I nearly always bump up contrast a bit in post. Raw images often tend to look washed out if you don't. My camera settings are pretty straight forward. When I first got it, I tried the higher saturation settings, but I didn't like the skin tones. None of this set were edited with anything more than iphoto. When I do portraits, of course, I usually get fancier:)
I also didn't have any filter on the lens, although I should at least keep the UV/Polarizer on there to protect it.
Please post some shots. Maybe someone can help with processing tips if you do.
1) Were your postings straight out of the camera or did you run any PP in batch or single-thread? (Excluding the B&W conversions as that's pretty straight forward)
I recropped most of them, and did some per-shot tweaks as well as batch. I have a set of defaults in Aperture that I tend to apply to most photos after importing (a bit of contrast, a bit of vibrancy and some edge sharpen).
Some of them I ended up changing exposure on as well, mostly because the camera exposed too dark (I shot mostly with aperture priority). The ceiling light ones in particular.
2) Are you running any filter on the lenses or naked? If so, what filter?
Naked, but I should get some UV filters for glass protection.
3) Did you have any on-board configs dialed in such as color enhancement, saturation bump etc?
I use raw so the settings in the camera make no difference.
Reason I ask is I'm embarrased to post my shots after review. All of them exept the neon/night shots are really washed out/pale. I just can't put my finger on it at the moment.
As Caroline suggested, post a couple you don't like?
I can show before/after versions of mine later tonight as well.
These are straight out of the camera except for a resize. I'd normally run a sharpen routine at minimun, and play a little with color saturation, but these are SOOC. These are from a D90, "A" mode for 99% of the shots at around f/8 for most of them with the 18-200. ISO was 200-400 for the daytime shots and bumped to 1600 for the night shots (50mm). No in-camera configurations were done. The three lenses I used were 1)Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 with no filter, 2)Nikon 18-200VR f/3.5-5.6 with a UV (mc) filter and 3)Nikon 50mm f/1.8 with a UV filter.
My flow is RAW->LR2 nothing special. I keep the sharpen jacked up to about 70 with the mask at about 85 or 90 but otherwise, I'm running the LR2 defaults. I posted my PP'ed images here.
Looking at your 2009 East Coast Tour images, do you nominally jack the vibrancy in your defaults? LR2 knows about lenses so if you are using a new lens, perhaps some of your defaults reset.
They aren't horribly off, but they do seem a bit less saturated than your other shots.
Looking for similar shots, the front of the old car, you have about 2x more light coming in. I was f/4 1/160 ISO800 vs. you at f/6.3 1/13 and ISO400 [1/2.5x f-stop, 12x shutter, 1/2 ISO = 2.4x]. The shot from your secret spot, I'm at ISO100, f/8 1/320s and you were at ISO200, f/8 1/500 so 2x on ISO and a little less than 1/2 on shutter, so a bit more light coming in. On our shots of the rotunda straight up (025 in your keyword list) you were ISO400, f/8 1/60s and mine was ISO400 f/4.5 and 1/200s so 3x on f/stop and a little less than 1/3 on shutter. So it looks like you are a little exposed to the right in the series of samples relative to where I was shooting. Now, I was shooting manual most of the time to get more practice there, but switched back to Av occassionally so I'm not sure what mode I was in in these cases.
Two more things sort of popped into my head to include my monitor at home and metering point in the body.
My monitor is color adjusted and now that I ponder that, it's equal across mine and everyone elses's shots so that sort of eliminates it. My metering (as best I can find that menu) shows "Centerweighted 8mm". That's the default as I've not intentionally changed it.
And how do I do a high contrast PP on the gutted out building?
You big baby! Those shots are not the big embarrassment you made them out to be.
Hey, I really wanna see that gutted out building shot in high contrast.
Caroline
I agree with Caroline, your shots aren't that far off. One thing to remember is that what you see and what you like to see is very personal...everyone likes something different. Most people tend to like the "overly real world" of oversaturation and overbrightness (that is why LCDs TVs look "better" to people in the stores, but plasmas do a much better job of reproducing accurate colors and contrasts). One thing to try and do is to remember how it actually looked to your eye and then compare it to the picture and you will find it is closer than you think (remember though, a weakness of a digital camera vs. film...or your eye...is that it can't catch all the subtleness of color ranges...again, back to the LCD (digital camera) vs. plasma (film camera) example).
I only used UV filters on all my lenses...the sky was great so no need for a polarizer (and no water). I shot 100 percent of mine in AV mode (I really like to play with DOF and that is the easiest way for me to do that quickly) and about 80 percent in spot meter mode. Spot metering tends to make my camera shoot a bit underexposed overall, but helps me get the main subject of the picture exposed the best but I do have to compensate either on the camera or in post (it also makes me stop and think a bit more about light in the image).
