Photography help thread.
Posted by: BigH47 on 08 November 2015
As sugested to stop overly cluttering the Nice Photos thread matbe my help question should have it's own thread.
Maybe I could get Richard to move my question and the replies to this thread?
I know which picture I prefer, but I don't know which one more faithfully reflects the view at the time the picture was taken.
BTW, thank you for your comments, but as you allude, its the Leica, not me, that is delivering any decent results.
In no way does a photograph accurately reproduce what you're seeing Don. The eye and brain are infinitely better at viewing, and of course we all see things in different ways anyway. It really does come down to what you find most pleasing. No photo you see in magazines is ever "real" in that sense.
+1:no image sensor,say b/n film or full frame digital,can beat the exposure latitude of human eye.
I wonder where Cartier Bresson would sit in this discussion...
The recent David Bailey in Edinburgh had a section of shots taken with a mobile phone...not sure how many pixels were needed to create these mini-masterpieces (in comparison with my limited ability).
G
Don, I get the good humour in which you responded to my humour, good thing we're not mastering engineers :-)
In terms of colour preference, I have a friend who loves HDR pics and still (to my eyes) over saturates the colours in post processing. In some pictures this gives a more 'art' feel as you are taken out of the 'picture' as they are unnatural colours that could not co exist.
The key in photography to me, is framing, timing, settings and 'doing it right' at capture time and I shot as RAW+Fine JPG and process in Lightroom, Aperture, iPhoto or PhotoShop all depending. Lenses especially ones that go to low f stops (1.4) will allow more creativity, but there is a reason you are taking the photo, something appeals to you, or you want to capture the moment and not just for the 'I was there' reason.
Ken Rockwell is a big Nikon fan, but has moved into Canon recently, some of his tweeked settings for the in camera processing make for more vibrant JPG's - but they aren't to everyone's taste. But like hifi components, cables and speakers - different combinations lead to enjoyment for some, but not for others and regardless of the cost of the equipment.
At the end of the day MP3's are good enough for some people or situations, and JPG's are the same, if you are only printing ( either as a 5x7 or even crazier an Apple book ) a JPG will be fine. But depending on lighting and image, I can tell if I took it on an iPhone, Point and Shoot or DSLR (it takes effort to haul round a DSLR, not so much a phone in my pocket ) but that doesn't take away from the impact of the photo or jogging the memory of what we were doing at the time and the smile it brings to my face.
At the end of the day MP3's are good enough for some people or situations, and JPG's are the same, if you are only printing ( either as a 5x7 or even crazier an Apple book ) a JPG will be fine. But depending on lighting and image, I can tell if I took it on an iPhone, Point and Shoot or DSLR (it takes effort to haul round a DSLR, not so much a phone in my pocket ) but that doesn't take away from the impact of the photo or jogging the memory of what we were doing at the time and the smile it brings to my face.
...You need a Leica
G
At the end of the day MP3's are good enough for some people or situations, and JPG's are the same, if you are only printing ( either as a 5x7 or even crazier an Apple book ) a JPG will be fine. But depending on lighting and image, I can tell if I took it on an iPhone, Point and Shoot or DSLR (it takes effort to haul round a DSLR, not so much a phone in my pocket ) but that doesn't take away from the impact of the photo or jogging the memory of what we were doing at the time and the smile it brings to my face.
...You need a Leica
G
Don, I get the good humour in which you responded to my humour, good thing we're not mastering engineers :-)
In terms of colour preference, I have a friend who loves HDR pics and still (to my eyes) over saturates the colours in post processing. In some pictures this gives a more 'art' feel as you are taken out of the 'picture' as they are unnatural colours that could not co exist.
The key in photography to me, is framing, timing, settings and 'doing it right' at capture time and I shot as RAW+Fine JPG and process in Lightroom, Aperture, iPhoto or PhotoShop all depending. Lenses especially ones that go to low f stops (1.4) will allow more creativity, but there is a reason you are taking the photo, something appeals to you, or you want to capture the moment and not just for the 'I was there' reason.
