Can You REALLY Make Money Blogging? [7 Things I Know About Making Money from Blogging]

Every now and again I am pulled aside at a conference or am emailed and/or tweeted by someone wanting to get the “real” scoop on whether it is possible to make money blogging.

• Is it really possible to make a living from blogging?
• Is it just a small number of people making money from blogging?
• Is it only really possible to make money blogging if you write about the topic of making money blogging?

I completely understand the questions and would probably want to add one more:

• If it is really possible to make money blogging, how likely is it that you’ll succeed?

I’ve written many times here on ProBlogger about this in the hope of giving a realistic picture of the topic, but I think it is worth touching on again because there is a lot of misinformation out there right now.

On one hand, we see hype on the topic. Periodically someone will claim to be able to make millions from blogging quickly. These claims are usually accompanied with the release of a product or service (i.e. they are marketing spin).

On the other hand, I periodically see people writing about how it is impossible to make money blogging (or that anyone claiming to be full time is either a scammer, a liar, or is selling something on the topic of making money online).

The reality is somewhere between these two extremes.

7 Things I know about making money from blogging

1. It is possible

I’ve been blogging for just under ten years and for nine of those I’ve been making money blogging. It started out as just a few dollars a day but in time it gradually grew to becoming the equivalent of a part-time job, then a full-time job, and more recently into a business that employs others.

I used to talk about the specific levels of my earnings when I started ProBlogger but felt increasingly uncomfortable about doing so (it felt a little voyeuristic and a little like a big-headed boasting exercise and I didn’t really see the point in continuing to do it)— but my income has continued to grow each year since I began.

On some levels I was at the right place at the right time—I got into blogging early (in 2002 … although I felt I was late to it at the time) and have been fortunate enough to have started blogs at opportune times on the topics I write about.

However I know of quite a few other bloggers who make a living from blogging, many of whom have not been blogging anywhere near as long as I have.

For some it is a hobby that keeps them in coffee; for others it is the equivalent of a part time job/supplementing other income from “real jobs” or helping their family out as they attend to other commitments (raising a family). For others it is a full-time thing.

I’ll give you some examples below.

2. There is no single way to monetize blogs

Recently at our Melbourne ProBlogger event I featured numerous Australian bloggers in our speaker lineup who fit somewhere in the part-time to full-time spectrum. They included:

• Nicole Avery (Parenting/Organization Blog)
• Jules Clancy (Food Blog)
• Nikki Parkinson (Fashion Blog)
• Mrs Woog (‘Life’ Blog)
• Gavin Aung Than (Cartoon Blog)
• Cintia Gonzalez (Craft Blog)
• Christina Butcher (Hair Blog)
• Caz and Craig Makepeace (Travel Blog)
• Nathalie Brown (Child Behaviour Blog)

The year before, we had others, including:

• Lucy Feagins (Design Blog)
• Emma Merkas (Dating Blog)
• Chris Hunter (Motorbike Blog)
• Phoebe Montague (Fashion Blog)

Most of these bloggers are full-time (or well on the way to being full-time bloggers). They come from a wide array of niches and all monetize quite differently—doing everything from selling advertising, to having membership areas, to selling ebooks, to running affiliate promotions, to promoting their offline businesses, to selling themselves as speakers, to having book deals, and so on. Many have a combination of different income streams.

They are all also Australian, and are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what is happening here in Australia—the same thing is being replicated around the globe.

There are many ways to monetize a blog. To give you a quick sense of the many methods check out this “money map” I created a year or so back, which outlines just some that I brainstormed (click to enlarge).

I also recorded this free hour-and-twenty-minute webinar giving an introduction to the topic.

3. There are no formulas

From time to time, people have released products that claim to be formulas for success when it comes to making money online. They outline steps to follow to “guarantee” you’ll make money.

In my experience there is no formula.

Each full-time blogger I’ve met in the last ten years has forged their own path and has a unique story to tell. They have often acted on hunches and made surprising discoveries along the way.

There are certainly similarities in many of the stories but each blogger has their own personality and style, each one is reaching a different audience, and each niche tends to monetize differently.

