Well done Matt. It is so true that you have to think outside of the box. It really shows that can't have enough Start-2-Finish examples to drive a point home.
Matt, another great video. "Put down that brush !" I needed this. I want to compliment your bird photography, another level ! Just started shooting birds this year and it's a lot harder than it looks !
Thank you so very much, the wing tips of Red Kites have been driving me crazy, I was attempting, badly, to use the brush 😂 now using background and/or Sky it’s fixed, life saver, or sanity saver 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 Cheers Matt 👍🏼
Great presentation. I dove into bird photography a year ago and these methods of masking will save a lot of time. I appreciate you sharing your expertise.
Just cleaned up the bleed between the wingtips of flying ducks using subtract sky. IT WORKED!!!!!!! Those BIF shots are going to be rescued. Thanks Matt.
That was brilliant! We are all guilty of trying to do the “correct thing” and don't take the time to explore the “what ifs” and find a process that actually works better! Well done.
G’day, Matt. I’ve been following you off and on for what must be over 10 years. I’m loving you’re latest videos. They’re realistic. So often you see someone should a technique, try it, and only to find that it doesn’t work on your photo. Because they’ve used the perfect photo to show off the technique. But you’re showing real world examples. As a wildlife, mainly birds (osprey) and landscape photographers I’ve really appreciating your videos. Thank you.
Wow, this is a neat way of doing it. Being South African I naturally shoot wildlife 🐆🦁🦓🦏🐘🦅🦉very regularly. I've always just used the brush on my wildlife photos which can become very tedious. Using the select sky or select background or color range looks like a much faster way of doing it Thanks Matt
This is a really good tutorial. I never thought about using the Subtract from mask feature like this! Thanks Matt! (Enjoying your “Inside the Composition” course a lot, almost done!)
Another excellent video. Also great philosophy: it doesn't have to be perfect! I hate to think how many hours (days? months?) I've spent trying to mask something perfectly that, in the end, was not needed.
Perfect I like to see more workarounds .. just like intersect which is missing in Lightroom, for example use sky mask and subtract with linear gradient then invert that would fix it
Thanks Matt for the linear gradient subtract tip! Really helpful in my landscapes. And when were you in Ridgway...based on that quick pic in PS of chimney rock and court house :) 😃 👌
Well Matt, you must deal with those fairly new to editing (LR/PS), at least with RU-vid. It must get a little exhausing, how do you stay challenged? Maintain cutting edge work?
Thanks so much Matt. I was editing a similar image of an Osprey and had the same issue with the wing tips. Choosing "subtract" worked a treat. BTW what would you do with the other wing tip in your example as there is did not work so well there probably due to the green foliage there?
Thanks Matt. I've got to ask, is that LR the latest version? What with the way the masking tools work. I think I am one iteration back and it won't run on Mac OS running Catalina.
"Good enough" is actually be "great": I think "perfection" when masking is actually not the way to go, because if you try to perfectly mask you will get "hard" edges and probably a fake look since it will look like a cutout. When masking I often try to feather en let the images have natural edge "blending" so that it feels real or natural.
All these fancy auto selections in many cases are still weaker than the classic channel pulling, IMHO. In the last example ALL the grass could be easily selected via the channels. 😉
Not even close, but if it works for you, great. But there is no way channels are better with today's modern tools. (And that's coming from a fan of channel selections way back)
@@MattKloskowski channels and the Pen tool are my best friends for masking, though I assume the development of the technology, on the 2nd image it did a good job