For processing, I usually add a bit of saturation to the colors and tweak the contrast (either up or down) until I get the most details in the shadows I can without effecting the rest of the image.
Scott--I don't think yours are bad either. I think your colors look pretty accurate compared to what I saw in person. I tend to do most of my processing shot-by-shot, which is why it takes me so longggggg. I almost always boost the saturation and sharpening. I haven't settled on a workflow, so I go back and forthe between ACR and Aperture for my RAW processing--most times I end up in PS too. Lately, I've been using the Topaz plug-ins quite often and I really like them. As for lens filters, I had a UV on for part of the time indoors. Outdoors, I did use a polarizer for some of my shots of the capitol dome, but I should have taken it off. I like the extra boost to the sky sometimes but sometimes it can be too much if I don't have the filter just right. Byron was right about not needing a polarizer that day and I should have done without. For the night shots, I used my 50 1.8 with no filter.
Pics coming soon . . .
Lauren
"But ask the animals, and they will teach you." (Job 12:7)
Man, you guys are GREAT. I really appreciate the comments.
Andrew - I really don't have a workflow yet. I do have LR, but pretty much use it single-thread/picture at a time. What I really need is a quick overview of how it works for others. I believe podcasts are out there on it I'll go look at. For example, I don't really know the pro/con of setting up a single catalog for everything, or by year. Simple stuff like that before I even get to processing.
But for now, I dump the large/fine and RAW images into a specific folder on my computer. I cull from there and the ones that are left are brought over to LR where I do them one at a time, mostly saturation and sharpening. Any work where I want to get 'creative' I export a .jpg back over to Photoshop Elements.
~scott
Man, you guys are GREAT. I really appreciate the comments.
Andrew - I really don't have a workflow yet. I do have LR, but pretty much use it single-thread/picture at a time. What I really need is a quick overview of how it works for others. I believe podcasts are out there on it I'll go look at. For example, I don't really know the pro/con of setting up a single catalog for everything, or by year. Simple stuff like that before I even get to processing.
But for now, I dump the large/fine and RAW images into a specific folder on my computer. I cull from there and the ones that are left are brought over to LR where I do them one at a time, mostly saturation and sharpening. Any work where I want to get 'creative' I export a .jpg back over to Photoshop Elements.
~scott
Scott:
I'll be glad to show you how I use my Lightroom, get in touch with me and we can hammer out a time...not sure I use it the most efficient way, but the system works great for me:)
Man, you guys are GREAT. I really appreciate the comments.
Andrew - I really don't have a workflow yet. I do have LR, but pretty much use it single-thread/picture at a time. What I really need is a quick overview of how it works for others. I believe podcasts are out there on it I'll go look at. For example, I don't really know the pro/con of setting up a single catalog for everything, or by year. Simple stuff like that before I even get to processing.
But for now, I dump the large/fine and RAW images into a specific folder on my computer. I cull from there and the ones that are left are brought over to LR where I do them one at a time, mostly saturation and sharpening. Any work where I want to get 'creative' I export a .jpg back over to Photoshop Elements.
~scott
Just shoot RAW and cull in LR. You can dump jpeg and you will have equal or better results from the conversion. The sharpening in the export is 'smart' in that it determines what to do based on the size of the result (more sharpening for smaller images).
Cull what you don't like in LR and delete it. You can then create starting points for a group of shots by bumping settings en masse.
I echo Andrew's advice about shooting in Raw. That's all I shoot, even for everyday family stuff because I have so many PP options if needed. I also cull out the good or OK ones as soon as I can, and delete the others. I talked to one of our pros who said he "never" deletes anything (though he does file his shots on ext hard drives/DVDs/etc.). Of course, his "bad" ones are no doubt better than my best so it is a relative thing. If I didn't delete stuff, I'd slow my system down more than it already is . . . and I'm using an iMac that they promised could handle all these photos! I'm trying to get more and more critical about what I keep and what I delete.
If anyone objects to having their pic on line, please tell me and I will take them down. Based on our discussions during the shoot, I presumed it to be OK for everyone.
C&C are welcomed.
Lauren
"But ask the animals, and they will teach you." (Job 12:7)
Nice photos, Lauren. Did you use the Topaz plugins to get the HDR-style effects on the first 2? I like them.
I also sat down and took a second look at everyone's gallery. These are some of my favorites:
Lauren: I really like your first one of the capitol. The street shadows one is nice too.
Carolyn: I like the composition in the moon shot. I also really like the 14th one (black and white of the fence).
Byron: Your Paramount sign and the one of the parking lot wall ("Abstract") are great. I noticed the logo wasn't lit on my photos, you must have been by later?
Andrew (based on the separate thread): The RR Crossing photo is great. I like the one of the punch machine too.