The key lesson is to be aware of what others are doing and to learn what you can from each other, but to also be willing to forge your own path as well!

4. Many niches monetize

One common critique of the topic of monetizing of blogs is that the only people making money from blogging are the ones writing about how to make money blogging.

This is simply not true.

In the above list of speakers from our Melbourne event you’ll notice I included topic/niche of each blogger. None sell products teaching others to make money blogging—all are on blogging on “normal,” every-day topics.

My own experience of having a blog about blogging (ProBlogger) and a blog about Photography is that it is my photography blog that is by far the most profitable blog (I’d estimate it’s ten times more profitable).

I’ve interviewed numerous full-time bloggers of late in a webinar series including:

• Sarah Wilson
• Tsh Oxenreider
• Ana White

Interestingly, none of them make money by teaching others to make money online. Sarah largely blogs about health and wellbeing, Tsh blogs about simple living, and Ana blogs about woodwork.

5. Most bloggers don’t make a full-time living from blogging

Every time I’ve surveyed readers of ProBlogger about their earnings, we’ve seen that those making money from blogging are in the minority.

In a recent survey of 1500 ProBlogger readers we asked about their monthly earnings. What you’re seeing below is the spread of earnings from readers who are attempting to make money blogging (note: not all ProBlogger readers attempt to make money, so not all are included in these results).

Keep in mind that ProBlogger readers are generally newish bloggers—about half of those who took this survey had been blogging for less than two years.

So of those trying to make money blogging, 10% don’t make anything and 28% are making less than 30 cents per day. A total of 63% make less than $3.50 per day.

Let’s be clear—most bloggers who are attempting to make money are not making a living from blogging.

Having said that, of the 1508 bloggers surveyed 65 (4%) are making over $10,000 per month (over six figures per year) and a further 9% were doing over $1000 per month (which is at least a part-time level of income).

My feeling, having been attending blogging conferences for six or so years now, is that the number of full-time bloggers is on the rise, and there are actually quite a few more people now at least making the equivalent of a couple of days’ work a week in income from their blogs.

However, most bloggers don’t make much.

6. It takes time to build

When I dig down into the stats from the survey on income levels above, and do some analysis of those who are in the top income bracket, it is fascinating to look at how long they’ve been blogging.

85% of those in that top income bracket have been blogging for four years or more. Almost all of the others had been blogging for three or four years.

This certainly was my own experience. I blogged for a year without making money and once I started monetizing it was around two years of gradual increases before I approached a full-time income level. It would have been four years before I joined that top bracket of income (over $10,000 per month).

Blogging for money is not a get-rich-quick thing. It takes time to build an audience, to build a brand, and to build trust and a good reputation.

And of course even with four or five years of blogging behind you, there’s no guarantee of a decent income.

7. It takes a lot of work

Longevity is not the only key to a profitable blog. The other common factor that I’ve noticed in most full-time bloggers is that they are people of action.

Passivity and blogging don’t tend to go hand in hand.

Blogging as “passive income stream” is another theme that we hear in many make-money-blogging products, however it is far from my own experience.

I’ve worked harder on my business over the last ten years than I’ve worked on anything in my life before this. It is often fun and gives me energy, but it takes considerable work to create content on a daily basis, to keep abreast of what’s going on in the community, to monitor the business side of things, to create products to sell, to build an audience, and so on.

The key is to build blogs that matter to people, that are original, interesting, and helpful. But this doesn’t just happen—it takes a lot of work.

Conclusions

Yes, it is possible to make money blogging. There is an ever-increasing number of people making money from blogging at a part-time to full-time level —however they are still in the minority.

Those who do make a living from blogging come from a wide range of niches, however one of the most common factors between them is that they’ve been at it for a long while.

How long have you been blogging? Are you looking to make money from it—and have you already? Share your experiences with us in the comments.

References : http://www.problogger.net/archives/2012/11/28/can-you-really-make-money-blogging-7-things-i-know-about-making-money-from-blogging/

How To Resize Images In Photoshop CC

Written by Steve Patterson. In this second tutorial on image resizing in Photoshop CC (Creative Cloud), we’ll learn how to resize our images using the Image Size command. We’ll also learn the important difference between resizing an image and resampling an image, and how the resolution value of your image determines its print size. At the end of the tutorial, we’ll take what we’ve learned and use it to easily figure out the largest possible size that you can print your photo and still get professional looking results!

