PHOTOGRAPHS FROM UNUSUAL VIEWPOINTS thread (20130420)

[Jessicayla]

Thanks!

 

[Hoogle]

mmmm Dont really have any unusual images in my only folder I have left of all my pictures... But great excuse to go out with camera again now weather is getting better



Anyone else having desaturated colours in preview images. rather than clicking the image for better quality

 

[iDad]

Not sure if it would be considered an unusual viewpoint but it is unusual to find a skull on a fence post...... part three:mrgreen:

View attachment 31819

 

[ibclare]

That's unusual alright Mr. BarKeep!

I thought this one was too. This photo is from 1993. It was shot with an SLR and that's all I can remember. It needs more work, now that I see it uploaded here. Strange phenom . . . This was a tough one for me to fix. And I didn't quite.

Switching trains on my way to the Louvre, I just had to get this shot.



Maybe there isn't much difference between these two, (the first has a slight color correction and is lighter overall) but it's too bright in here today and I can't tell if the top one is too washed out or not. The angle of my monitor makes so much difference, aargh. So, which one? or neither, lol?

 

[Tom Mann]

Hi Clare - To be honest, I don't see that much of a differences between the two versions. I would be more concerned about overall tonality (particularly, the brighter areas), the cyan color cast, and sharpness issues. With respect to sharpness issues, for the life of me, I can't figure out how the Eiffel tower can be so badly OOF, whereas buildings and other objects also "at infinity" are reasonably sharp. My guess is that since this was a film camera, the film wasn't held flat. Anyway, I tried a quick fix. See what you think.

T

 

[ibclare]

Thanks Tom, looks good. I definitely had trouble with the cyan, but I didn't take enough time to work it because the sharpness was an issue. Tried regular sharpening and high pass, unsatisfactory both. So what did you do? Selectively sharpen the tower?

"the film wasn't held flat"

Do you mean in developing? I'd have to pull it out of its resting place to see if it's a result of scanning. It wouldn't make any difference that it's 20 yrs old and just scanned? What if some of the emulsion rubbed off? Just curious, but not fatal!

 

[Tom Mann]

Hi Clare -

First, I brought the image into ACR (CS6) and used the main color sliders to deal with the cyan cast (most visible in the foreground concrete). I can't remember, but I may also have slightly moved the cyan hue slider in the HSL adjustment tab in ACR.

Also, while in ACR, I used both the main tonality adjustments and the blue/cyan luminosity controls to try to slightly pull down some of the brightest areas.

I then took your image into PS, masked for the sky (and similarly colored areas) and applied Neat Image to smooth out the film grain (most visible in the sky).

Next came sharpening. I did this in two light passes. First, with "Focus Magic". I had the blendIF sliders set to prevent oversharpening of the very lightest and very darkest tones. Then I did another light focusing pass using "Topaz InFocus" (again using the same blendIF slider settings). I then applied a black layer mask and painted in white where I wanted the focusing to be maximum.

The final step was to reduce your image 700pixels in the long dimension using bicubic (normal) to avoid the artifacts introduced by PSG's uploading software.

With respect to my comment about film flatness, that's just a guess on my part, but I don't see any other way the tower could be OOF and other, similarly distant items could be in focus. The problem could occur either in the film gate of the camera, or at the time of scanning. I can't tell.

Cheers,

T

 

[smoke]

Barcelona

 

[MikeMc]

I suspect flatness was not caused by the camera / film gate flatness. After repairing cameras for 25 years, the number of bad pressure plates I have seen number under 5...The springs just do not let go, without some help..IE fingers. If this is the cause, all pictures will have this issue

I suspect film curling when in the enlarger, more common of a problem with many labs hurrying printing up.

 

[pepgirlz]

Was on a boat trip last year and got this shot. No croping just fixed exposer. Jean

 

[Tom Mann]

MikeMc: "... I suspect film curling when in the enlarger, more common of a problem with many labs hurrying printing up ..."

That's a very good point, Mike, although the problem may have happened in the scanner, not an enlarger as Clair did say, "I'd have to pull it out of its resting place to see if it's a result of scanning", and it sounds like it was scanned recently.

Clair, is that a scan of a print or a negative?

Tom

 

[ibclare]

Clair, is that a scan of a print or a negative?

Tom

Scanned from a print Tom and the awful truth, lol, is that my husband put it and all our photos from that trip into one of those - arrrrrrrrr - photo albums with the acetate picture "protector." Now the truth is out. That may well have lifted the top part of the photo away from the bed, though I tried to flatten it so I thought it was OK. Apparently not

 

[Tom Mann]

I took this a week or so ago from the inside of a car zipping around the Watkins Glen International Speedway. Definitely an unusual viewpoint for me.

T



PS - Don't worry, this lap I was being the photographer, not driver.

 

[chrisdesign]

Between the wheels

 

[ForeverFallenAngel]

Unusual viewpoint

 

[iDad]

Between the wheels

View attachment 33947

I remember this one from Topaz

 

[chrisdesign]

I remember this one from Topaz

iDad your still a good observer...it was on Topaz forum a while back.

 

[iDad]

Were your ears ringing Tom? I thought of this thread after these pictures were taken......:cheesy grin:
its a 10 foot long window but you'd never know it by these

I did some others I'll add later ....maybe:mrgreen:

 

[Paul]

Santas grotto mate

 

[iDad]

lol my wife favorite time of year.... arts, crafts design, paintings, you name it she loves that stuff (damn good at it too)!