Ken Rockwell is a big Nikon fan, but has moved into Canon recently, some of his tweeked settings for the in camera processing make for more vibrant JPG's - but they aren't to everyone's taste. But like hifi components, cables and speakers - different combinations lead to enjoyment for some, but not for others and regardless of the cost of the equipment.
At the end of the day MP3's are good enough for some people or situations, and JPG's are the same, if you are only printing ( either as a 5x7 or even crazier an Apple book ) a JPG will be fine. But depending on lighting and image, I can tell if I took it on an iPhone, Point and Shoot or DSLR (it takes effort to haul round a DSLR, not so much a phone in my pocket ) but that doesn't take away from the impact of the photo or jogging the memory of what we were doing at the time and the smile it brings to my face.
Thanks Guy, I'm glad that somebody recognised the good humour in my post !! And thank you for your comments. I did recently look at Ken Rockwell's site in connection with a DSLR option.
With my EOS100 film camera, I used to get a CD as well as 35mm slides. I would get as high a resolution CD as possible and could play about with brightness, colour adjustment, sharpness, etc in Photoshop Elements. I printed a few pictures at A2 size and they were technically good enough to now adorn walls in friends homes.
The move to digital capture, co-incided with a change in job and access to an A3 printer rather than A2 so I have never been able to easily print digitally captured material at more than A3. Even so, a few of my pictures have found their way onto friends walls at A3 size and are technically quite good. All of these were based on the JPEG captured files. I have never gotten around to manipulating RAW files.
I fully appreciate what you and others have said, ie there is more scope with a RAW file. Unfortunately, I for one, and I suspect one or two others in this world, are both time and artistically challenged when it comes to post-production manipulation. And crucially as you say, it can be somewhat subjective. I therefore rather depend upon the camera maker to provide an easy-to-use file format that produces decent pictures at A3 (and hopefully A3) size.
As I said before, one day I will try those RAW files, one day................
I know which picture I prefer, but I don't know which one more faithfully reflects the view at the time the picture was taken.
BTW, thank you for your comments, but as you allude, its the Leica, not me, that is delivering any decent results.
In no way does a photograph accurately reproduce what you're seeing Don. The eye and brain are infinitely better at viewing, and of course we all see things in different ways anyway. It really does come down to what you find most pleasing. No photo you see in magazines is ever "real" in that sense.
You are of course right Tony, and its good to emphasise it. Many thanks.
Don
Blimey, a monster has been created... I love this forum.
You know that scene in Life of Brian? The People's Front, grouped round the table. As Dave Allen might say; it goes something like this:
REG: Right. Now, uh, item four: attainment of world supremacy within the next five years. Uh, Francis, you've been doing some work on this.
FRANCIS: Yeah. Thank you, Reg. Well, quite frankly, siblings, I think five years is optimistic, unless we can smash the Roman empire within the next twelve months.
REG: Twelve months?
FRANCIS: Yeah, twelve months. And, let's face it. As empires go, this is the big one, so we've got to get up off our arses and stop just talking about it!
COMMANDOS: Hear! Hear!
LORETTA: I agree. It's action that counts, not words, and we need action now.
COMMANDOS: Hear! Hear!
REG: You're right. We could sit around here all day talking, passing resolutions, making clever speeches. It's not going to shift one Roman soldier!
FRANCIS: So, let's just stop gabbing on about it. It's completely pointless and it's getting us nowhere!
COMMANDOS: Right!
LORETTA: I agree. This is a complete waste of time.
*BAM!!*
JUDITH: They've arrested Brian!
REG: What?
COMMANDOS: What?
JUDITH: They've dragged him off! They're going to crucify him!
REG: Right! This calls for immediate discussion!
COMMANDO #1: Yeah.
JUDITH: What?!
COMMANDO #2: Immediate.
COMMANDO #1: Right.
LORETTA: New motion?
REG: Completely new motion, eh, that, ah-- that there be, ah, immediate action--
FRANCIS: Ah, once the vote has been taken.
REG: Well, obviously once the vote's been taken. You can't act another resolution till you've voted on it...