We took a quick tour of Photoshop CC’s newly redesigned Image Size dialog box in the previous tutorial, including a look at its new preview window, preset image sizes, and new interpolation options designed to maximize image quality, especially when enlarging an image. To get the most from this tutorial, I recommend reading through the previous one before you continue if you haven’t done so already.

Also, just a quick reminder that this series of tutorials is for Photoshop CC, available only with an Adobe Creative Cloud subscription. Users of Photoshop CS6 or earlier will want to read our original How To Resize Images In Photoshop tutorial and other related tutorials in our Digital Photo Essentials section.

Download our tutorials as print-ready PDFs! Learning Photoshop has never been easier!

As you may know, digital photos are made up of pixels, tiny colored squares arranged in such a way that when viewed from a far enough distance, they create the appearance of a continuous image. When we talk in general about resizing a digital photo, there’s really two very different things we could be talking about. We may want to simply change the size at which our digital image will print without changing the number of pixels in the original image. Or, we could be talking about actually changing the size of the digital image itself, making it larger or smaller by adding or removing pixels.

Even though both of these options are often (and incorrectly) lumped together under the term "image resizing",resizing refers specifically to that first option I mentioned, changing the size at which the digital image will printwithout changing the number of pixels in the image. On the other hand, if we’re changing the size of the digital image itself, adding or removing pixels as needed (or in other words, changing its pixel dimensions), that’s known by another name – image resampling.

Since resampling an image is a bit more involved than simply resizing it and changing its print size, I’ve split these topics into two separate tutorials. Here, we’ll cover the options in Photoshop CC’s Image Size dialog box that control print size. In the next tutorial, we’ll expand on what we’ve learned here and cover everything we need to know about resampling, including the all-important interpolation options that can have a major impact on the quality and appearance of the final image.

For now though, we’ll keep things simple. Here’s a photo I have open in Photoshop CC (kids in leaves photo from Shutterstock):

The original photo.

To resize (or resample) an image, we use Photoshop’s Image Size command. To get to it, go up to the Image menu in the Menu Bar along the top of the screen and choose Image Size. Or, press Ctrl+Alt+I (Win) /Command+Option+I (Mac) on your keyboard to access the Image Size command with the handy shortcut:

Going to Image > Image Size.

This opens Photoshop CC’s newly redesigned Image Size dialog box, complete with a new preview window on the left:

The Image Size dialog box in Photoshop CC.

Since my preview window is currently centered on part of the image that isn’t very helpful, I’ll click inside the preview window and, with my mouse button held down, I’ll drag with my mouse to move the image around inside of it:

Click and hold your mouse button, then drag your mouse to reposition the image inside the window.

We can also zoom in and out of the image within the preview window. Move your mouse cursor anywhere within the boundaries of the preview window and a bar appears along the bottom. Click the bar’s plus icon ( + ) to zoom in on the image or the minus icon ( - ) to zoom out. The current zoom level is displayed between the two icons. The default zoom level is 100%, but here, I’ve zoomed out to 25%:

Clicking the minus icon ( – ) to zoom out.

And now that we’ve spent some time discussing the preview window, here’s a bit of secret (okay, so it’s really more of a helpful tip than a secret). When we’re simply resizing an image (changing the size at which it will print), we don’t actually need the preview window for anything. It’s a great feature and as we’ll see in the next tutorial, it does come in very handy when we’re resampling images (adding or removing pixels). But simply changing an image’s print size, as we’re learning how to do here, has no effect on the digital image itself. It keeps its original number of pixels, and those pixels are not touched or harmed in any way. So, since we’re not doing anything to the image itself, there’s really nothing to preview and no real use for the preview window at the moment (that will change, though, in the next tutorial).

