What's new
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Photos & Questions


ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
Hi Gurus!

I'll be hogging this thread to display photos and ask for critique. Also I'll be asking questions about this and that. Typically compostition, phototechnique, retouching so on and so forth.


Hope you'll hang around!


[SHORT ADDITION ABOUT ME UPON REQUEST]

Started my photo career back in 2010 and read everything I could on the subject. Then I got two kids and my photography came to a halt. (Except pictures of my kids that is :D)
Tring to start it up again at the moment.

Started using PS around the same time and mainly for retouching back then. Nowdays I'm trying to learn montage retouch and what not.

So I'm quite new to all this and eager to learn.

[CAMERA]
Nikon D800

[LENSES]
60mm F/2,8 Nikon
24-70mm F/2,8 Sigma
70-200mm F/2,8 Tamron

[STROBE]
SB-900


[SOFTWARE]
Lightroom 4
PS 5
 
Last edited:

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
I'll start this of by double posting myself!

In this shot I took last week the sharpness just isn't there. What went wrong? Did I shake too much or is something of with my equipment?

Uploaded photo have passed lightroom. Original Raw found Here. (_DSC4447).

_DSC4447-Redigera.jpg
ISO 100: 82mm: f/2,8: 1/800sec

In preview this shoot looks flat and green grayish for me how is it on your end?
 
Last edited:

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
To me, by far, the more serious problem is that you shot on an blue overcast day (with lots of green light from the grass bouncing up at the couple) without using some well color balanced fill flash. There are limits to what simple color correction can do, and, IMHO, you reached them.

The minor problem is sharpness. My guess is that most of the softness is caused because you shot at f/2.8 with maybe a bit because of camera motion. I would have increased the ISO on your d800 to 800, stopped down to f/5.6, and doubled the shutter speed. If the background is a bit too sharp at f/5.6, that's a lot easier to correct in post processing than attempting to sharpen a slightly soft image.

I attempted to reduce these problems by processing your image twice in ACR: once for the couple, and once for the background, and then merging them in PS. I also separately sharpened the couple. It looks like I added too much contrast/ saturation / red, but I just don't have time to go back and correct it for this forum posting.

HTH,

Tom
 

Attachments

  • _DSC4447nef-TJM01-acr-ps03b_sRGB-698px_wide-02.jpg
    _DSC4447nef-TJM01-acr-ps03b_sRGB-698px_wide-02.jpg
    232.6 KB · Views: 12
Last edited:

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
I see your point Tom and will try to take it to heart. However...

This shoot/location was requested by the couple (2 good friends and it was my first weddingportrait) so I would like to improve as much as I can. :)

Would you have suggested a diffrent location?

without using some well color balanced fill flash.
What exactly do you mean by this? I know the basics about fill flash but then you lost me.:banghead:

Just to clarify about sharpness on a scale from 1-10. 10 being super and 1 being Ohh NO! Where would this shoot land?

Lastly I must ask again if I'm doing something wrong, but the green you see in my picture isn't so horrible if I look at my screen in say ACR but when previewing in this forum it's horrible. Have I missed something when saving or uploading or is this just how it is?

Thanks for replying and even taking your time for a fast edit, means alot.:thumbsup:
 

ibclare

Queen Bee
Messages
11,034
Likes
4,638
Yeah, lol, maybe just a bit red . . . :mrgreen:

But the idea is there and there is a dimensionality that wasn't in the first pic.

Ziped, if you post another, would you make it the full size image? Hard on my "mature" eyes to really see.
 

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
"mature" eyes
So that's what I got nowdays! Always wondered what to call em before. :lol:

would you make it the full size image
I included a link to the raw for comparison in my first post. But since you all are such nice guys n gals I included a humongs jpg too found here.

And since I can't post full size, below is as close as I could get.
_DSC4447-Redigera-Redigera.jpg
 

Attachments

  • _DSC4447-Redigera-2.jpg
    _DSC4447-Redigera-2.jpg
    686.2 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:

ibclare

Queen Bee
Messages
11,034
Likes
4,638
OK, thanks. And here is a true quirk of PSG. In the first post, the color looks awful. As you described, greensih grey. When I clicked on the enlarged verson, the color balance is way better and the green cast is gone. We find this discrepancy often and I don't know wy that is.

But it still needs some sharpening and fill light (though I know nothing about doing this; not a studio photographer) as Tom suggested, it looks much better.

Did you like that? Mature eyes, lol.