JUDITH: Reg, for God's sake, let's go now!
REG: Yeah. Yeah.
JUDITH: Please!
REG: Right. Right.
FRANCIS: Fine.
REG: In the-- in the light of fresh information from, ahh, sibling Judith--
LORETTA: Ah, not so fast, Reg.
JUDITH: Reg, for God's sake, it's perfectly simple. All you've got to do is to go out of that door now, and try to stop the Romans' nailing him up! It's happening, Reg! Something's actually happening, Reg! Can't you understand?! Ohhh!
Just go out and take some pictures!
Thanks Guy, I'm glad that somebody recognised the good humour in my post !! And thank you for your comments. I did recently look at Ken Rockwell's site in connection with a DSLR option.
With my EOS100 film camera, I used to get a CD as well as 35mm slides. I would get as high a resolution CD as possible and could play about with brightness, colour adjustment, sharpness, etc in Photoshop Elements. I printed a few pictures at A2 size and they were technically good enough to now adorn walls in friends homes.
The move to digital capture, co-incided with a change in job and access to an A3 printer rather than A2 so I have never been able to easily print digitally captured material at more than A3. Even so, a few of my pictures have found their way onto friends walls at A3 size and are technically quite good. All of these were based on the JPEG captured files. I have never gotten around to manipulating RAW files.
I fully appreciate what you and others have said, ie there is more scope with a RAW file. Unfortunately, I for one, and I suspect one or two others in this world, are both time and artistically challenged when it comes to post-production manipulation. And crucially as you say, it can be somewhat subjective. I therefore rather depend upon the camera maker to provide an easy-to-use file format that produces decent pictures at A3 (and hopefully A3) size.
As I said before, one day I will try those RAW files, one day................
If you spend just a few minutes with editing software, not necessarily Lightroom, even a free or cheap package will do, though preferably one allowing tweaking of mid tones or 'fill light, for more flexibility , and just try increasing sharpness for appropriate photos, maybe adjusting overall exposure if the camera wasn't perfect, and seeing what happens if you brighten or darken mid tones, maybe increase or decrease saturation - I think you may be amazed how much it is possible to improve on the standard offering, even with no artistic eye, just seeing what you think looks better.
BTW I, too, used to have an EOS 100 film camera - I used to send away for processing as cheaper than doing myself, except if I had been on holiday and had a lot to do. I never took the option of digital copies, instead doing my own printing, mostly 10x8, but some up to 24x20 (inches), and when appropriate playing with different exposures to different parts of the image etc, all manually in the darkroom - time consuming but enjoyable. Favourite film for big enlargements was Fuji Velvia (iso 25!) - until recently digital couldn't match, but now I think it can.
But I am not artistic, and don't have a flair for creating a good image, they come more by luck if I take enough pictures! Digital is fantastic because its free until you print.
Blimey, a monster has been created... I love this forum.
You know that scene in Life of Brian? The People's Front, grouped round the table. As Dave Allen might say; it goes something like this:
REG: Right. Now, uh, item four: attainment of world supremacy within the next five years. Uh, Francis, you've been doing some work on this.
FRANCIS: Yeah. Thank you, Reg. Well, quite frankly, siblings, I think five years is optimistic, unless we can smash the Roman empire within the next twelve months.
REG: Twelve months?
FRANCIS: Yeah, twelve months. And, let's face it. As empires go, this is the big one, so we've got to get up off our arses and stop just talking about it!
COMMANDOS: Hear! Hear!
LORETTA: I agree. It's action that counts, not words, and we need action now.
COMMANDOS: Hear! Hear!
REG: You're right. We could sit around here all day talking, passing resolutions, making clever speeches. It's not going to shift one Roman soldier!
FRANCIS: So, let's just stop gabbing on about it. It's completely pointless and it's getting us nowhere!
COMMANDOS: Right!
LORETTA: I agree. This is a complete waste of time.
*BAM!!*
JUDITH: They've arrested Brian!
REG: What?
COMMANDOS: What?
JUDITH: They've dragged him off! They're going to crucify him!
