Blurring out backgrounds using photoshop? (1 Viewer)

NoSpringChicken said:

Thanks Mono. I have had a quick play with an image and this is the result. It was done very quickly and crudely and would need a lot more care for a decent result but I guess this is on the right lines. The other image gives an idea of what it was like before mutilation!

Ron

Click to expand...

That is a great capture, and the blur in pic one is great :t:

Musoman said:

Lots of lenses sell with max ap of f4, but they wont be able to charge a premium

Click to expand...

Not sure why you insist on being so difficult, but here we go again. The field of 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses is a prime marketing target for the major manufacturers. A lens marketed as a 70-200mm f/4 will not compete in that niche; ergo it will not sell.

Neil

You're telling me that 70-200mm f4 dont sell, so these are non sellers ?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/70-200mm-f4-is.htm

whatever dude - I can't be bothered with you. Really you should try growing up.

Neil

I'm addressing your statement that 70-200mm f4 lenses dont sell. You're the one that needs to grow ' dude'

I agree with everything everyone is stating , regarding primes, stopping down, accuracy of autofocus, speed of focussing, bokeh etc etc, also possibly a little kudos in owning an F2.8 lens too, but my sole point was, why make an F2.8 lens thats unusable at that aperture. If i bought an F2.8 lens, i would most certainly expect to use it at that aperture on occasions.

The Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 on the other hand is a much better lens optically to the Sigma but slightly suspect in terms of AF speed and accuracy. DPreview looked at all the 70-200mm f2.8's not so long ago (the MkI versions that is). When you're talking the prices the Sigma and Tamron sell for compared to the Canon/Nikon's then you've got to accept some compromises here and there. Ditto for most cut-price f2.8's, it's just something about large apertures (please no technical explanations of it!) that increases undesirable lens affects, be thankful for crop sensors in this respect, it's even worse on FF sensors.
The more expensive lenses with better glass and more special elements do a much better job of controlling these problems and that's why we have to pay a premium for them and are truly usable wide open, used my 300mm f2.8 quite a few times like that lately.

Sigma and Tamron lenses as a rule have some compromises to sell cheaper than the own brands, that's the way they are marketed and make their money but at the end of the day if you want the very best of performance you've got to buy expensive own brand lenses.

Strayed a bit off topic here but hey, it's what Birdforum's famous for. :-O

If you have to use the built in features of PS, there are several ways as mentioned above of blurring backgrounds, adding a layer mask, blurring the layer mask with 1.0 pixel radius and then painting on the layer mask with black or white to reveal or conceal selected areas. Getting good at selecting your bird and choosing an amount of blur that isn't extreme will help make your image look more natural.