To the right of the preview window is where we find the various image size options along with some general information about our photo. At the very top, we see its current file size in megabytes (M) and the current dimensions of the image in pixels (px). Here, we see that my image is currently taking up 34.5 megabytes in my computer’s memory, and it has pixel dimensions of 4256 x 2832. As we’ll see, since all we’re doing is changing the print size of the photo, its original file size and pixel dimensions should not change at all:

The Image Size and Dimensions information.

Turning The Resample Option Off

If you look down below the Width, Height and Resolution options (which we’ll look at in a moment), you’ll find the important Resample option. This single option controls whether we’re resizing or resampling the image. By default, it’s enabled (checked) which means we’d be changing the number of pixels in the image if we leave it enabled. We don’t want to do that. We’re only interested in changing the print size of the image for now, so click inside its checkbox to uncheck it and turn the option off:

When resizing images, turn the Resample option off.

Width, Height And Resolution

With Resample turned off, we can now change the print size of the photo using the Width, Height and Resolutionoptions:

The Width, Height and Resolution options.

Let’s look at how these three options (Width, Height and Resolution) work together to control the print size. The Width and Height options are pretty straightforward. Width determines how wide the image will print, while Height sets how tall it will print. It’s important to note, though, that since we’re not changing the size of the digital image itself, the aspect ratio (that is, the relationship between the width and height of the image) remains locked in place. What that means is, if we enter a new value for the width, Photoshop will automatically enter a new value for the height to match the original aspect ratio. And vice versa, if we enter a new value for the height, Photoshop will automatically enter a new value for the width.

For example, right now the Image Size dialog box is telling me that my image is set to print 14.187 inches wide x 9.44 inches tall. Let’s say I want it to print only 10 inches wide. To change any of the current values, we simply need to double-click inside the box, which will highlight the current value, and then type in the new value. I’ll double-click inside the Width box and enter in my new value of 10 (inches). When I do, Photoshop automatically changes the Height value to 6.654 inches in order to keep the aspect ratio the same:

When I change the width, Photoshop automatically changes the height.

If I wanted the photo to print as a standard 4×6, I could double-click inside the Height box to highlight the current value and then type in my new value of 4 (inches). Again, to keep the original aspect ratio the same, Photoshop automatically changes the Width value to 6 inches (or in this case, 6.011 inches which is close enough:

Once again, Photoshop changes the other value automatically.

Now, here’s what’s interesting. If we look back up at the top of the dialog box, we see that even though I’ll now be printing the photo at a much smaller size, its actual pixel dimensions have not changed. The digital image itself is still 4256 px wide by 2832 px tall. Its file size, in megabytes, also has not changed:

Changing the print size had no effect on the pixel dimensions (or file size).

The Resolution Value

How is that possible? If there’s still the exact same number of pixels in the photo as there was originally, how is it printing smaller? Well, you may have noticed that each time I changed the width and height of the photo, something else automatically changed as well – the Resolution value. If you didn’t notice, go back and take another look at the screenshots (I’ll wait). At its initial print size of 14.187 inches x 9.44 inches, the Resolution value was 300 pixels/inch. When I reduced the print size to 10 inches x 6.654 inches, the Resolution suddenly increased to 425.6 pixels/inch. And when I reduced the print size even further, down to 6.011 inches x 4 inches, the Resolution value shot all the way up to 708 pixels/inch. Why is that?

Notice that the Resolution value is listed in "pixels/inch" (or "pixels per inch"). That’s because what the Resolution value tells us is how many of the image’s pixels are going to be printed inside every inch of paper. Since all we’re doing is resizing the image (not resampling it), we can’t change the number of pixels in the image. So, if we want the image to print smaller and we can’t change the number of pixels, we simply squeeze more pixels into the same amount of space (in other words, into every inch of paper). Likewise, if we want it to print it larger, we squeeze fewer pixels into every inch.

It’s actually very easy to figure out what the Resolution value needs to be to print an image at a specific size. All we need to do is take either the width or height of our image, in pixels, and divide it by the width or height that we want it to print, in inches. For example, let’s look again at what the Image Size dialog box was initially telling me. At the top, we see that the pixel dimensions of the photo are 4256 px x 2832 px, while the Width, Height and Resolution options tell us that the image will print 14.187 inches x 9.44 inches at a resolution of 300 pixels/inch:

The initial print size and resolution of the photo.