REG: Right! This calls for immediate discussion!
COMMANDO #1: Yeah.
JUDITH: What?!
COMMANDO #2: Immediate.
COMMANDO #1: Right.
LORETTA: New motion?
REG: Completely new motion, eh, that, ah-- that there be, ah, immediate action--
FRANCIS: Ah, once the vote has been taken.
REG: Well, obviously once the vote's been taken. You can't act another resolution till you've voted on it...
JUDITH: Reg, for God's sake, let's go now!
REG: Yeah. Yeah.
JUDITH: Please!
REG: Right. Right.
FRANCIS: Fine.
REG: In the-- in the light of fresh information from, ahh, sibling Judith--
LORETTA: Ah, not so fast, Reg.
JUDITH: Reg, for God's sake, it's perfectly simple. All you've got to do is to go out of that door now, and try to stop the Romans' nailing him up! It's happening, Reg! Something's actually happening, Reg! Can't you understand?! Ohhh!
Just go out and take some pictures!
Point, shoot, print...............earlier today.
Well beyond the help of RAW into Lightroom...............
Bit plane.
The "auto-focus" in "P" mode was pointing at the screws and rivets, rather than the tower !
Now, if a bit of fiddling with the RAW file in Lightroom can sort this one out I would be delighted.
and I was by the Spinnaker Tower this afternoon.
I hope you kept your hands on the wheel while you were messing with camera.
G
I would love a Leica M series, just not the price tag ! Hindsight is a great thing, and as I have gotten older, I have bought less but of 'better quality'. I started out my 'serious' photo journey with my dad's old Olympus 35 SP, a great camera and I known Leica are in the same size. Who knows, one day maybe...
G
I would love a Leica M series, just not the price tag ! Hindsight is a great thing, and as I have gotten older, I have bought less but of 'better quality'. I started out my 'serious' photo journey with my dad's old Olympus 35 SP, a great camera and I known Leica are in the same size. Who knows, one day maybe...
S/H M8?
G
As I said before, one day I will try those RAW files, one day................
Don, I know when I wanted to print on canvas, the company only excepted TIFF, so I knew I wanted to do edits and crop the photo a little and the only way was using RAW. This was the end result.
Quote: dayjay:-
If you've not already got one, for a Canon I'd highly recommend hitting ebay and buying a ef50 which will cost you less than fifty quid. Its super sharp for the money and has a large aperture of 1.8 which is great for portraits.
Slightly annoying as I already have a FD 1.4, 50mm lens which I can't use, plus several other lenses with my T70 kit.
Quote: dayjay:-
If you've not already got one, for a Canon I'd highly recommend hitting ebay and buying a ef50 which will cost you less than fifty quid. Its super sharp for the money and has a large aperture of 1.8 which is great for portraits.
Slightly annoying as I already have a FD 1.4, 50mm lens which I can't use, plus several other lenses with my T70 kit.
Worth checking if you can get a converter for your fd but the ef50 is so cheap and so sharp for the money its really a no brainer. If you can get an older version with the metal connector that's a better version but they are all great vfm
Blimey, a monster has been created... I love this forum.
You know that scene in Life of Brian? The People's Front, grouped round the table. As Dave Allen might say; it goes something like this:
REG: Right. Now, uh, item four: attainment of world supremacy within the next five years. Uh, Francis, you've been doing some work on this.
FRANCIS: Yeah. Thank you, Reg. Well, quite frankly, siblings, I think five years is optimistic, unless we can smash the Roman empire within the next twelve months.
REG: Twelve months?
FRANCIS: Yeah, twelve months. And, let's face it. As empires go, this is the big one, so we've got to get up off our arses and stop just talking about it!
COMMANDOS: Hear! Hear!
LORETTA: I agree. It's action that counts, not words, and we need action now.
COMMANDOS: Hear! Hear!
REG: You're right. We could sit around here all day talking, passing resolutions, making clever speeches. It's not going to shift one Roman soldier!
FRANCIS: So, let's just stop gabbing on about it. It's completely pointless and it's getting us nowhere!
