lightroom – Create these high-contrast flat DoF images

OK, so I did not have a box of intriguing delicacies to try
I just had a box of eggs and a couple of blueberries in the fridge, which I sat on the window sill in direct, but rather dim sunlight.

Enter the image description here

If you can not read it, it's because I turned it from left to right to better fit the OR

It is by no means the perfect photo, just a short example.

Basically, we see a very shallow depth of field, so a blueberry and a bit of box is focused on each side – in a plane that is equidistant from the lens [approximately], The rest becomes increasingly blurred the farther he is from that plane.

I have harder shadows, which have the impression of a higher contrast than the original photograph, since my light source through the window was clearly one-sided. I suppose the original was taken outdoors, where the light was slightly more diffuse – but the rest The shading is about what we see in the original.

Since I did not immediately have a Japanese school uniform on hand, I put a dark pillow behind the direct sunlight. The shading at the front is simply lack of light. The amount of sunlight falling on the eggs determines the exposure, which darkens the background automatically.

It was sharpened a bit to make the blueberry pop a little more, but no other processing.

It was performed on a field camera with a 50mm lens with 1.4x magnification. If you do not have a lens with such a large aperture and you do not mind changing the perspective to frame the subject in the same way, then a longer lens with a smaller aperture will look the same.

Another way to add punch – I've done this with mine, so the blueberry pops out more, is the sharpening. The Clarity slider in PhotoRAW achieves this a bit by adjusting local contrast. However, my preferred method is to use a high pass filter. In Photoshop, it hides innocently and in filters> Others often undetected …

First, duplicate your image to a new layer. Apply the high pass to taste, which looks like an unusual collection of grays and colors. Apply this layer and set this layer to & # 39; Overlay & # 39; instead of & # 39; normal & # 39 ;. Magical sharpness!
There is no right or wrong in terms of how much – not enough that you do not see that you have done it. Too much looks too crispy and sharp-edged. A simple but effective trick is to use it twice, once quite high, which will flip you back and another really good. Experiment.
You can also add a layer mask and remove the high pass from the areas you want to keep soft by coloring it in the mask.

I made a quick composition on the original photo that was shown before, after, and at the high-level [which I have overdone a bit just to make it easier to see.] You can make this much more subtle on the original image than is possible with a small JPG.

Enter the image description here

Late processing:
Even if sometimes more Post hoc ergo propter hoc Wise. I like these "how to rebuild xyz" challenges. I need to get on my feet to create similarities and expose my own mistakes in similar situations.
If other people find it useful, that's a bonus. 🙂

Accessibility – Is there a standard for displaying a high-contrast style?

Is there a standard symbol / text that should be used?

From the point of view of accessibility, there is no agreed standard for a symbol. The suggestions in the other answers are all good. Remember that a user with poor eyesight may not do this see If you use the icon, make sure that there is alternative text for a screen reader to correctly advertise.

Do it normal view Style have sufficient contrast according to WCAG 1.4.3 Contrast (minimum)? I hope the answer is "yes" and yours High contrast view tries to meet the AAA policy of 1.4.6 Contrast (Enhanced).

If your normal view has a low contrast and you try to satisfy WCAG 1.4.3 with a style with increased contrast. Just make sure that the mechanism you use to switch to high contrast has sufficient contrast itself. (This sounds a bit confusing, but if your page has low contrast and you have a button to switch to higher contrast, make sure that the button itself has sufficient contrast in accordance with WCAG 1.4.3 Color of the text on the button compared to the background color of the button must have at least a contrast ratio of 4.5: 1)

An example of a high contrast switch can be found at https://www.applause.com/ in the footer. You use a switch, but you could just as easily have links between your two topics as you suggested. (Although I would not use a literal link () because that gives the wrong permission. A "link" is an element that navigates to another page [or somewhere else on the current page] and should not be used to perform an "action". A button stands for "action".)

See also "G174: Control with sufficient contrast ratio that allows users to switch to a presentation that uses sufficient contrast." A disadvantage of this recommendation, however, is the use of an "alternative version" of a page as a possible solution. This is badly discouraged by the accessibility community. If you want to switch to another topic as you try, this is a better solution.

Accessibility – Is there a standard for displaying a high-contrast style?

I am working on a web app and have developed both a normal style sheet and a second high contrast style sheet. I get up when a user allows to switch between styles.

Is there a standard symbol / text that should be used?

So far I have links like this (high contrast is only visible in normal view and normal view is only visible in high contrast).

switch to High contrast
switch to normal view

Accessibility – Can I use low color contrast in native mobile apps? Android and iOS have high-contrast modes

I design native apps for Android and iOS. Both Android and iOS have a high contrast. In light of this, can I use low-contrast colors (eg, 3: 1 instead of the 4.5: 1 value that WCAG Level AA calls for), knowing that users with poor eyesight can activate High Contrast mode?


And a detail question about compliance with WCAG: Do these modes with high contrast count as "assistive technology"? (WCAG says content should be readable to people "who do not use support-enhancing technology." Source)