Where did that value of 300 come from? If we take the width of the image in pixels (4256) and divide it by the width it will print in inches (14.187), then 4256 ÷ 14.187 = 299.993, which rounded up is 300. Let’s do the same thing with the height, taking the photo’s height in pixels (2832) and dividing it by the print height in inches (9.44). Using my handy calculator, 2832 ÷ 9.44 = 300, exactly what the Resolution value is showing us. This means that 300 of the photo’s pixels from top to bottom, and 300 of the pixels from left to right, will be printed in every square inch of paper. At that resolution, it will take 14.187 inches x 9.44 inches of paper to fit the image.

When I reduced the print size to 10 inches x 6.654 inches, the Resolution value increased from 300 pixels/inch to 425.6 pixels/inch. Again, where did that 425.6 value come from? We just take the width of the photo in pixels (4256) and divide it by the new print width in inches (10). 4256 ÷ 10 = 425.6. If we do the same thing with the height in pixels (2832), dividing it by the new print height in inches (6.654), 2832 ÷ 6.654 = 425.6. This means that 425.6 image pixels from top to bottom, and 425.6 pixels from left to right, will need to be printed inside every square inch of paper to print a 10 inch x 6.654 inch version of the image:

Increasing the resolution value decreases the print size of the image.

Finally, reducing the print size even further to 6.011 inches x 4 inches caused the resolution value to jump up to 708 pixels/inch. If we check the width, 4256 pixels ÷ 6.011 inches = 708 pixels/inch. And checking the height,2832 pixels ÷ 4 inches = 708 pixels/inch. Our own calculations match up perfectly with what the Image Size dialog box showed us. And that, really, is the basics of resizing an image and changing its print size. Simply uncheck the Resample option, enter either the width or height that you need your image to print (in inches), and Photoshop sets the other values for you automatically:

It’s easy to figure out the needed resolution value ourselves, but still nice that Photoshop does it for us.

Resolution And Image Quality

As we’ve seen, when resizing an image (changing only its print size), the Width, Height and Resolution options in the Image Size dialog box are all linked together. Change one of the values and Photoshop automatically changes the others, and that includes the Resolution value. In most cases, you’ll want to let Photoshop figure out the resolution automatically when you enter in a new width and height, but we can manually enter the Resolution value ourselves to see how large we’d be able to print the image and still get professional-looking results.

In general, if you’re printing the image using an inkjet photo printer (the kind you most likely have at home), the lowest resolution value you’d want to use is around 240 pixels/inch. If you go much below that, your printed image will start looking too soft and dull. So, knowing that 240 pixels/inch is the lowest resolution value I’d want to use, I can simply enter 240 into the Resolution option. When I do, Photoshop automatically changes the Width and Height values to match the resolution and shows me that I could safely print this image at a size of 17.733 inches wide by 11.8 inches tall, which is most likely larger than I’d need. But at least I know that as long as my intention is to print it smaller than 17.733 in x 11.8 in, the result will look great:

Entering a Resolution value of 240 pixels/inch shows me the largest size I could safely print the image.

To learn more about how image resolution affects print quality, check out our full Image Resolution And Print Quality tutorial in the Digital Photo Essentials section of our website.

And there we have it! That’s how to change the print size of an image using the new Image Size dialog box in Photoshop CC! In the next tutorial, we’ll take things further and cover everything you need to know about image resampling!

Download our tutorials as print-ready PDFs! Over 300 tutorials! Learning Photoshop has never been easier!

 

Resource : http://www.photoshopessentials.com/essentials/resize-images-photoshop-cc/

Creative Vignette Effects With The Radial Filter In Photoshop CC

Written by Steve Patterson. Photoshop CC (Creative Cloud) brings with it lots of exciting new features, including the brand new Camera Raw Filter that lets us apply any or all of Camera Raw’s powerful image editing abilities as a filter to any layer we want in our Photoshop document! What’s more, Camera Raw (and the Camera Raw Filter) in Photoshop CC includes new features of its own, like the amazing Radial Filter. In this tutorial, we’ll learn how the Radial Filter can be used to add highly customizable, creative vignette effects to your images!

