/Tutorials/ Get into lomo with Photoshop
05/10/2006 | Filed under Design > Tutorials
Vignetting, noise and colour saturation are all image imperfections you normally hope to avoid, but not when it comes to lomography. Craig Grannell introduces you to this digital craze
Fads are strange things. Some, such as Dayglo socks, we’re happy to see move out of our lives, but others, such as lomography, or ‘lomo’ to its friends, are more appealing. The lomo bug has bitten deep in recent years, and entire communities have sprung up around it. Primarily, the movement uses dubious Russian cameras and cross-processing to create vibrant, highly saturated images, which often have imperfections that are said to add character to the photos.
The thing is, if you take a lomo shot, there’s no way of turning it into a clean image. You might also have images that you’d like to apply the effect to, but it’s now too late to do so. Ultimately, a decent compromise is to fake the effect in Photoshop. Although this won’t provide random elements evident in a roll of shots taken with a real lomo camera, you’ll be able to rework any shot you choose and also control and fine-tune the outcome. Crucially, by using layers, you won’t need to amend your photo at all and can also rapidly slot new images into the effect.
Expert tip The real thing Digital effects are all very well, but for some people, only the real thing will do. If you have a hankering for lomography, you can find out more about it (and check out countless lomo images or shop for a lomo camera) by heading to www.lomography.com.
It’s also worth noting that it’s the processing rather than the camera that produces most of the effect. By processing a slide film taken with any camera as a standard colour print film (something referred to as ‘cross processing’), the saturation and colour shifts evident in lomo should be achieved.
Start: Find a photo Choose an image to work with. To work with the settings as defined here, image dimensions of approx 1,600x1,200 pixels are recommended (use Image > Image Size to resize your image, if required).
|
2 Straighten the image Unless you used a tripod when taking your photo, it’s probably a bit wonky. Ensure View > Rulers is checked and drag down a guide or two. Float your background layer (Alt/Option+click) and use Free Transform (Ctrl/Command+T) to rotate and straighten your image.
|
3 Crop and make corrections If you’ve rotated your image, use Photoshop’s Crop tool to remove the transparent corner pieces. Make any other corrections that you deem necessary, such as correcting any colour casts, by using the various options within the Image > Adjustments sub-menu.
|
4 Shift colours Create a Color Balance adjustment layer using the Layers palette. Lomo cameras emphasise reds and greens, so use the sliders to increase these colours. We set the first two Color Levels values to +6 and zero in Shadows, +20 and +5 in Midtones and +15 and +5 in Highlights.
|
5 Increase the colour saturation As stated earlier, lomo cameras over-saturate colours. Therefore, create a Hue/ Saturation adjustment layer and drag the Saturation slider to a value of 20. Note that because we’re working with adjustment layers, all these settings can be edited later, if required.
|
6 Increase the contrast Create a third adjustment layer, this time choosing Brightness/Contrast from the menu. Move the Contrast slider to a value of +20. This will emphasise highlights and shadows. Note that the lomo effect tends to work well on images with plenty of existing contrast.
|
7 Over-expose To apply an over-exposed effect to your image press D to reset the toolbar colours and X to make the foreground colour white. Choose the Gradient tool and select Foreground to Background and Radial Gradient. On a new layer, drag a gradient from the centre to the right-hand edge.
|
8 Change the mode Change the mode of the layer created in step 7 to Overlay. This blends the layer into the image below, retaining the highlights and shadows of the base layer. You’ll see another marked boost in the image’s vibrancy at this point, and it already resembles some lomo images.
|
9 Make a selection We’re now going to create a vignette effect. Create a new layer and then select the Marquee tool. Set Feather to 200 pixels and then drag from the top-left to the bottom-right of the canvas. You should see a selection created with rounded edges, due to the Feather setting.
|
10 Fill the selection Invert the selection (Shift+Ctrl+I/ Shift+Command+I) and fill it with black. Change the layer’s mode to Overlay and this will continue to enhance the saturation and exposure effects. Although the effect isn’t as random or circular as the real-life effect, it works well enough..
