Supermoto practice in Phoenix

scottcolbath · February 17, 2008

One of my friends out at PKRA today.

I'll post up a few more later.

This was taken with my 30D with the 400mm at f5.6 uncropped or edited. Yes, Andrew's shirt does glow like that.

Good? Bad? How say you?

S.C.

scottcolbath · February 17, 2008

A few more. No editing done. What would you do with these pics?

S.C.

scottcolbath · February 18, 2008

I like this shot.

Another good one.

S.C.

ian408 · February 18, 2008

Hmmm. Time to go riding....A lot of them could use a tighter crop or more
bike and rider. You've got the bokeh for blurring the ugly backgrounds down.

Is that a 690 your buddy is on?

cletus · February 18, 2008

Nice stuff

Lighting and exposure looks really good. I don't think there is a whole lot (if anything) you need to do to them.

I just wish some of the shots weren't quite so tight. There are a couple shots in there with a tiny portion of the tires and/or rider's boot getting clipped at the bottom of the picture. I think those shots would be a lot better with just a touch of pavement between the bike/rider and the edge of the picture.

scottcolbath · February 18, 2008

Thanks for the comments.

Those pics are completely untouched.

I also have many wider shots which I could neatly crop down. These are the first I decided to post after a quick review. I'll put up some others ASAP.

S.C.

maczippy · February 18, 2008

scottcolbath wrote:

A few more. No editing done. What would you do with these pics?

In all honesty, I wouldn't have posted them until you *had* edited them.

IMO, they're over saturated, many are a wee bit off in the focus department and the cropping doesn't do the subject any favours....

Rule of thumb. If you're going to post *anything* always, always post your best stuff....

Andrew

scottcolbath · February 19, 2008

maczippy wrote:

In all honesty, I wouldn't have posted them until you *had* edited them.

IMO, they're over saturated, many are a wee bit off in the focus department and the cropping doesn't do the subject any favours....

Rule of thumb. If you're going to post *anything* always, always post your best stuff....

Andrew

I'm learning and trying to take in as much as I can, which is why I posted them as is. I want to know from those who are better at this than I am what they would to to improve these pics. I thought I made that very clear in my initial posts.

BTW maczippy, as far as them being over saturated, what would you do to correct that? Like I said, I have done nothing with these pics. What settings would you change? What sort of PP would you do? I posted looking for some sage wisdom. What are you offering?

S.C.

scottcolbath · February 19, 2008

BTW, maczippy, I'm a big fan and subscriber of RRX and love your work. Please lay it on me.

S.C.

maczippy · February 19, 2008

scottcolbath wrote:

I'm learning and trying to take in as much as I can, which is why I posted them as is. I want to know from those who are better at this than I am what they would to to improve these pics. I thought I made that very clear in my initial posts.

BTW maczippy, as far as them being over saturated, what would you do to correct that? Like I said, I have done nothing with these pics. What settings would you change? What sort of PP would you do? I posted looking for some sage wisdom. What are you offering?

S.C.

Are you working for Ian...he's been trying to get that PP thing from me for years...

Scott, I'm no expert and i hate offering critiques, but for me the reason I posted was simple. The most important person to please first of all is yourself. So if you feel that something isn't quite right, or you're not sure, then be your own worse enemy and be hard on yourself.

I know you said they're untouched and straight off the camera, but why do that? IMO, you would be better off to do *something* with them and then solicit advice at that point. Put some of your own spin and finish into the product and then post them.

The whole business is so subjective that you could ask 20 different folks how to do this that or the other and you'd get 100 different answers and you'd still be none the wiser. What I would do is take say, one or two images that you like, sy based on their strengths as they apply to you, and do something with them. There are too many images in your post that resemble each other. The saturation, if it is in camera generated will have to be addressed ( I only ever shoot RAW so this for me is always a PP/developing task). Maybe consider shooting RAW? For me the saturation is muddying (is that a word?) the images.

But for me you have to take the first step and then see what folks will offer in suggestions.

Andrew

scottcolbath · February 19, 2008

Thanks for the advice Andrew.

BTW, those were RAW images I converted to JPG.

S.C.

BradfordBenn · February 19, 2008

Nice shots. Now if I can get the snow here to melt... maybe some riding.

scottcolbath · February 19, 2008

maczippy wrote:

IMO, they're over saturated

BTW, I checked the picture style setting on the camera and it's set to "standard" mode. In standard mode, all the defaults are set. No over saturation, sharpness. Nothing.

Makes you wonder...........

S.C.

Icebear · February 20, 2008

scottcolbath wrote:

BTW, I checked the picture style setting on the camera and it's set to "standard" mode. In standard mode, all the defaults are set. No over saturation, sharpness. Nothing.

Makes you wonder...........

S.C.

I believe you'll find that the "picture style setting" on your camera only applies to JPEG processing. If you shoot RAW, as you say you did, that setting has absolutely no effect on your image. Maybe your camera's different than mine.

ian408 · February 20, 2008

maczippy wrote:

Are you working for Ian...he's been trying to get that PP thing from me for years...