As we’ll see, the Radial Filter even lets us add multiple vignettes at the same time so we can darken some areas of the image while brightening and enhancing others! And, we’ll create the entire effect non-destructively using Smart Objects and Smart Filters so our original image remains completely unharmed.

Download our tutorials as print-ready PDFs! Learning Photoshop has never been easier!

Since the Radial Filter is only available as part of Camera Raw in Photoshop CC, you’ll need Photoshop CC to follow along. Here’s the photo I’ll be starting with (serious girl photo from Shutterstock):

The original image.

And here’s what the final result will look like. Of course, this is just one possible result using this specific image. What’s more important, as with all of our tutorials, is that you’ll learn all the steps needed to create your own customized Radial Filter vignette effects with your own images:

The final Radial Filter vignette effect.

Let’s get started!

Step 1: Convert The Background Layer Into A Smart Object

We’ll start by converting the layer our photo is sitting on into a Smart Object. This way, the Camera Raw Filter will be applied as a Smart Filter, keeping the vignette effect itself fully editable while the original image remains untouched and unharmed. With my photo newly opened in Photoshop CC, if we look in the Layers panel, we see the image sitting on the Background layer:

The Layers panel.

To convert the layer into a Smart Object, click on the small menu icon in the top right corner of the Layers panel:

Clicking the Layers panel menu icon.

Choose Convert to Smart Object from the menu that appears:

Choosing “Convert to Smart Object”.

Nothing will seem to have happened to the image in the document window, but a small Smart Object icon appears in the lower right corner of the layer’s preview thumbnail, letting us know that the layer is now a Smart Object:

The layer preview thumbnail displaying the Smart Object icon.

Step 2: Select The Camera Raw Filter

Go up to the Filter menu in the Menu Bar along the top of the screen and choose Camera Raw Filter:

Going to Filter > Camera Raw Filter.

The image will appear inside the large Camera Raw dialog box. Technically, this is the Camera Raw Filter dialog box, but with few exceptions, all of the tools, controls and options that we’d find in the main Camera Raw dialog box are here:

The Camera Raw (Filter) dialog box.

Step 3: Select The Radial Filter

Along the top left of the Camera Raw dialog box is where we find its various tools. Click on the Radial Filter to select it (it’s the last tool on the right):

Choosing the Radial Filter.

Step 4: Lower The Exposure

With the Radial Filter selected, the panel on the right of the Camera Raw dialog box displays the Radial Filter’s various options for making adjustments to the image. Start by clicking the round minus icon ( - ) directly to the left of the word Exposure. This will set the Exposure slider to a preset value of -50, but the main reason we’re doing this is because it instantly resets all of the other sliders to 0, allowing us to focus just on the Exposure setting:

Clicking the minus icon to the left of the Exposure slider.

Then, click on the Exposure slider itself and drag it further to the left to a value of around -2.00. This will give us a good initial darkening value to start with. The image itself won’t appear any darker at the moment because we haven’t yet added the actual filter, but we’ll do that next:

Setting the initial Exposure value to -2.00.

Step 5: Drag Out The Radial Filter In The Image

With the Exposure value lowered, click somewhere near the center of where you want your vignette effect to appear in the image. Then, with your mouse button still held down, drag outward from that point. You’ll see the elliptical Radial Filter shape appearing as an outline as you drag (if you want to force the Radial Filter shape into a perfect circle, press and hold the Shift key on your keyboard as you’re dragging). You can move the filter shape around inside the image as you’re dragging it by pressing and holding the Spacebar on your keyboard. Release the Spacebar once you’ve positioned the filter where you want it to continue dragging out its shape, then release your mouse button when you’re done:

Dragging out the Radial Filter from its center.

