PDA

View Full Version : Lots of Lessons--Best to Get it Right in the Field!



Lorant Voros
06-27-2009, 12:19 PM
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/4900/090523riolagartos0789bp.jpg


Thanks to Lorant for posing this image. It led to a great thread with lots of lessons. As it turns out, we were unable to solve all of the problems because of an over-exposed RAW capture. So the big lesson is: getting it right in the field can make things a lot easier and even save an image from the trash bin.

later and love, artie......... Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART

BAA Site Guides, Digital Basics File, Mark III User's Guide, APTATS, Wimberley products, Lens Coats, Leg Coats, Mongoose heads, Delkin Products, Gitzo Tripods, and tons more: http://www.birdsasart.com (http://www.birdsasart.com/)

From Lorant:

It is very impressive to see these big birds flying. I like how this one was turning just before landing showing the feathers on the top. Thanks for looking.

1DMKIII
500mm f:4
ISO 500
f:5.6
1/800
handheld

Kobus Tollig
06-27-2009, 12:31 PM
greatpose here. Orange maybe clipped here. Also looks a bit soft. Watch for sharpening halos. Nice image well done

Desmond Chan
06-27-2009, 02:11 PM
I think the exposure looks good; I can even see some details in the darker feathers. I do see a hint of halos, too, still, I would like to suggest perhaps a bit more sharpening to the eye ? :)

Morkel Erasmus
06-27-2009, 03:07 PM
I agree colours may be overcooked, slight desaturation would do wonders, especially in the yellow/red frequencies. ditto some slight sharpening needed. great angle and shot though!!

Arthur Morris
06-27-2009, 04:14 PM
As one who admittedly does not have a great eye for detail, I gotta say that I love this one: the beautiful dorsal view, the fully out-stretched wings, the killer grey BKGR, and even the trailing feet. All loverly. Almost forgot the perfect head turn.

Arthur Morris
06-27-2009, 04:19 PM
Brought the image into Photoshop and the folks above were right. The red channel is toasted beyond all help. Best to re-convert in ACR paying attention to the highlight warnings and the color temp. It is likely save-able. See also the RED-ucation threads in ER. They were written for images like this....

DanWalters
06-27-2009, 06:42 PM
Very nice image. Like the detail in the bird and the nice lighting.

Jeff Cashdollar
06-27-2009, 10:18 PM
Nice shot, I love these birds. How much crop and what was the subject distance. Maybe turn down the sat dial a bit, colors seem too rich?

Techs look nice, what was your point of focus? It is hard to be hard to hit his head/neck HH, I bet. Were you using center sensor only?

Lorant Voros
06-28-2009, 05:10 AM
Thanks for the comments and suggestions. I am in the middle of an assignment, but I wanted to reply your comments

Artie, I will try saving the RED details. I have to learn a lot of PS for sure. I read the threads, but still not sure how to do it exactly. Is there a tutorial on the net on that?
Jeff, I always use the center sensor only and for birds in motion use All servo. It is a crop of course

Thanks again.

Arthur Morris
06-28-2009, 06:02 AM
Hi Lorant, What are you using to convert your RAW files?

Jeff Cashdollar
06-28-2009, 07:53 AM
Thanks for the answers, I was wondering how much crop (%'s) and the point of focus - overall well done.

Stu Bowie
06-28-2009, 11:40 AM
Great banking angle to show the dorsal view. Great contrast in colours Lorant.

Lorant Voros
06-28-2009, 07:29 PM
Artie, I use Photoshop CS3 and it's Camera Raw.

Jeff, here is the original size, so you can see how much crop it is:
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3114/originalffv.jpg

Thanks for your comments and help again.

Arthur Morris
06-28-2009, 07:36 PM
Thanks Lorant. Go back to the RAW and reconvert. Make sure that you have the two warning boxes activated. Then move the Recovery slider to the right till the RED warnings disappear. If that does not get rid of them try -10 on the Saturation. And if that does not work, try moving the Exposure slider to the left. Once all the red warnings are gone, hit convert and post the resulting JPEG just as you did above. You can check out all of my advice for ACR here: http://www.birdsasart.com/bn291.htm It's in the 2nd item.

Lorant Voros
06-28-2009, 08:24 PM
Thanks Artie. I don't have either red or blue warning sign in ACR. Used recovery, -10 saturation and a bit of exposure to the left. This is the image that came out. I don't know how it looks on your monitor, but the color doesn't look right on my laptop screen that isn't really accurate. Do you find this version better?

Thanks.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/9198/090523riolagartos0789.jpg

Arthur Morris
06-29-2009, 04:38 AM
Lorant,

re:

Thanks Artie.

YAW.

