Thanks for the detailed explanations, although I am a big baffled by some of
the terminology.
What is "noise?"
I usually keep the ISO setting on auto, it is possible that I didnt get it set
right, we were flying about 1000 ft in a Skyvan, and the typical valley was a
hard shot to get because we were moving very fast.
I'm going back up in a few more days, no exact date yet, and if the weather
co-opeates, I'll have opportunity to re-visit these locations and try for some
more images, I'll print this message and use it to adjust the settings, and
I'll shoot it in RAW format, for better post-processing.
I did shoot a couple sunflower pics yesterday with an ant on the flower,
in the daily living gallery
http://timrandles.fotopic.net, and there is a couple other pics taken with my
old 35 mm film Oly, ( one of the best presents I ever got, wish I still had
it..)
Cheers.. and thanks !
Tim
Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: LostKase wrote:
> Tim,
> The post processing I played with made the picture stand out. I pray Moose
> will weigh in with his adjustments. Nice picture!
I agree, there are some nice shots here. As predicted, I've done some
alternate versions of a few of them
..
> I have become a slave to post processing. The control of contrast and
> exposure compensation has re-invigorated alot of my so-so exposures. You have
> a nice eye, don't let anyone discourage you. Just watch your histogram as you
> take the picture.You merely need a little practice with a editing package.
You know I am a serious post-processor. Yet a little more understanding
and care in camera settings can help too. Especially if, as I assume,
you are either shooting JPEGs or converting RAW with the camera
defaults. Specifically:
All the Baffin Island shots I checked were taken at iso 100. That's a
way to be sure of optimum sensor performance and minimum noise. However,
in the case of 'typical valley', that has resulted in a poorer result
than using a higher iso would have given. My alternate version of this
image improves many qualities, but has an odd, unnatural look to it. The
reason is simple; considerable, vibration induced blurring of the image.
Click on the image to see a full pixel sample. Notice all the blurring
of the banks of the river and the bright thingies that should be single
points, but are squiggles. These problems aren't very obvious in a
reduced size version of the low contrast original, but give an odd look
to the alternate version. This is a case where any noise from iso 400
and probably even 800 would affect the result less than the consequences
of inadequate shutter speed.
The rough rule of thumb for minimum shutter speed based on focal length
is 1/fl for 35mm. For 4/3 format, that becomes 1/(2xfl), or 1/300 for
150mm. At 1/250, this shot is just on the edge for someone with steady
hands on firm ground. Taken from what I assume is a smallish plane,
vibration becomes a serious issue. I'm guessing from the 1/250 result
that at least 1/1000, and probably faster, would be needed for a sharp
image. By the way, when taking shots from something that vibrates, make
sure to let your body absorb as much as possible. Never let the camera
or the hand(s) holding it touch the window or any part of the vehicle
when taking the picture.
I suspect wide open at iso 4-800 would have resulted in a much sharper
image and the ability to process it into a great one.
In another post, you mention a problem with blue creeping into your
images. There are three major causes of these, none related to choice of
lens:
1. Color of the light illuminating the subject. Outdoor light varies a
great deal in color temperature, from the very warm (reddish) light when
the sun is close to the horizon to the very cool (blueish) light of
heavy overcasts and shadows. Auto WB can do a lot to correct for this in
many situations, although it can be fooled by scenes where the overall
average color isn't neutral gray
..
In the case of 'Pond Inlet Skyline', you shot an overcast, very cool
subject with WB set at 'Fine Weather'. It is at least primarily the
camera setting that makes it too blue.
2. Shotting long distances through air can also cause a blue tint for
the same reasons of light scattering that cause the sky to be blue. A
haze filter and/or post processing can correct for this.
3. The blue sensor (or layer, for film) cannot distinguish between
visible blue light and UV light that we don't see. So pictures taken
anyplace with high UV will be too blue. I know this includes high
altitudes and I think it may include places close to the poles, liek
some where you take pictures. This generally CANNOT be fully and
naturally corrected in processing. The only real solution is a filter.
The 81 series is designed for this purpose. I would try an 81a on some
of your long shots. Interestingly, it IS possible to correct for over
filtering, but not for the reverse.
I corrected for excess blue in 'Pond Inlet Skyline' using 81 type
filtering in PS. I wasn't there, so I don't know if I over or under did
the correction, but it makes the presence of subtle amounts of other
colors apparent without trying to make a cool place look sunny and warm.
It also looked to me like the sun was low on the horizon, so there
should be a slight warmth in the sky.
> Capturing the picture with the proper exposure range is a necessary evil but
> post processing can save a bordline exposure.
>
None of the posted pictures looked to me to have much on the way of
exposure problems. 'baffin_Island_Rock_Garden' has some blown highlights
in the sky, but it's not a useful part of the image to me and I cropped
it out.
A couple of the histograms showed signs of processing in 8 bit that
chopped things up, but didn't spread out, very narrow histograms. The
narrow histograms are part of what Christos was talking about, no true
whites or blacks.
> Bob
> Tim Randles wrote: Glad you like the landscapes, I dont know how to do the
> exposures or the post processing.. still learning..
>
> I thought there was a good variety of darks, colors etc.. oh well..
>
Now there are more. :-)
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+
countries) for 2¢/min or less.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|