|
11 Emphasise the vignette effect Repeat steps 9 and 10, but this time set the Feather value to 250 pixels. This will further emphasise the vignette effect and create more graduated colour from the centre of the image outwards.
|
12 Edit opacity settings The next few steps show how flexible the effect can be when it’s created in Photoshop. If, for example, you find the result from the three layers created between steps 7 and 11 too harsh, try reducing the Opacity setting of the over exposure layer to 50 per cent.
|
13 Toggle layers Adjustment layers have been used for a number of elements, so each can be toggled. For example, turn off the Color Balance 1 layer to see how the image looks now. You could also use layers to add variations of each of the adjustment layers to an overall lomo template.
|
14 Black and white reduction Lomo cameras tend to show white as off-white and black as a dark grey. To create this effect, make a Curves adjustment layer. Drag the left-hand handle to ‘Input: 0; Output: 25’ and the right-hand handle to ‘Input: 255; Output: 225’. Position this layer above the others.
|
15 Contrast and saturation If you feel the previous step has reduced the image’s edge too much, double-click Brightness/Contrast 1 and/or Hue/Saturation 1 and increase the settings. Don’t go over the top, though, or the image will appear garish and colour banding will become obvious.
|
16 Add more photos To see how the effect looks with other images, simply paste them above your photo layer, but below all of the adjustment layers and exposure/vignette layers. If you have many images, use Photoshop’s Layer Groups feature (Layer > New > Group) to sort them into sets.
|
17 Add a radial blur Ensure that you save your image as a .psd file, so you can edit it in the future. Flatten the image (Layer > Flatten Image), duplicate the Background layer and select the copy. Go to Filter > Blur > Radial Blur. Set Amount to 10, Blur Method to Zoom and Quality to Best.
|
18 Add a layer mask Click the Add layer mask button. Choose black as your toolbar’s foreground colour and select the Gradient tool. Choose Foreground to Transparent and Radial Blur. Drag a gradient from the image’s centre to the right-hand edge. Reduce the layer’s opacity to 50 per cent.
|
Add some noise Flatten the image and go to Filter > Noise > Add Noise. Set Amount to 5 per cent, Distribution to Uniform and check Monochromatic. Use all these editing effects with care to avoid reducing the image’s impact.
Bookmark with:
Comments
nickandkeith / 05/10/2006 / 17:31 / http://nickandkeith.blogspot.com/
WARNING: TOTALLY BIASED RESPONSE FOLLOWS.
Your description of lomography runs entirely counter to my experience. I was given my first lomo in 1998. The whole point of the camera was "don't think, just shoot", capture a moment in time without worrying about framing, composition etc. It encouraged lots of shots and then enjoying what you got when the film was processed. It removed the "pressure" of tryinng to take the "perfect shot". It was and is fun.
Instead, your post says:
1. that Lomo is a "digital craze" - I've never used a digital lomo and didn't think there was such a thing. What does this mean?
2. it's a fad - not really, if only because taking photos with different types of cameras is part of the joy of photography and as digital pics are now more or less becoming standard, film-based shots take on more resonance.
3. it uses "dubious Russian cameras" - the original Lomo was and is manufactured by an advanced optical manufacturer in St Petersburg, Russia. From Wikipedia: "The company is ISO 9001 certified and exports world-wide. Night-vision devices and telescopes account for 30% of the company's exports. Germany is the largest importer of LOMO products." While the cameras themselves represent a "minor product" for Lomo Plc, they are by no means dubious. Having said that, a few of the more recent Lomo products (there are a range of cameras on offer) are of varying quality, but on the two occassions where I've had a problem, the supplier has willingly repaired or replaced them, no questions asked.
4. "if you take a lomo shot, there’s no way of turning it into a clean image" – that runs counter to the whole Lomo idea. Why take a Lomo shot if you're worried about "clean" images?
5. "it’s the processing rather than the camera that produces most of the effect":
You can use cross-processing if you wish, but there's nothing that says you have to in order to achieve the "desired effect". From Wikipedia: "The 35 mm LOMO LC-A camera employed an unusual lens which produced large amounts of distortion at the edges of the image whilst keeping the center sharp." Inother words, the lens makes the difference.