BTW, using camera raw, adding fill light is an option. I would depend on other, more expereinced opinions to say if that is helpful in this case.
 
Last edited:

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
Okay good to know, I won't have to go crazy just yet then. :lol:

And yeah loved it.

I' havn't gotten round to sharpening the pics yet, but I'll try out Tom's method and see what I can get :D
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
I'm sitting in a tire store waiting for a new set of tires to be put on one of our cars, typing on my cell phone, so my responses are going to be short.

1. The problem with the color and tonality of the forum's in line previews is that the forum software disregards and strips all the color space metadata in uploaded files. This means that any software used to view the preview will interpret the RGB numbers in the file as sRGB, instead of correctly interpreting them as ProFoto colors, as u intended.

This is is a very common problem on the internet. The solution is simple: ALWAYS convert (not assign) every image to sRGB b4 posting.

t
 

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
I've heard about this now that you mention it.
Never knew how it actually worked tough.

Thanks for clarifying.

Tom and everyone else for that matter. What format do you deliver for customers, how do you set them up and why? Intended use is web.

New pic coming tomorrow but for now, good night!
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
2. With respect to moving to a different location or shooting on a different day, pro photographers simply don't have that luxury. The solution is what I said earlier: bring some lights and umbrellas and supplement the existing light. Done correctly, it will make a huge improvement. It will also produce higher quality results, and in less time than attempting to fix the problem with software.

If u only have a single hot shoe strobe, use it (dialed down by about 1.3 stops). It will be better than nothing.

Another trick is to lay down a big white bed sheet on the grass in front of the couple, just out of the frame. This will turn the green reflected light into blue (like everything else in the image). It's much easier to correct a single color cast than two different reflected colors.

T
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
...What format do you deliver for customers, how do you set them up and why? Intended use is web....
By format, I presume u mean "color space".

For web viewing, the answer is simple: ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS sRGB.

Of course, that certainly doesn't mean u have to do all your work in sRGB, just that u must convert to it before sending files out the door.

T
 
Last edited:

MikeMc

McGuru
Messages
1,871
Likes
1,202
I might add, motion is best stopped with a secure mount for the camera...So use a monopod or a tripod. To hand hold anything with shallow DOF is usually a problem ....BTW you can prop a large whiteboard to the tripod legs for free "fill" light reflected up and back
 

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
Tom, sorry meant jpeg, png tiff and the like. And by setting up I mean compression rate, colorspace (already answered) so on and so forth.
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
A minor correction to my first post in this thread (ie, Post #3), plus some observations:

1. In my first post, I suggested that the OP double his shutter speed. I had looked at the EXIF data for this image, but for some reason, as I was writing my reply, I incorrectly remembered his shutter speed as being 1/200 instead of 1/800. That's already plenty fast for either hand holding or tripod mounted. Zoomed only to 82 mm, he doesn't need to go any faster than that.

The EXIF data states that he did not have the VR feature of his 70-200/2.8G turned on. This is what you do if you are going to use that lens on a tripod, so it suggests that he already had the camera mounted on a tripod.

2. To be honest, because of the space problem which couldn't possibly be any worse (ProFoto interpreted as an sRGB), and because I'm a bit worried about and don't know the settings the OP used in LR, I've only been looking at, and working from the raw file that the OP posted on Dropbox, and essentially just ignoring the images that Ziped posted in this forum.

To show how his image would have looked if there wasn't a problem with the color space, I took his NEF into Nikon's software, Capture NX2, and converted it to an sRGB JPG (attached below). As you can see, it looks vastly better than the versions previously posted in this thread. ACR and/or Lightroom can do just about as good a conversion as NX2 does, but one has to tweak the settings in ACR/LR to get to this point, whereas NX2 knows and respects Nikon's conversion preferences, so usually needs almost no tweaking.

3. Ziped, with respect to your question about sharpness, note that in my first post, I did not consider the file I have been working with (ie, your raw, NEF, file) to have any serious problem in this area as you can see from the version attached below. All RAW files need some sharpening, and this one was no different. In addition, I stand by my previous recommendation to stop down the lens by a stop or two to increase the DOF and use the lens closer to its optimal aperture, but, as I said, this is not an urgent matter. To answer your question about numerically rating the sharpness of this image, I would put it at around a 5 (ie, average for that very good lens - I have an earlier model that I love). For example, I can see the "goose-bumps" on the arm of the girl.