I don't have either red or blue warning sign in ACR.

You do. You just do not know how to activate them. When the ACR Camera Raw opens there should be a histogram in the upper right. In the top corners of the box with the histogram, there are two squares. When you click on each square you will see a white border around the square. This indicates that the warnings are now active. You can click them repeatedly to toggle them on and off, but they should always be left on.

Used recovery, -10 saturation and a bit of exposure to the left.

The image that you posted just above still has burned highlights, lots of them. Without the warnings activated, you are working in the dark.

This is the image that came out. I don't know how it looks on your monitor, but the color doesn't look right on my laptop screen that isn't really accurate.

It is surely duller.

Do you find this version better?

No, because it is still grossly over-exposed. Go back, re-convert with the Highlight and Shadow warnings activated, and post the whole image if you are able to eliminate the red highlight warnings. If not, let me know.

In the meantime, go to ER and study the Reducation posts so that you can avoid having to go through this in the future....

Gyorgy Szimuly
06-29-2009, 06:38 AM
The repost does not provide the real picture. The truth is between. The original post is a bit oversaturated but the repost is definitely under. I have seen those birds in Mexico and they are unusually strong pink indeed.

Despite the huge crop it is nice for web.

Szimi

Arthur Morris
06-29-2009, 06:52 AM
The repost does not provide the real picture. The truth is between. The original post is a bit oversaturated but the repost is definitely under. I have seen those birds in Mexico and they are unusually strong pink indeed. Szimi

Despite the fact that the last repost features dull colors it is still way over-exposed.

Jeff Cashdollar
06-29-2009, 11:58 AM
Lorant,

I like the original image, with a littlle top and right crop, thanks, nice work. The LHS pink reflection on the water is great!

Mayby post original with a nip and tuck.

Lorant Voros
06-29-2009, 01:58 PM
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/7933/bpn2.jpg



I read the threads in ER about "REDucation". I don't exactly know how Juan did the -40 qand such on the red channel, but I understand the meaning.

However, I don't know why I still have flashing highlights. I opened the image in ARC and clicked on the little tabs...the highlight is pointed out with an arrow on the picture. I moved the sliders until I didn't have any red flashing. I double checked with pressing the ALT and moving the exposure sliders. Than I opened the image in PS and rechecked the red channel in the level histogram. It is attached too. Can you please let me know what I am doing wrong?

Thanks Artie for spending the time on me. It is really amazing how you guys help out.

Lorant Voros
06-29-2009, 01:58 PM
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/5217/bpn1.jpg

Here is the second image with the levels check.

Lorant Voros
06-29-2009, 07:03 PM
Here is one more info. This is where the first red spots appear. With the above shown settings the hottest pixels are 253 on the red.


http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/3409/bpn3.jpg

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 03:17 AM
Lorant, You have done great. You have gone from having the whole bird flashing to having just a few hot pixels. The latter is quite acceptable. Though this repost is tiny, about 30kb as i was made from your screen capture, it will show you where I was going when I first saw the image.... You had a great image within the original image. I did get rid of the one flamingo in the llc.

One of the huge advantages of this crop is that you wind up with a lot more pixels.

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 03:19 AM
The trick in these situations it to work with the RGB histogram to ensure not clipping the RED channel! This will usually mean using much less plus compensation than you would expect.

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 03:20 AM
Hey Lorant, I can learn from you. How did you create that lovely arrow in pane #20?????? (Be specific!)

Lorant Voros
06-30-2009, 03:27 AM
While I was using ACR and PS I took little "pictures" of the process with Grab that came with my Mcbook Pro. I opened the pictures with Photoshop, selected custom shape tool (u) and from the Shape window in the top tool bar I choose the arrow that I wanted to use. There are other possibilities as well.

I hope I am specific enough.

So Artie, you say I still have highlights, but I can't see them. Is it still like that with the above shown settings? My final image is dull. How can I correct it once my exp is good?

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 03:39 AM
While I was using ACR and PS I took little "pictures" of the process with Grab that came with my Mcbook Pro. I opened the pictures with Photoshop, selected custom shape tool (u) and from the Shape window in the top tool bar I choose the arrow that I wanted to use. There are other possibilities as well.
I hope I am specific enough.

So Artie, you say I still have highlights, but I can't see them. Is it still like that with the above shown settings? My final image is dull. How can I correct it once my exp is good?

First off, thanks for the arrow info. I will have to try it. Never knew about custom shaped tools!

There are a very few flashing pixels in the screen capture in Pane #22. I will check the image in Pane #15 now and be back in a bit. (IM had sort of skipped over that one....)

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 03:41 AM
I was confused. As stated above, the image in Pane #15 is way over-exposed. That was the one before you got your warnings turned on.