The Outside / Inside Effect Option

Notice, though, that with my image, the inside of the Radial Filter shape is being darkened while the area outside the shape remains at its original brightness level. That’s the exact opposite of what I wanted for my vignette effect. If you’re seeing the same thing with your image, look down at the bottom of the Radial Filter options in the panel along the right (you may need to scroll down using the scroll bar along the right of the panel if you’re not in Camera Raw’s Fullscreen mode). There, at the bottom of the list, is an option called Effect with two checkboxes that control where the image adjustments are applied – inside the shape or outside. Mine is currently set to Inside so I’ll click the Outside option to change it:

Changing the effect’s location from inside the shape to outside.

And now, we see the darkening effect appearing around the outside of the shape where it should be:

The effect after changing its location to Outside.

Resizing, Moving And Rotating The Shape

Once you’ve dragged out your initial Radial Filter shape, you can resize and reshape it, making it taller, shorter, wider or more narrow, by clicking and dragging any of the four handles (the little squares). You’ll find one at the top, bottom, left and right of the shape. You can continue moving the shape around inside the image if needed by moving your mouse cursor inside the shape. When your cursor changes to a four-pointed direction arrow, click and drag your mouse. Also, you can rotate it by moving your mouse cursor near the edge of the shape, then clicking and dragging when you see your cursor change into a curved, double-pointed arrow. In my case, I’m just going to make my shape larger by clicking and dragging the handles:

Dragging a handle to resize and reshape the filter.

Step 6: Adjust The Image Using The Sliders

Now that we’ve added the filter to the image, we can use the various image adjustment sliders in the panel along the right to make further changes to the effect. We can start by fine-tuning the Exposure amount to either darken the effect further or lighten it by clicking and dragging the slider left (darker) or right (lighter). But there’s a lot more we can do besides that. We have sliders for adjusting the contrast, the highlights and shadow areas, color saturation, and more! You can experiment with these sliders all you want because everything we’re doing to the image here is non-destructive, and you’ll see a live update of your changes to the image as you try different settings.

For my image, I think I’ll darken the edges a bit more by lowering the Exposure value further to -2.20. I’ll bump up the contrast of the edges by increasing the Contrast value to +40. I’ll leave the Highlights and Shadow sliders alone for now, but I’ll drag the Clarity slider all the way to the right to increase it to its maximum value of +100(Clarity increases or decreases contrast in the midtones of an image, and setting it to a high amount often creates a harsh, grungy look that I think suits my image well). Finally, I’ll drag the Saturation slider all the way to the left to-100 to remove all the color from the edges of the image. Of course, these are just the settings that I think work well with the specific image I’m using. The adjustments you make with your image may be different:

Changing the look of the image using the various adjustment sliders.

Adjusting The Feathering

We can also adjust the feathering amount for the vignette, or in other words, increase or decrease the size of the transition area between the main image in the center and the darker area surrounding it, by dragging the Featherslider left (to decrease it) or right (to increase it). You’ll find the Feather slider near the bottom of the options on the right (directly above the Outside / Inside Effect option):

Adjusting the size of the transition area with the Feather slider.

Showing And Hiding The Overlay

To get a better view of what your vignette effect looks like, you can temporarily hide the Radial Filter overlay in the preview area by unchecking the Show Overlay option in the lower right of the Camera Raw dialog box. Select the option again to turn the overlay back on. Or, you can quickly turn the overlay on and off simply by pressing the letter V on your keyboard. Here, I’m unchecking the option to turn the overlay off:

Unchecking the Show Overlay option.

And here’s what my image looks like so far with the overlay turned off:

Turning the overlay off makes the effect easier to see.

Showing And Hiding The Preview

The reason we’re seeing a live preview of our changes to the image is because by default, the Preview option at the top of the Camera Raw dialog box is checked. We can turn the preview off at any time to compare our changes with the original image by simply unchecking the Preview option. Check it again to turn the preview back on. Or, you can press the letter P on your keyboard to quickly toggle the preview on and off:

The Preview option is located just above the top right corner of the preview area.

Step 7: Add A Second Radial Filter

One of the most powerful features of Camera Raw’s Radial Filter is that we can add additional Radial Filters to the same image, each with separate image adjustments! To add a new Radial Filter, select New at the top of the Radial Filter panel:

Selecting the New option.