4. Also, I still strongly stand by my previous suggestion to bring some lights on such shoots. They will make the subjects "pop" and give the three dimensionality that Clare mentioned.

HTH,

Tom

PS - Because this is our Fourth of July holiday, we are leaving town for the weekend to visit friends in the country (West Virginia). I'll try to bring a laptop, but probably won't be on PSG as much.
 

Attachments

  • _DSC4447_capture_nx2_jpg_sRGB-xnv_698px_hi.jpg
    _DSC4447_capture_nx2_jpg_sRGB-xnv_698px_hi.jpg
    127.1 KB · Views: 28

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Ahh .. I just saw the question about file format, compression, etc. that you posted while I was typing.

To avoid problems, unless the person I am delivering my images to is a sophisticated professional photo editor (ie, a person that I'm sure knows about color spaces, has a hardware calibrated monitor, etc.), I always send them sRGBs at the maximum quality level. I'll send this at both the full, original resolution, as well as at a moderate pixel dimension (ie, small enough so that it can be viewed on a 19 inch, typical office desktop monitor without any resizing, automatic or otherwise.

If the client is a pro, they will be able to tell me exactly what they want.

T

PS - With respect to the NX2 conversion of your raw file that I just posted, I would probably prefer a version somewhere in-between it and the "too hot" ACR conversion that I posted earlier in this thread, and maybe with a bit of vignetting, ie, something like this ...
 

Attachments

  • _DSC4447nef-TJM01-acr-ps04a_sRGB-698px_hi_blend_with_NX2_conversion-01.jpg
    _DSC4447nef-TJM01-acr-ps04a_sRGB-698px_hi_blend_with_NX2_conversion-01.jpg
    211 KB · Views: 30

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
Thanks again Tom.

I had hope to try out your merging two diffrent version togheter today but I'll have to postpone that for tomorrow.


Meanwhile everyone feel free to critique and give suggestions for this image. (Taken earlier this evening).

This is a good friend and her dog that unfortunatly is dying from cancer. She wanted a picture with the two of them together before it's too late. This is one of them.

Linda&Enzo.jpg
ISO 640: 200mm: f/2,8: 1/400sec

New one coming tomorrow so stay tuned!
 
Last edited:

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
Didn't have the opportunity to leave home today, except for wotk that is. :)
So I shot this "flower" my GF has standing in the window. ( All botanics out there feel free to tell me what it is cause I don't have a clue and my GF is currently refilling her sleepaccount.)

Please leave critique and suggestions as you see fit.
Blomma.jpg
ISO 200: 60mm: f/9: 1/5sec

Watch out for a new one tomorrow!
 
Last edited:

ZipedX

Power User
Messages
214
Likes
142
Got my first ND-filter home earlier this week and finally I got the chance to try it out.

Critique and suggestions appreciated.

Birka.jpg
ISO 50: 40mm: f/8: 13sec
 
Last edited:

egosbar

Guru
Messages
778
Likes
351
hi mate maybe it would be helpful if you give some backround information on yourself and your photography , i see by one of toms post your using a d800, give us some info on how long youve had this camera and how much you understand it , im guessing by your photos your understanding the basics of photography as far as shutter aperture and iso and i dont think there is too much to worry about with your actual basic photography , i think where you need to work on is your post processing skills and lighting techniques it is hard for everyone to give the same critique as our monitors are all different and without us all seeing the same thing you may get varying results , reminds me i really need to buy a color calibrator, i view my images with the brightness turned down about 4 clicks , i think i read it somewhere lol maybe here,
first image looks really overcooked to me (in post less is more most of the time) , there is still a lot of detail in the blacks you can pull out in raw i had a go at the post , i give myself a time limit of 5 minutes max , this didnt take that long although everything is subjective to individuals eyes , very quickly i just reduced the vibrance a bit and pulled some shadows out , i sharpened a little all in camera raw , to my eyes its better but that isnt saying its better for all eyes or monitors, i like to see detail and if its there then i pull it unless im going for a specific look i think your photography is good and id be concentrating on improving your post processing , ill have a look at the exif data now composition is excellent and i think its a well thought out image and you captured the mood extremely well , pose looks very natural well done oh by the way give us your post processing experience and programs your using sorry to hear about your freind and her struggle
 

Attachments

  • Linda&Enzo-animate-small.gif
    Linda&Enzo-animate-small.gif
    402.3 KB · Views: 20
Last edited:

Top