Wikipedia goes on to point out that "The company's promotional website for Lomography showcases many high contrast photographs, with unusual saturation and color, that were created using the technique called cross processing", but the main things are the lens and the approach to taking the shots. Otherwise, it's just Photoshop. And that really kills the sponteneity.
Sorry to be a pedant, but as I warned, I am biased. If anyone is thinking about Lomography, buy a Lomo. The Photoshopped results just won't feel the same.
Gary / 07/10/2006 / 14:00 / http://www.spiritbased.co.uk
Here, here!
LOMOgraphy can't be emulated in Photoshop any more than film can be reproduced in Final Cut Pro.
Interesting take on it though.
Cliff Irongeezer Eggink / 10/10/2006 / 14:34 / http://irongeezer.com
Great, however, perhaps many people that visit Web sites want simple, calm easy to navigate straight forward info. The many regular visitors to our two free, non-profit sites, www.irongeezer.com & www.irongeezer.org tell that all day long. Maybe the old, "less is more?'
nickandkeith / 11/10/2006 / 11:19 / http://nickandkeith.blogspot.com/
I'm sorry, what? What does "Irongeezer's" comment have to do with Lomo or what's been said before??? No-one said anything about simplicity, calmness or navigation troubles.The tutorial was quite clear, I had no problems with that. Or was it just a quick stab at self-promotion? If so, may I just say that the few, very occasional visitors to our not-for-profit, not-very-regularly-updated, rather feeble attempt at blogging humour, nickandkeith.blogspot.com, haven't said much of anything at all (and what they have wasn't realy suitable for publication, the filthy buggers). Nonetheless, I imagine that they would argue that "more is more".
Robin / 27/01/2007 / 10:50 / http://www.rottenlead.com
You have put together a great method of vignetting a photo and boosting color to produce the lomo look. This works well if you a replicating a photo taken on the LC-A infinite setting. If you take a photo on portrait, the little bubble of a lens creates a lot of distortion in the form of circles. Have a look at a photo of my son here http://www.flickr.com/photos/inrepose/310682576/in/set-72157594452865421/ The background is monstly a circle type blur which would be a lot harder to replicate in Photoshop. A simple CS2 lens blue just does not match it. If you can do it, drop me an email, I would like to replicate the complete range of Lomo photos.
Mike / 13/02/2007 / 23:05
Awww... ain't that sweet...
Those digital monkeys are trying to emulate good old analogue tech - how very post-modern/ironic/zeitgeist.
I love Photoshop to bits, but if you want Lomo, buy Lomo and THEN stick your shots through Photoshop. Cutting out the Lomo part is totally defeating the point of Lomography, surely.
Is it just me, or did everything look brighter in the 80's?
GQ / 14/03/2007 / 21:06 / http://www.qnetx.com
My own definition of Lomography is ... Unintended or poorly executed snapshots using a crappy, low cost, low quality, camera lens with no regards to any of the technical rules of good photography. Then let serendipity lead you to find art in the results.
I now realize that my first experience with photography at the age of seven was actually lomography. The passion that I have for photography during the last 40 years was set in motion with the glee and joy I experienced of using a cheap plastic camera and pointing it at anything at anytime. I didn't know better. Now that I do, I strive to improve my technical mastery of classical photography but in the process I miss the freedom and surprise of those early days.
GQ
cj / 01/11/2007 / 20:50 / http://www.lomography.com
the oca costs 2007 quid film processing costs about a fiver so its not really cheap. And the joy of lomo is to have fun don't worry don't think just shoot. I'd rather take a roll of random impulse shots then to subscribe to a digital mag with my SLr and come out with bland landscape etc. I think u was havinmore fun with photos than with ure years of photo rules.
Julian / 08/11/2007 / 18:51
I actually really like 'lomography' and I alsoI like..erh. more semi/professional photography as well. I'll call that "cannonography" because I use a canon camera when I need to take a photograph and I'm a semi/professional photographer.