I'll add a couple of the people shots to my gallery tonight or tomorrow. I kept them offline since I didn't know if there was general consent or not. :-)
Other lessons learned for me:
* Leave the tele(s) at home. They're heavy and felt way too cramped when I tried switching.
* Bring the flash for the indoor shots, especially on the D80.
* My composition skills definitely need improvement. Some could be fixed by recropping but that's a crutch.
* Need to do this again / more often.
Seeing what you guys saw that I missed (or saw differently) makes me want to go out again. I had a lot of fun and was a great learning experience.
Lauren, I really like your work! You and Caroline made so much more out of those railings than what I saw in them. I suspected some interest, got some angles, but never saw the right crop.
Andrew - I like the shade of pink but I'm afraid the image doesn't do anything for me.
Oluf - I did use some Topaz effects on the first 2 shots in my gallery. I just recently bought it and am enjoying it a LOT! I'm sure it will do a lot more than I've sorted out yet. I do shoot some HDR also, using Photomatix Pro for the processing. I might try some of these Austin shots with tonemapping also. Thanks for the compliment.
Thanks, all!
Lauren
"But ask the animals, and they will teach you." (Job 12:7)
Generally, I don't generate funky colors, but tried this. To the scrap heap?
I'm normally not a fan of "creative" photoshopping, but that one is pretty cool. The pink/purple in the dark part of the shadow is a little bright but the rest looks neat.
Sorry I missed out.
Sorry I couldn't make the Austin shoot out. We headed up to Enchanted rock for a little family exploration - new to TX. The weather was great and the kids got to run around and throw rocks into the water.
Comments
I also didn't have any filter on the lens, although I should at least keep the UV/Polarizer on there to protect it.
Please post some shots. Maybe someone can help with processing tips if you do.
Caroline
Some of them I ended up changing exposure on as well, mostly because the camera exposed too dark (I shot mostly with aperture priority). The ceiling light ones in particular. Naked, but I should get some UV filters for glass protection.
I use raw so the settings in the camera make no difference.
As Caroline suggested, post a couple you don't like?
I can show before/after versions of mine later tonight as well.
Nikon D700, D80
24-70 f/2.8 | 50 f/1.8 | 70-210 f/4 | 80-200 f/2.8
SB-900
http://bno.smugmug.com/ | http://tinyswede.blogspot.com/
http://m38a1.smugmug.com/Other/20091227-South-Congress/10786441_hG25m#751925456_rgwRK
These are straight out of the camera except for a resize. I'd normally run a sharpen routine at minimun, and play a little with color saturation, but these are SOOC. These are from a D90, "A" mode for 99% of the shots at around f/8 for most of them with the 18-200. ISO was 200-400 for the daytime shots and bumped to 1600 for the night shots (50mm). No in-camera configurations were done. The three lenses I used were 1)Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 with no filter, 2)Nikon 18-200VR f/3.5-5.6 with a UV (mc) filter and 3)Nikon 50mm f/1.8 with a UV filter.
I need some help as this is horribly frustrating.
.
Looking at your 2009 East Coast Tour images, do you nominally jack the vibrancy in your defaults? LR2 knows about lenses so if you are using a new lens, perhaps some of your defaults reset.
They aren't horribly off, but they do seem a bit less saturated than your other shots.
Looking for similar shots, the front of the old car, you have about 2x more light coming in. I was f/4 1/160 ISO800 vs. you at f/6.3 1/13 and ISO400 [1/2.5x f-stop, 12x shutter, 1/2 ISO = 2.4x]. The shot from your secret spot, I'm at ISO100, f/8 1/320s and you were at ISO200, f/8 1/500 so 2x on ISO and a little less than 1/2 on shutter, so a bit more light coming in. On our shots of the rotunda straight up (025 in your keyword list) you were ISO400, f/8 1/60s and mine was ISO400 f/4.5 and 1/200s so 3x on f/stop and a little less than 1/3 on shutter. So it looks like you are a little exposed to the right in the series of samples relative to where I was shooting. Now, I was shooting manual most of the time to get more practice there, but switched back to Av occassionally so I'm not sure what mode I was in in these cases.
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
Hey, I really wanna see that gutted out building shot in high contrast.
Caroline
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
My monitor is color adjusted and now that I ponder that, it's equal across mine and everyone elses's shots so that sort of eliminates it. My metering (as best I can find that menu) shows "Centerweighted 8mm". That's the default as I've not intentionally changed it.
And how do I do a high contrast PP on the gutted out building?
.
What's your PP flow?
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
I agree with Caroline, your shots aren't that far off. One thing to remember is that what you see and what you like to see is very personal...everyone likes something different. Most people tend to like the "overly real world" of oversaturation and overbrightness (that is why LCDs TVs look "better" to people in the stores, but plasmas do a much better job of reproducing accurate colors and contrasts). One thing to try and do is to remember how it actually looked to your eye and then compare it to the picture and you will find it is closer than you think (remember though, a weakness of a digital camera vs. film...or your eye...is that it can't catch all the subtleness of color ranges...again, back to the LCD (digital camera) vs. plasma (film camera) example).
