Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] ( OM ) New photos - non-film, sorry

Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) New photos - non-film, sorry
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:49:41 -0700
Brian Swale wrote:
> Jeff Keller wrote
>
>   
>> Wow, there's a lot of very nice pictures there Brian. I don't see any need
>> for mousification. There does seem to be some post processing going on ...
>> the tulips look more like a painting than a photo (great picture). 
>>     
>
> Thanks Jeff.  Yes, some photos were heavily modified using FastStone Image 
> Viewer to overcome various deficiencies. 

Just a personal opinion, at which I hope you don't take offense, but I 
think using FastStone as an image editor is a bit like using a wrench to 
drive a nail. It can be done, but the experience and results will both 
generally leave much to be desired.

> From memory, the two internal shots of the clock-tower, and the tulips, more 
> than others. Re the tulips, the camera chose to take the exposure reading 
> from the (very late afternoon) sky at a rainy moment. This defeated the 
> composition I wanted. 
>   

I think it's unfair to blame the camera. You set the exposure method and 
compensation. If you are going to let the camera set excposure without 
your intervention, at least use its smarter metering mode, ESP, I think, 
for this camera. Center weighted averaging without exercising some 
thought is just asking for trouble.

And then, you've got instant feedback on the LCD, both histogram and 
image. If the exposure is off, it's on you.

BUT, but, it looks to me like the exposure is right on the money. 
Perhaps by mistake, you've properly exposed to the right. Compare the 
tulips to the vineyard. At least as presented, the sky in the vineyard 
is quite unsightly, with large areas of undifferentiated pure white 
where our eyes know there was tonal detail.

The tulip sky is nicely captured, giving a good tonal rendition of a 
cloudy day. The web version has a bit of clipped highlight, but very 
little and it may be from processing.

> ...
>
> Anyway, for the tulips image in-camera, the sky was beautiful but the land 
> was nearly black. So I cranked up Gamma, modified Contrast, sharpened, 
> possibly added Saturation, and accepted the heavy noise as being part of 
> the unavoidable price for rescuing a shot otherwise fit only for the discard 
> bin.
>   

I'm not seeing a lot of noise in the web size image. The E-3 has quite 
low noise at ISO 100. I'm pretty sure if this had been a RAW file that 
the foreground could have been very nicely lightened without excessive 
noise.

It seems to me that you are applying film thought and technique to 
digital work. What you saw as a shot fit for the dustbin was in fact a 
well exposed shot for capturing a high dynamic range scene on a DSLR.

All that said, it seems to me that you have produced a rather nice 
result - especially for working with a wrench. :-)

Using more sophisticated tools, ti's certainly possible to add a little 
more pop, and to make the cloud tonalities a little more obvious, either 
of which you may or may not like. 
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/BSwale/PA220575.htm>

> ...
>
> About the Mt Cook scenes; while I do respect the expertise of our Moosie with 
> his computer, as far as cameras and computers can capture colour well, the 
> powder blue of the shots I have posted is pretty accurate and I did not mess 
> with that (except to not use the Circ Pol Filter shots I have from the Zuiko 
> 100/2). Moose may have apparently removed the haze, but in doing so also 
> removed the essential colour element of those photos. 
>   

Easy enough to return the water to the original colour. 
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/BSwale/PA220575.htm>

> Remember, it was just under 40 miles (as the blow flies) from the camera to 
> that hill. The air clarity was exceptionally good for that area, that 
> afternoon..
>   

As I tried to make clear in my post, I was simply using your images, as 
they came immediately to hand, to further answer Bill's question as to 
how one could recover colour and detail lost to haze.

If this image were mine, I almost certainly not go so far as I did here, 
to proce a point.I'd probably go part way, as perhaps in the softer 
version I've added to the example.

> The combination of great visibility and colour induced me to break a trip 
> that was eventually to take 11 hours, to spend nearly 2 hours on taking 
> photos.
>
> :-)
>   

Crazy - but that's how you get the great images.

Moose
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz