreground which causes the line and another further back.

a reply to: peacefulpete
The picture reminded me of a cloud I saw a few years back. As I was sitting in traffic inching my way home, I saw a cloud that captured my attention. I grabbed a few pictures of it and I just spent over ten minutes trying to find it. Posting the only picture I could find. It is not the best of the lot but I found it in a junk file of saved photos from my really old cell phone

This is just a lousy picture taken with a cheap cell phone over two years ago. I have not touched it. I am sure that someone with the right set of skills could make it look a lot more intriguing.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
Here you go no messing about with Picasa done using Lightroom so I didn't have to mess about with the whole image looks like 2 clouds one in the foreground which causes the line and another further back.

Well so what is your edited image supposed to signify? What did you even do to edit it? I can see that you made a sharp line across the cloud. What's the point?

It stops being the original image when you are adding new details to it.

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: peacefulpete
The picture reminded me of a cloud I saw a few years back. As I was sitting in traffic inching my way home, I saw a cloud that captured my attention. I grabbed a few pictures of it and I just spent over ten minutes trying to find it. Posting the only picture I could find. It is not the best of the lot but I found it in a junk file of saved photos from my really old cell phone

This is just a lousy picture taken with a cheap cell phone over two years ago. I have not touched it. I am sure that someone with the right set of skills could make it look a lot more intriguing.

Nice photo and nice backstory! The cloud certainly has the resemblance of a flat plate, with that fiery light toward the center.

Later on, I think I will play with the brightness and colors a bit. Looking at how dark the street is, there is a lot of brightening that could be done, and it will look like a new picture.

a reply to: peacefulpete
It was taken around October 2016. The phone I used to take the picture was ditched a long time ago after dropping it and shattering the screen.

The only reason this one was saved was because it was on a scan disk and got copied when I put the disk in my new phone, which has been replaced several times since then.

It just caught my attention. Like I said I did not play with or enhance it in any way.

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: peacefulpete
It was taken around October 2016. The phone I used to take the picture was ditched a long time ago after dropping it and shattering the screen.

The only reason this one was saved was because it was on a scan disk and got copied when I put the disk in my new phone, which has been replaced several times since then.

It just caught my attention. Like I said I did not play with or enhance it in any way.

^Nice, it definitely looks like a raw photo from a cellphone. I'll see what I can do to play with brightness and color.

I did a little and the difference of light and dark, in the photo, is tricky. If I brighten the whole pic, the cloud becomes less visible, whereas if I darken it, to make the cloud more visible, then the rest of the pic becomes very dark. So probably I will make very dark versions of the photo, which give the cloud more color and visibility.

The glowing spot will not be clarified, it seems, because it's just a bright bunch of light.

I'll post later. The pics will be interesting.

I can't imagine how huge and awesome it looked in real life.

a reply to: peacefulpete
It was awesome. Even my mother, she was 81 at the time, who came to pick me up from work, was impressed.

She called it the Mother Ship.

I got my wry sense of humor from her.

a reply to: peacefulpete

I NEVER made the sharp line

lIGHTROOM far better than Picasa plain and simple so I used an adjustment brush just to edit the area around the clouds to show more detail in the cloud area WITHOUT having to mess about with the buildings in the foreground.

With lightroom I can change exposure,white point,dark point,hue,saturation, sharpness/clarity, highlights/shadows etc all INDIVIDUALLY.

The problem with phone pictures they tend to be jpeg pictures so the image recorded by the camera sensor is processed in the phone and DOWNGRADED to jpeg.

JPEG is a lossy format colour depth is not as good as RAW, artifacts are introduced.

The picture was 3024 x 4032 (12mp) pixels the file size is under 2mb IF I had taken the picture with my 16mp DSLR the file size would have been 4912 X 3264 and 15.9 mb as I take all my pictures in RAW format which means that ALL the data recorded by every pixel is in the file UNPROCESSED by the camera.

