Some days the light just isn’t with you. Dull, overcast, just plain unappealing. But some images can be salvaged and this is an example.
Originally I dismissed this shot, but did not delete it, as being too dark and dull. I rarely delete images unless there is something horribly wrong, such as blurry or way overexposed. You never know what tools and skills await saving something and storage has become cheaper every year. And even the good images can be made better when reworked.
This is from last June. I only made two frames and they sat until now. I wouldn’t say this is my best or even one of my better frog images but it is worth sharing and on Frog Friday that’s what it’s about.
The new masking tools in Lightroom were a big help as well as doing some burning and dodging in Photoshop. While some people dismiss Photoshop as cheating, it can be used in the same way photographers of yore worked in the wet darkroom, strategically adjusting light, using preferred chemicals, selecting just the right paper, etc.
Btw, this is a male green frog-Lithobates clamitans aka Rana clamitans. The large tympanum behind the eye says male (larger than the eye=male, smaller=female)and the ridge along the back says green frog. Maybe this guy had chicken skin from a June morning chill. 🙂
Happy Frog TGIF.
Stephen Gingold Nature Photography Blog 
Nice save!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Liz!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It certainly paid off to revisit this one with the new tools–very nice work, with a very handsome subject.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Gary. Every once in a while I discover something worthwhile in the archives which is why I rarely delete anything.
LikeLike
Pingback: More Cricket Frogs | Mike Powell
I like the contrast between the long, straight reeds (?) the frog is perched on and the surrounding lily pads. He looks like a tourist who’s chosen the interstate rather than that back roads and has paused to say, “There’s nothing interesting out here.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
That could be the case as he lingered for only a few minutes. Maybe his croak could be translated to “boring!”
LikeLike
It is remarkable what you achieved. Like a magician you even made it feel like it was a warmer, sunny day! Happy Frog Day!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Melissa. I suppose I could have achieved some of this if I had a warming filter and exposed a bit longer. Photoshop is a great tool.
LikeLike
yes, in the hands of someone who knows how to use it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You did a remarkable job in this photo. I also don’t know why some people consider photoshop use cheating, and although I tend to try to take a good image in camera, sometimes. As you mentioned, the light just doesn’t cooperate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Alessandra.
I know a few photographers with their noses in the air amid claims of getting it right in the camera. As if the camera itself doesn’t alter images. Getting the best possible exposure is the start, not the end. They should use only a 50mm “normal” lens to duplicate what their eyes naturally see. Film photographers manipulate the light and color by film choice. Little of photography reflects reality. And nothing makes creativity more personal than presenting the images as you wish it to be seen rather than how the engineers in the camera factory think it should be shown.
LikeLike
A dark image can be spruced up with the new editing tools demonstrated so well in your frog photo today. Great job, Steve.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Peter.
LikeLike
Very nice! Interesting frog facts too 🐸
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Belinda. Glad you enjoyed the image and information.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very Nice Adjusted Frog Image!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Reed. One never knows what’s lurking in the archives.
LikeLike
You did a fine job salvaging this picture. The edited version has a life that the original version lacked.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Steve. I’ve always enjoyed processing. Not as much as actually being in the field but the process of improving or even rescuing an image is almost as special as the magic that happens when one is watching an image develop in the wet darkroom. Almost.
LikeLike
Wow. What a great save.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Linda. Worth the time and especially when you end up with something worthwhile.
LikeLike
That’s a fine frog you have there, hehe! I can never understand why people think that Photoshop is ‘cheating’. Would they think the same of traditional darkroom work? Most Photoshop work is just the digital equivalent. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Ann! I always think of Ansel Adams’ remark about someone standing next to him at the time of exposure hardly recognizing the image after he did his darkroom work. He did some things creatively and with precision that is hard to do even in Photoshop.Some of that attitude comes from people who see the work of photographers that is presented as real when they have hugely manipulated the image.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can certainly understand some suspicion when photographers do huge manipulation and claim that’s just how things were!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Awesome! I think this was worth sharing both for the frog, which is a great representation of the species, and for how you’re able to bring out what’s in the image. If some folks want to call it cheating, so be it. Some of us see it as both a creative tool and one to enhance what could be used as a natural history sort of image showcasing a species in its best light. Nicely done. I’m glad you shared this one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Todd. People are entitled to their opinion but most often, in this example of art, it isn’t out of knowledge of the subject but simply denying its value which seems to be all the rage in most aspects of American life. No one asks a painter, well probably no one, whether the light or color was like that, whether there was or wasn’t an attractive element like in the picture, etc. Too many assume photography has to be strictly representational. If you are not familiar with Guy Tal, I’d recommend reading some of his essays. He definitely considers himself an artist who uses the medium of photography. Here’s an interview with him by Alister Benn, whose channel is worth subscribing to and watching.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I enjoy reading Guy Tal, though it has been a while. I have a few of his books, both physical and ebook, and I remember reading his columns in LensWork when I was a subscriber. I appreciate the link to the video. I’m not familiar with Alister Benn and will check out his channel.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The technical changes you wrought are fascinating to see. The frog’s tympanum reminds me of a precious stone, maybe amber. I admire a man who wears his jewelry well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I stopped wearing jewelry a while ago but maybe I should reconsider that. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why not?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just not my/our thing. I do wear my wedding ring some of the time and Mary Beth hers as well as some hoop earrings. But for the most part neither of us chooses to adorn ourselves.
LikeLike
Oh, in addition, Mary Beth is quite frugal and would be more upset with me spending significant cash on such a gift than pleased with actually wearing it. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person