I think that both the astetic possibillities offered by lomography" and "canonography" are important tools to me the 'photographer', as is "digitalography" and yes "photoshopCS3ography"
I hope people don't buy into the lomo "lifestyle" hype and the term "Lomography" is only a name that honestly is nothing but "propagandography". I like the lomo but the hype is homo.
Peter / 14/12/2007 / 22:55 / http://www.funfancydress.com
Did I miss something...What is Lomography?
Joe / 27/03/2008 / 21:32
Hi; Thank you for such a clear and useful tutorial. I would like to have a Lomo camera, but, as millions of others, I live in a country where to get a Lomo camera is a bit less than a fantasy. Those Lomo freaks probably believe that the entire world can be reduced to Europe. We, the ones outside the select circle of pretentious lompgraphist, have to be try our best with our modest Photoshop resources. Thanks man, for teaching us how to create a nice photo effect, just for us; the plain people. We, then, can shot with an vulgar and inexpensive digital camera, without thinking like a pseudo-artistic, purist dilettante . Jaranita
Melissa Maples / 18/04/2008 / 15:35 / http://melissamaples.com/
As a fan of both Lomography and Photoshop, I've been playing with your tutorial all afternoon with some very interesting results... thanks for taking the time to put this together - it's fun to play around with stuff just for fun, which I think is very much in keeping with the Lomo philosophy.
GG / 22/07/2008 / 08:11
Why all the hate? If you love old-fashioned lomography, what are you reading this article for? Go back to your lomo camera and stop bitching. As a graphic designer, it's quite useful to be able to imitate a particular look, especially when a clients insists on it and the real thing is not available. I, for one, am thankful for this tutorial.
Lex / 22/07/2008 / 16:38
To the critics, you guys are bunch of tight-ass snobs. Just enjoy the tutorial and don't be digital-nazis
Dan / 01/08/2008 / 02:54
Very nice tutorial. What I love most about my LC-A is the great color. The color shift and saturation boost in your tutorial is just the right amount to give that same look to my digital shots. I really appreciate this, I've tried it a few times now and it really improves the color immensely.
clare / 05/08/2008 / 16:11
I don't give a monkeys about the negative comments. The article was useful to me.
As a fairly intelligent person I can deduce that this is one persons opinion. I would like to know what people think about using slide film in a lomo fisheye camera and xprocessing. Will this work or is it too much???
Any comments welcome please!
mike / 24/08/2008 / 18:14 / http://www.bozboz.co.uk
I found this really useful thanks! I guess you maybe wont get the same results via photoshop, but if your just trying to smarten up a webpage i think this will be great for a bit of variety
mahia / 30/10/2008 / 15:14
I use a HOLGA and use photoshop to replicate the lomo effect. What on earth are people complaining about if we attempt to replicate a digital shot? The paradigm of "shoot from the hip" is not exclusively a lomo principle. But has instead, been championed by the lomography brand.
Just because you have chosen to follow the "shoot from the hip" principle, does not mean we all have to follow it. I take great pride in trying to find that definitive moment.
Why such a hostility towards digitalised effects? What gives a chemical reaction more authenticity than a digital one? I bet you would never tell if my photos were taken on a holga, or manipulated in photoshop from a digital camera.
Ogum / 23/12/2008 / 21:55 / http://www.ogum.co.uk/
Great tutorial - I wish I had searched before I did a similar one of my own! (although a few steps are different but it is on my blog if anyone wants to look).
Some people miss the point of photoshop editing of pictures. You can have a gorgeous "normal" digital picture and then wonder if it would look good as (for example) a lomo-style picture. This does not belittle lomography, which is nothing unique just a call for more spotenaity.
In pre-digital days, the argument was about how much dodging, burning, cross-processing etc that took place in the dark room - now the die hard purists say the same about photoshop... Does it really matter what processes have been used (HDR is a good example) if the end result is a pleasing picture? Despite what people think photographs are not reality - even film ones. At best they are a freeze of a moment in time showing what the photographer was looking at.
Mike / 02/06/2009 / 15:56 / http://www.icoste.com
I am also confused about what "lomography" actually is!?