It's clouds nothing else.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn


Cloud with the sun setting behind not really much more you can say.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
sed an adjustment brush just to edit the area around the clouds to show more detail in the cloud area

So in other words, it's exactly what I already said: You selectively edited the cloud, to add in your own arbitrary extra detail or sharpness WHICH WAS NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL PHOTO.




Two thumbs down for absolute garbage. The photo is not the original photo ONCE YOU ADD NEW DETAILS TO IT.

So your "enhanced" photo is not a photo anymore. It's edited garbage. Congratulations.

a reply to: wmd_2008
I don't think anyone really thinks that bunnies and bears float around in the sky, but when a cloud shows a resemblance to some known object, or in this case unknown object, it tickles the imagination.

Shared my pic of a strange looking cloud that tickled my imagination.

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: wmd_2008
I don't think anyone really thinks that bunnies and bears float around in the sky, but when a cloud shows a resemblance to some known object, or in this case unknown object, it tickles the imagination.

Shared my pic of a strange looking cloud that tickled my imagination.

Yes and it's a very cool pic. I did play with the colors a bit. Check it out. These 3 versions of your photo are only increasing light and dark colors, only. So it's still the original image just with the colors exaggerated.

These pics are dark because I was focusing on making the cloud as visible as possible. (I could brighten up the street but then the cloud almost disappears from the extra brightness.)

So here's hoping to make the cloud as visible as possible, by darkening the whole image:



^That might be about as solid as I can make the cloud look (by changing colors).

Here it is with like twice as much color saturation:



Finally here is a very dark pic. The purpose is to show that the outer-edge of the cloud takes on a hard appearance, and the edge even seems to show a regular shape of square pieces sticking out, alternating with square indentations (like the edge of a gear, so you can see the alternating teeth of the gear).



^Also note that part of the puffy cloud shape, starts to resemble a set of regular-spaced lights or portholes (right above the bright-glowing part).

Also note that in the far left (almost touching the tree) are two very small dots in the sky, which could be anything. (Like birds, or like little craft approaching the mother-ship lol.)

Hope you got some enjoyment from these pics. I enjoyed playing with the colors to attempt better visibility of the cloud / cloaked mothership.

a reply to: peacefulpete
Great pics!

I love clouds. My mother and I still play the "What Do You See" game. Even old broads like us like to take a walk on the wild side of our imaginations, sometimes.

a reply to: peacefulpete

I didn't add new details dipstick the software can enhance details even from jpeg YOU don't have a clue what your talking about if you did you wouldn't be using Picasa you would at least use GIMP not quite as good as Photoshop or Lightroom but free of charge and way better than Picasa.

a reply to: peacefulpete



Those are ALTERED pictures

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: peacefulpete

I NEVER made the sharp line

lIGHTROOM far better than Picasa plain and simple so I used an adjustment brush just to edit the area around the clouds to show more detail in the cloud area WITHOUT having to mess about with the buildings in the foreground.

With lightroom I can change exposure,white point,dark point,hue,saturation, sharpness/clarity, highlights/shadows etc all INDIVIDUALLY.

The problem with phone pictures they tend to be jpeg pictures so the image recorded by the camera sensor is processed in the phone and DOWNGRADED to jpeg.

JPEG is a lossy format colour depth is not as good as RAW, artifacts are introduced.

The picture was 3024 x 4032 (12mp) pixels the file size is under 2mb IF I had taken the picture with my 16mp DSLR the file size would have been 4912 X 3264 and 15.9 mb as I take all my pictures in RAW format which means that ALL the data recorded by every pixel is in the file UNPROCESSED by the camera.

It's clouds nothing else.

Blah blah blah.

You f*cked up a photo, so it's not a photo anymore, and now you're writing paragraphs about it.

WMD please do not respond to any more of my posts, and please do not respond to any threads I make.

My posts are not intended for you or your buddy InhaleExhale, or any other trolls.

My posts and threads are intended for people who share a genuine interest in the topics that I post or make threads about, f*ckhead.

a reply to: peacefulpete

My posts and threads are intended for people who share a genuine interest in the topics that I post or make threads about, f*ckhead.

ATS is not a blog.
So... good luck with that.