Lorant Voros
06-30-2009, 03:51 AM
Ok, I went back and did the whole thing again having the histogram on all the time checking for the reds. I think where I made the mistake is with the sharpening. I sharpened with smart sharpen and it increased the highlights. (by the way, I read the new bulletin's sharpening just now). Also, to post I convert to sRGB at the very end of the process. Maybe it is a mistake too. I add a lot of highlights in the red by that.

If I convert to sRGB in ACR my highlights appear and I have to compensate a lot. If i work with that version after conversion to JPG I can end up with a photo that has no highlights, but flat and dull colors. If I increase any saturation I get the highlights back.

Here is the RGB version...looks very dull.

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9519/090523riolagartos0789rg.jpg
http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9519/090523riolagartos0789rg.jpg

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 05:16 PM
Lorant,

re:

Ok, I went back and did the whole thing again having the histogram on all the time checking for the reds.

Well, you have finally produced a version that is not over-exposed.

I think where I made the mistake is with the sharpening. I sharpened with smart sharpen and it increased the highlights.

Could be. I never use Smart Sharpen.

(by the way, I read the new bulletin's sharpening just now). Also, to post I convert to sRGB at the very end of the process. Maybe it is a mistake too. I add a lot of highlights in the red by that.

I work in and save my master files in Adobe RGB and convert to sRGB only for web and other electronic uses....

If I convert to sRGB in ACR my highlights appear and I have to compensate a lot. If i work with that version after conversion to JPG I can end up with a photo that has no highlights, but flat and dull colors. If I increase any saturation I get the highlights back.

Here is the RGB version...looks very dull.

Yes, that is the price you pay when you clip the RED channel. I may have found a partial cure. Let me know what you think of the repost here.

Arthur Morris
06-30-2009, 05:17 PM
ps: You never let me know what you thought of the wider crop that I suggested in Pane #23?

Lorant Voros
06-30-2009, 05:27 PM
Thank you again, Artie. A lot of things to learn, but I love every bit of it from going to take the photo to working on it and finding the way in processing.

I missed your crop suggestion. I went back now to see it....nice; I will try it for sure.

I will keep this lesson in mind next time and use my histogram more...though as far as I know it is only accurate for JPEG , since the camera produces it from that even if I take RAW. I am sure it works though, since this is what you describe in your bulletins and threads. I am visiting ER and read a lot already.

Thank you.

Lorant Voros
06-30-2009, 05:28 PM
And your repost is better. What have you done exactly?

I just opened it in PS.....it has the highlights on the red channel.

Arthur Morris
07-01-2009, 06:08 AM
I added RED and YELLOW to the REDs in Selective Color. There were no hot pixels when I saved the image. Not sure if uploading could have caused that....

Arthur Morris
07-01-2009, 06:13 AM
Hi Lorant,

re:

Thank you again, Artie.

YAW.

A lot of things to learn, but I love every bit of it from going to take the photo to working on it and finding the way in processing.

Me too.

I missed your crop suggestion. I went back now to see it....nice; I will try it for sure.

:)

I will keep this lesson in mind next time and use my histogram more

Good photographers use their histograms constantly. Ideal is to check the histogram as you encounter a new situation or when you sense that the light has changed.

...though as far as I know it is only accurate for JPEG , since the camera produces it from that even if I take RAW.

That's like saying, "I think that the horsepower for the engine in my Jaguar is slightly over-rated so I have decided to get out and push it." The histogram for the JPEG will be a bit ore contrastly than the actual histogram for the RAW. That is why I feel that having a few flashing pixels is often the best EXP.

I am sure it works though, since this is what you describe in your bulletins and threads. I am visiting ER and read a lot already.

It does and we need lots more folks spending time in the ER....

Arthur Morris
07-01-2009, 06:16 AM
Well, this is nuts. I went back and checked the histogram on the file that I had uploaded and it too showed the bird as over. So the lesson is, get it right in the field! At times, you simply cannot save detail that is not there...

Arthur Morris
07-05-2009, 10:10 AM
ps: I had added RED and YELLOW to the REDs in Selective Color, but as it turns out, that did not work....

Juan Carlos Vindas
11-06-2009, 01:57 PM
What a thread!

I have to say that I have learned so much today. I can not recall when was the first time you were mentioning the use of the RGB histogram, may be it was when you and Juan Aragones discussed it. Any ways, since that time I have been paying more attention to the red channel, and boy, that channel can make or break a picture.

Thank you Arthur and Lorant for bringing this thread into discussion.

JC

Ákos Lumnitzer
11-26-2009, 04:39 PM
This is a great read Artie and Lóránt. Thanks for sharing it!