COMMANDOS: Right!
LORETTA: I agree. This is a complete waste of time.
*BAM!!*
JUDITH: They've arrested Brian!
REG: What?
COMMANDOS: What?
JUDITH: They've dragged him off! They're going to crucify him!
REG: Right! This calls for immediate discussion!
COMMANDO #1: Yeah.
JUDITH: What?!
COMMANDO #2: Immediate.
COMMANDO #1: Right.
LORETTA: New motion?
REG: Completely new motion, eh, that, ah-- that there be, ah, immediate action--
FRANCIS: Ah, once the vote has been taken.
REG: Well, obviously once the vote's been taken. You can't act another resolution till you've voted on it...
JUDITH: Reg, for God's sake, let's go now!
REG: Yeah. Yeah.
JUDITH: Please!
REG: Right. Right.
FRANCIS: Fine.
REG: In the-- in the light of fresh information from, ahh, sibling Judith--
LORETTA: Ah, not so fast, Reg.
JUDITH: Reg, for God's sake, it's perfectly simple. All you've got to do is to go out of that door now, and try to stop the Romans' nailing him up! It's happening, Reg! Something's actually happening, Reg! Can't you understand?! Ohhh!
Just go out and take some pictures!
Not totally related, but amusing none-the-less.......
"I'm on a Committee"
Oh give me your pity, I'm on a committee
Which means that from morning to night
We attend and amend, contend and defend
Without a conclusion in sight
We confer and concur, we defer and demur
And reiterate all of our thoughts
We revise the agenda with frequent addenda
And consider a load of reports
I do have a converter but I can"t get it to focus any of my FD lenses.
TBH I think I'll just play around with what I have for now.
I'm very surprised no-one has yet mentioned DxO.
It's capable of much better results than any camera's internal JPEG engine, capable of batch processing including use of adaptive algorithms and (despite being French) is very easy to understand. It controls things form a photographer's viewpoint rather than a computer programmer's viewpoint (you don't need to understand the physics of light or have to use complex maths to be able to understand it).
I'm very surprised no-one has yet mentioned DxO.
It's capable of much better results than any camera's internal JPEG engine, capable of batch processing including use of adaptive algorithms and (despite being French) is very easy to understand. It controls things form a photographer's viewpoint rather than a computer programmer's viewpoint (you don't need to understand the physics of light or have to use complex maths to be able to understand it).
Sounds interesting Huge, but do you imply that a knowledge of physics and complex maths is required in order to use Photoshop or Lightroom ?
I don't know DxO so can't compare, however Lightroom doesn't require any more knowledge of physics and maths than anything a photographe is likely to know and understand without even being aware - it is certainly used by photographers comingfrom an artistic background, without any evident scientific mathematical leanings. It works very much from a photographers perspective, and personally I think it is very intuitive. Photoshop is considerably more complex, and requires a lot of [Photoshop] experience to master anything beyond superficial use.
I'm very surprised no-one has yet mentioned DxO.
It's capable of much better results than any camera's internal JPEG engine, capable of batch processing including use of adaptive algorithms and (despite being French) is very easy to understand. It controls things form a photographer's viewpoint rather than a computer programmer's viewpoint (you don't need to understand the physics of light or have to use complex maths to be able to understand it).
Sounds interesting Huge, but do you imply that a knowledge of physics and complex maths is required in order to use Photoshop or Lightroom ?
I don't know DxO so can't compare, however Lightroom doesn't require any more knowledge of physics and maths than anything a photographe is likely to know and understand without even being aware - it is certainly used by photographers comingfrom an artistic background, without any evident scientific mathematical leanings. It works very much from a photographers perspective, and personally I think it is very intuitive. Photoshop is considerably more complex, and requires a lot of [Photoshop] experience to master anything beyond superficial use.
Lightroom is similar in that is uses a 'photographically oriented' UI, although it's quite a lot less flexible than DxO.
On the other hand, I have found that understanding the physics and computing principles behind colour rendition are required to get the most from ARC (i.e. the RAW converter in Photoshop).