Maria in waterfall

Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
edited March 14, 2011 in People
Natural light, slightly overcast - 70mm, f4.5, 1/125th, ISO 125

Effect work done 100% in Lightroom 3. Final retouching done in CS5.

SOOC image


HTL-IMG_1415.jpg
www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px

Comments

  • cj99sicj99si Registered Users Posts: 880 Major grins
    edited March 10, 2011
    Looks a little hot to me.
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited March 10, 2011
    Not to me. The image that is. I agree 100% about the model, if that's what you meant. Very nice pp work.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 10, 2011
    Correct, John. All detail is in the image. Also, a common mistake by photographers is underexposing images and not realizing the print will actually be slightly darker - making it worse.
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • cj99sicj99si Registered Users Posts: 880 Major grins
    edited March 10, 2011
    I subscribe to your print to monitor philosophy as well..... This image is hot, and awkward to look at.
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 10, 2011
    Again, where is the detail lost? Also, check the commercial ads. These sell and print daily.
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited March 10, 2011
    I guess "awkward" is subjective, so I can't argue with that, but on my monitor everything's there in the whites. I keep my monitor a bit dim, so it matches my prints. Maybe that's why it looks fine to me.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited March 11, 2011
    dsmPhotoCompany wrote: »
    Again, where is the detail lost? Also, check the commercial ads. These sell and print daily.

    CJ is correct. Did you not look at the blinkies or histogram on this? Bring it into ACR, and you'll see her face and dress are quite blown out. That's true on both the SOOC and processed versions.

    Beautiful shot otherwise. Got any shots from a lower vantage point that show more of the waterfall?
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 11, 2011
    Blinkies are not 100% accurate...just a general ballpark. No ACR...Lightroom. And the histogram on my camera and Lightroom did not and still do not show clipping of the whites.
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited March 11, 2011
    This is what I'm seeing with ACR on the SOOC version. That's a lot of blown pixels. The processed version looks the same.

    1212821083_gisYp-L.jpg
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 11, 2011
    ACR must be lying to you then. Lightroom shows nothing blown and I didn't see issues when I was in at 400-600% retouching in CS5.
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited March 11, 2011
    dsmPhotoCompany wrote: »
    ACR must be lying to you then. Lightroom shows nothing blown and I didn't see issues when I was in at 400-600% retouching in CS5.
    Well your red channel is at 254 in all those areas that are shown as blown out which confirms it, but I'll defer to your expertise.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • jdryan3jdryan3 Registered Users Posts: 1,353 Major grins
    edited March 11, 2011
    kdog wrote: »
    Well your red channel is at 254 in all those areas that are shown as blown out which confirms it, but I'll defer to your expertise.
    lol3.giflol3lol3.gif
    "Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
    -Fleetwood Mac
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 11, 2011
    And here is the Lightroom screenshot. Oh wow, I guess I lied - very minute amounts of the fabric are clipped...which can barely be seen. Nothing else is though...even included a close crop of the face (next post). Perhaps some foolerly is going on in your ACR work...
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 11, 2011
    Other sample...
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited March 11, 2011
    You might ask yourself what that big spike is jammed against the right-hand side of your histogram. Note also the highlight clipping alert is illuminated as well, just over that spike. I don't use LR, so I can't tell you why you don't have any clipping feedback on the preview image, perhaps you don't have them enabled. I would test them if I were you. But everything else in your display is screaming clipping.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited March 11, 2011
    To enable your highlight alert view, click on the highlight alert triangle on the upper-right of your histogram.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    kdog wrote: »
    To enable your highlight alert view, click on the highlight alert triangle on the upper-right of your histogram.

    Which is exactly what I did. I almost always have that on. Again, no detail is lost. The histogram clearly shows the highlights are strong but not clipped.
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited March 12, 2011
    What color space are you working in? Also, I see you're working on a TIF. You should try the same experiment as me. Go ahead and save the image from this thread directly. Then bring in that saved image to LR. I bet you'll find it's clipped. You may be incurring the clipping somewhere in the output of your workflow caused by the conversion to sRGB (assuming you're working in aRGB), or from Photobucket.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    kdog wrote: »
    You might ask yourself what that big spike is jammed against the right-hand side of your histogram. Note also the highlight clipping alert is illuminated as well, just over that spike. I don't use LR, so I can't tell you why you don't have any clipping feedback on the preview image, perhaps you don't have them enabled. I would test them if I were you. But everything else in your display is screaming clipping.


    Joel,

    I'm seeing both. In LR3 I see what his screen shows, with clipping on the wrap, but not on the face, Hist looks the same right side spike. In ACR I show what is shown with ( red dots) clipping all over her face....What gives?
    tom wise
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    This is all fine as an academic arguement, but on my monitor, I see all the detail in the wrap, so I could give a rat's patoot what some clipping blinkie says.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    Icebear wrote: »
    This is all fine as an academic arguement, but on my monitor, I see all the detail in the wrap, so I could give a rat's patoot what some clipping blinkie says.
    Yeah, okay, but what I am wonderin is, if it is different between two programs, is that an inherent work-flow flaw? I only check and typically do my stuff in LR3...but am I missing something?
    tom wise
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    I think it's a "cautionary warning" and not some sort of absolute measurement. At least that's how I use it. I, like you, use LR3 for 90% of my editing.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • VayCayMomVayCayMom Registered Users Posts: 1,870 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    Icebear wrote: »
    Not to me. The image that is. I agree 100% about the model, if that's what you meant. Very nice pp work.

    just what I was thinking
    Trudy
    www.CottageInk.smugmug.com

    NIKON D700
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    Icebear wrote: »
    I think it's a "cautionary warning" and not some sort of absolute measurement. At least that's how I use it. I, like you, use LR3 for 90% of my editing.

    Okay, you mean in ACR?..If so, message received, thanks John!
    tom wise
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    I've never used ACR and don't know much about it. What I can tell you with 100% certainty is that what I see in LR3 is what shows up on our prints that we get from a professional lab.

    So for me, I don't care what ACR shows on a low-res image that I posted online that is not designed for print.
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    Just for more fun, 2 more from the same set (these are from '09). For these I had moved to the other side and was standing on top of the waterfall. Not the smartest place to be - but I survived.

    HTL-IMG_1462-800.jpg
    HTL-IMG_1464-800.jpg
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • Jeremy_22Jeremy_22 Registered Users Posts: 220 Major grins
    edited March 12, 2011
    From 2010...wish I had hips twisted...

    HTLXI-4982.jpg
    www.dsmphotocompany.com · dsmPC Facebook · www.iclickphotography.com · iClick Facebook · DoubleShot Workshops

    ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited March 13, 2011
    These are quite the "fun"set!
    tom wise
  • ShimaShima Registered Users Posts: 2,547 Major grins
    edited March 13, 2011
    Very awesome work, love it!
    Photography by Cat || My Gear List
    Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
  • jdryan3jdryan3 Registered Users Posts: 1,353 Major grins
    edited March 14, 2011
    All blinking aside, I do like those two closeups. The first does seem to have what looks like a piece of green plastic grass on the very top of her head.headscratch.gif
    "Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
    -Fleetwood Mac
Sign In or Register to comment.