I only used UV filters on all my lenses...the sky was great so no need for a polarizer (and no water). I shot 100 percent of mine in AV mode (I really like to play with DOF and that is the easiest way for me to do that quickly) and about 80 percent in spot meter mode. Spot metering tends to make my camera shoot a bit underexposed overall, but helps me get the main subject of the picture exposed the best but I do have to compensate either on the camera or in post (it also makes me stop and think a bit more about light in the image).
For processing, I usually add a bit of saturation to the colors and tweak the contrast (either up or down) until I get the most details in the shadows I can without effecting the rest of the image.
Pics coming soon . . .
Lauren
Lauren Blackwell
www.redleashphoto.com
Andrew - I really don't have a workflow yet. I do have LR, but pretty much use it single-thread/picture at a time. What I really need is a quick overview of how it works for others. I believe podcasts are out there on it I'll go look at. For example, I don't really know the pro/con of setting up a single catalog for everything, or by year. Simple stuff like that before I even get to processing.
But for now, I dump the large/fine and RAW images into a specific folder on my computer. I cull from there and the ones that are left are brought over to LR where I do them one at a time, mostly saturation and sharpening. Any work where I want to get 'creative' I export a .jpg back over to Photoshop Elements.
~scott
Scott:
I'll be glad to show you how I use my Lightroom, get in touch with me and we can hammer out a time...not sure I use it the most efficient way, but the system works great for me:)
Just shoot RAW and cull in LR. You can dump jpeg and you will have equal or better results from the conversion. The sharpening in the export is 'smart' in that it determines what to do based on the size of the result (more sharpening for smaller images).
Cull what you don't like in LR and delete it. You can then create starting points for a group of shots by bumping settings en masse.
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
Here are some of my shots posted. More to follow later, including my neon shots: http://www.redleashphoto.com/gallery/10785431_DVx7E#752348304_MQscw
If anyone objects to having their pic on line, please tell me and I will take them down. Based on our discussions during the shoot, I presumed it to be OK for everyone.
C&C are welcomed.
Lauren
Lauren Blackwell
www.redleashphoto.com
I also edit image by image. I tweak contrast and such as I cull, and then go back to do more editing on a few.
Caroline
I also sat down and took a second look at everyone's gallery. These are some of my favorites:
Lauren: I really like your first one of the capitol. The street shadows one is nice too.
Carolyn: I like the composition in the moon shot. I also really like the 14th one (black and white of the fence).
Byron: Your Paramount sign and the one of the parking lot wall ("Abstract") are great. I noticed the logo wasn't lit on my photos, you must have been by later?
Andrew (based on the separate thread): The RR Crossing photo is great. I like the one of the punch machine too.
I'll add a couple of the people shots to my gallery tonight or tomorrow. I kept them offline since I didn't know if there was general consent or not. :-)
Other lessons learned for me:
* Leave the tele(s) at home. They're heavy and felt way too cramped when I tried switching.
* Bring the flash for the indoor shots, especially on the D80.
* My composition skills definitely need improvement. Some could be fixed by recropping but that's a crutch.
* Need to do this again / more often.
Seeing what you guys saw that I missed (or saw differently) makes me want to go out again. I had a lot of fun and was a great learning experience.
Nikon D700, D80
24-70 f/2.8 | 50 f/1.8 | 70-210 f/4 | 80-200 f/2.8
SB-900
http://bno.smugmug.com/ | http://tinyswede.blogspot.com/
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
Oluf - I did use some Topaz effects on the first 2 shots in my gallery. I just recently bought it and am enjoying it a LOT! I'm sure it will do a lot more than I've sorted out yet. I do shoot some HDR also, using Photomatix Pro for the processing. I might try some of these Austin shots with tonemapping also. Thanks for the compliment.
Thanks, all!
Lauren
Lauren Blackwell
www.redleashphoto.com
I'm normally not a fan of "creative" photoshopping, but that one is pretty cool. The pink/purple in the dark part of the shadow is a little bright but the rest looks neat.
Nikon D700, D80
24-70 f/2.8 | 50 f/1.8 | 70-210 f/4 | 80-200 f/2.8
SB-900
http://bno.smugmug.com/ | http://tinyswede.blogspot.com/
Well, here's one attempt....
Sorry I couldn't make the Austin shoot out. We headed up to Enchanted rock for a little family exploration - new to TX. The weather was great and the kids got to run around and throw rocks into the water.
See you at the meet up on the 20th??
Tom
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
the Austin smugmug group meets on the 20th @ 7pm.
You'll find info on it on the smug site, also check meetup.com
Hope to see you all there!