From: Ali on
I photographed a diamond ring recently, but the final images lack 'sparkle'.
Any tricks and tips for adding a 'sparkle' to it post process?

The ideal result I am looking for is very subtle. A bit like a catch light
in the eyes, where it adds sparkle, but most people wouldn't really notice
it too much.

From: pico on

"Ali" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
news:VPadnX7LQbyF14PanZ2dnUVZ8q6unZ2d(a)pipex.net...
>I photographed a diamond ring recently, but the final images lack
>'sparkle'. Any tricks and tips for adding a 'sparkle' to it post process?
>
> The ideal result I am looking for is very subtle. A bit like a catch
> light in the eyes, where it adds sparkle, but most people wouldn't really
> notice it too much.

Filter - Render - Lens Flare (on a layer above. Create a spot, flare it.
Change size. Change layer tranparency.) Not great, but maybe you can make it
work.


From: frederick on
pico wrote:
> "Ali" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:VPadnX7LQbyF14PanZ2dnUVZ8q6unZ2d(a)pipex.net...
>> I photographed a diamond ring recently, but the final images lack
>> 'sparkle'. Any tricks and tips for adding a 'sparkle' to it post process?
>>
>> The ideal result I am looking for is very subtle. A bit like a catch
>> light in the eyes, where it adds sparkle, but most people wouldn't really
>> notice it too much.
>
> Filter - Render - Lens Flare (on a layer above. Create a spot, flare it.
> Change size. Change layer tranparency.) Not great, but maybe you can make it
> work.
>
>

Freeware "the Gimp" has much better choice and
implementation of lens flare / starburst / sparkle etc flare
effect filter choices than Photoshop without third party
plugins.

I use both PS and Gimp - there are a few things where the
Gimp exceeds PS, and for what you need to do, it's one of
those cases.
From: John McWilliams on
Ali wrote:
> I photographed a diamond ring recently, but the final images lack
> 'sparkle'. Any tricks and tips for adding a 'sparkle' to it post process?
>
> The ideal result I am looking for is very subtle. A bit like a catch
> light in the eyes, where it adds sparkle, but most people wouldn't
> really notice it too much.

Shoot them over. Experiment with light at different angles. Unless
you're an expert in PS, you'll get better results this way.

--
john mcwilliams
From: frederick on
RC_Moonpie wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:14:49 +1300, frederick <lost(a)sea.com> wrote:
>
>> pico wrote:
>>> "Ali" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:VPadnX7LQbyF14PanZ2dnUVZ8q6unZ2d(a)pipex.net...
>>>> I photographed a diamond ring recently, but the final images lack
>>>> 'sparkle'. Any tricks and tips for adding a 'sparkle' to it post process?
>>>>
>>>> The ideal result I am looking for is very subtle. A bit like a catch
>>>> light in the eyes, where it adds sparkle, but most people wouldn't really
>>>> notice it too much.
>>> Filter - Render - Lens Flare (on a layer above. Create a spot, flare it.
>>> Change size. Change layer tranparency.) Not great, but maybe you can make it
>>> work.
>>>
>>>
>> Freeware "the Gimp" has much better choice and
>> implementation of lens flare / starburst / sparkle etc flare
>> effect filter choices than Photoshop without third party
>> plugins.
>>
>> I use both PS and Gimp - there are a few things where the
>> Gimp exceeds PS, and for what you need to do, it's one of
>> those cases.
>
>
> Does Gimp work on hi resolution CMYK files?
>
>
Who cares?
Did the OP ask this? Most people have no need for CMYK
files. If you do, then use PS.