Then, just use everything we’ve learned from adding our initial filter to add the second one. First, click inside the image and drag outward to create the new filter shape, holding down your Spacebar as you drag to reposition it if needed:

Clicking and dragging out a second Radial Filter.

Switching Between Radial Filters

Notice that there are now two round dots on my screen. Each dot represents one of the filters. At any time, we can switch between filters to re-adjust their settings simply by clicking on their dots. The currently active filter will have a colored dot while the other dot(s) appear white. Here, I’ve clicked on the initial filter’s dot to re-select it and make it active:

Switching back to the original filter by clicking its dot.

I’ll switch back to my new filter by clicking on its dot. Notice that a couple of things are happening with this second filter. First, all of my settings from the initial Radial Filter have been copied to this second filter. We’ll change that in a moment, but the second thing to notice is that my effect is again being applied outside the shape. With this second filter, I want the effect to appear inside the shape, so once again, I’ll scroll down to the bottom of the Radial Filter panel along the right and switch the Effect option from Outside to Inside. Or, I could just press the letter X on my keyboard to instantly switch from Outside to Inside and vice versa:

Changing the Effect option from Outside to Inside.

And now, the effect appears inside the second filter. Notice also that the filter’s selection dot has changed from red to green. A red dot means the effect is being applied outside the shape, while a green dot indicates it’s being applied inside:

With the effect inside the shape, the filter’s selection dot has turned from red to green.

I’ll resize, move and rotate my second filter using the steps we learned earlier, dragging the handles to resize and reshape it, clicking and dragging inside the shape to move it, and clicking and dragging near the edge of the shape to rotate it:

Using more of a narrow, diagonal shape for the second Radial Filter.

Next, I want to reset my image adjustment sliders in the Radial Filter panel, and another easy way to reset them is todouble-click on them. Here, I’ve double-clicked the Exposure, Contrast, Clarity and Saturation sliders to reset them all to 0 (the others were already set to 0):

Double-clicking sliders to reset them.

Now that my second filter has been reset, this time I’ll start by cooling down the overall color temperature inside the shape by dragging the Temperature slider at the top of the panel a little to the left. A value of around -20 will add a slight blue color cast. I’ll leave the Tint slider directly below it set to 0 since I don’t want to add any green or magenta to the image. I’ll also leave the Exposure slider set to 0, but I’ll increase the Contrast to +50. Again, these are just settings that I’ve found, after some experimenting, that they work well with this particular image.

I’ll dial down the highlights, bringing out a bit more detail in the lightest areas inside the shape, by lowering theHighlights value to around -25. Then I’ll do the opposite with the Shadows slider, increasing it to +25 to brighten up some of the darkest areas, again bringing out more detail. I’ll bump the Clarity value up to +50 to bring out more contrast in the midtones, and finally, I’ll lower the Saturation value to -30 to reduce the color saturation:

The image adjustment settings for the second Radial Filter.

Lastly, I’ll increase the size of the transition area for the second filter by bumping the Feather amount up to 50:

Increasing the Feather amount to 50.

Here’s what the image looks like now with both Radial Filters applied:

The image with the second Radial Filter’s adjustments applied.

Step 8: Close Out Of The Camera Raw Dialog Box

I’m happy with my effect, so I’ll click the OK button in the lower right corner of the dialog box to accept my settings and close out of the Camera Raw Filter:

Clicking the OK button.

If we look again in the Layers panel in Photoshop itself, we now see the Camera Raw Filter listed as a Smart Filterbelow the image. I’ll click on the Smart Filters visibility icon to temporarily hide the effects of the Camera Raw Filter from view in the document window:

Clicking the OK button.

This hides all of the changes I made with the Radial Filter and re-displays the original image. Notice that it remains untouched and unaffected by anything we’ve done:

The original image re-appears unharmed.

I’ll click again on the Smart Filter visibility icon to turn the Camera Raw Filter back on, and now we see the final Radial Filter vignette effect:

The final result.

And there we have it! That’s how to add a creative, fully customizable and non-destructive vignette effect to an image using the new Radial Filter inside the new Camera Raw Filter in Photoshop CC!

Resourse : http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-effects/radial-filter-vignette-effect/