Good one Andrew

But to Andrew's point. I read what he wrote and beyond some basic
stuff, you really need to develop your style based on what works for
you. And that also means distinguishing yourself from others. Be it in
post or shooting style or some combination.

Don't be afraid to try stuff.

scottcolbath · February 20, 2008

ian408 wrote:

Good one Andrew

But to Andrew's point. I read what he wrote and beyond some basic
stuff, you really need to develop your style based on what works for
you. And that also means distinguishing yourself from others. Be it in
post or shooting style or some combination.

Don't be afraid to try stuff.

Yeah, I need to work on that. I am not a very creative person. I'm a fixer by nature, not a creator.

S.C.

ian408 · February 20, 2008

scottcolbath wrote:

Yeah, I need to work on that. I am not a very creative person. I'm a fixer by nature, not a creator.

S.C.

Same here. Why do you think I keep hitting Zippy up for the recipe

I think the problem with saturation might have something to do with color
space as well. You might want to make sure it's sRGB and not Adobe's RGB.
Just so the profile is the same all the way round--check your image editing
software as well.

To give you a starting point, with the raw image--what ever was first out of
the camera, RAW or JPG, try having a go at some of the tutorials (look in the
menu bar just below the images) and try the "pop" one. That will give you a
good start as to what tricks to use.

I would also look at some shots and get an idea for what framing/composition
does it for you. Then, I'd go out and try to shoot like that. Keep in mind the
position of the sun and watch your backgrounds.

Good luck and let's see some more. Especially of the Katoom

scottcolbath · February 22, 2008

BTW, I just cracked open my most recent copy of Road Racer X and Andrew has not only the cover, but the inside page shot as well.

Nice work Andrew.

And Ian, I was set to sRBG.

S.C.

maczippy · February 22, 2008

scottcolbath wrote:

BTW, I just cracked open my most recent copy of Road Racer X and Andrew has not only the cover, but the inside page shot as well.
Nice work Andrew.

And Ian, I was set to sRBG.

S.C.

Thanks man!

(also check out the Grids, and the AMA feature too - loadsa Wheeler in this months mag!)

mercphoto · February 22, 2008

scottcolbath wrote:

Thanks for the advice Andrew.

BTW, those were RAW images I converted to JPG.

S.C.

But I agree that the colors look over-saturated, and the blacks look way too dark. You seem to have lost some detail in the blacks and the colors are a bit on the neon-side.

Which RAW converter are you using?

scottcolbath · February 22, 2008

maczippy wrote:

Thanks man!

But wait!!!!!!!! There's more!

Tonight while at the grocery store, I decided to pick up a copy of whatever rag I could find on photography, looking for a little knowledge and inspiration, and my eyes locate that PC pile of crap mag that does cameras, and then..........I see the top inch of a mag stuck behind all the others. "Pohtoshop" was standing out at me, so I pick it up and there's E Boz on the cover. Go ahead and guess who took the shot.

maczippy wrote:

(also check out the Grids, and the AMA feature too - loadsa Wheeler in this months mag!)

Yup. You're everywhere. Nice stuff. All of it.

S.C.

scottcolbath · February 22, 2008

mercphoto wrote:

But I agree that the colors look over-saturated, and the blacks look way too dark. You seem to have lost some detail in the blacks and the colors are a bit on the neon-side.

Which RAW converter are you using?

I'm using DPP.

But here's the thing. I was using very standard, safe settings on the camera. I shot in RAW. I was in sRGB mode, sunny white balance, etc. Basically, it was all "by the book" settings from all that I have already digested about the camera. Now, Andrew's shirt was really that loud. I mean LOUD. So I am stumped as to why the pics look over saturated.

S.C.

scottcolbath · February 25, 2008

OK, I have a great comparison. Both these shots are coincidentally on the same page of this particular Smugmug gallery.

First, a shot of the same rider I took ten months ago. This is with my 30D with the 28-135IS lens.

Pic # is 49

Next, the same body with the 400mm L lens.

Pic # is 56

If you go to this page on my Smugmug account, you can view the exif data.
http://wookiee.smugmug.com/gallery/2685777_aaWrF#255704335

There's basically only shutter speed and apeture that are different. I did very little PP on the first pic, maybe a little brightness and contrast adjustment. That's it.

Based on that, I have no idea why the second pic is so much more brilliant than the first.

S.C.

mercphoto · February 25, 2008

I would expect the 400mm L lens to be sharper and have better color and all than the 28-135, without a doubt. And your comparison does show that.

But wow, that's some difference huh? Something else must be going on.

One comment on the RAW converter. Most people assume that the in-camera settings only apply to in-camera JPG's. This is NOT 100% accurate. Canon's DPP software WILL pay attention to the in-camera settings and apply that to the RAW conversion as a default, unless you change those settings in DPP before you convert. Its a nice time-saving feature but it can catch people off-guard. I don't think that is your issue though.

Supermoto practice in Phoenix

Comments