A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old May 19th 17, 11:06 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/18/2017 10:55 PM, Bill W wrote:

snip


You're not the only one who misunderstood what I meant, so I'm going
to have to blame myself. I meant better at clever responses to things
like your "sky is purple" question. In fact, I wasn't even aware of an
LGBT reference. I'm falling behind in cultural awareness...


Language, especially some slang is amorphous. It doesn't seem that long
ago when being gay meant to have a cheery and bubbly personality. And
when you called someone a dark or black person, it meant just the opposite.




--
PeterN
  #62  
Old May 19th 17, 11:11 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/18/2017 11:21 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 03:15:18 +0000, nospam said:

In article [email protected],
Savageduck wrote:


I am here to serve and entertain. ;-)


but not protect?


I retired.


Your car had too many flats?

--
PeterN
  #63  
Old May 19th 17, 11:16 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/19/2017 1:45 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 05:21:45 +0000, Savageduck
said:

On 2017-05-19 04:55:46 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Fri, 19 May 2017 11:43:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 17 May 2017 21:56:22 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-18 04:49:46 +0000, Bill W said:

On Thu, 18 May 2017 00:37:33 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/18/2017 12:07 AM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 15:55:30 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

There is more to it than that. The colors look slightly off and
the
lightin is peculiar. I have had a quick go at one of your shots
with
Photoshop although this required dabbling in unfamiliar
territory. See
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s6dbcdd34m...3-EES.jpg?dl=0

Now the sky is purple...


Hmm.
Talk about ambiguity.
Song, or LGBT?

Nah, I'm a boring person. It's neither, just an objective comment. I
wish I could do better...

Here is the RAF if you care to try.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pj7bmsr7vabc9dt/_DSF4603.raf

For some reason none of my (up todate) Adobe CC software can open that
file. :-(

I downloaded it once more and this time it works. Here is quick dash
with Light Room. I used the dehaze filter and some fiddling with color
temperature.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3kaynb57vi...-4603.jpg?dl=0


I understand that you just used dehaze and temperature adjustments,
but the entire color balance seems out of whack to me. I also
understand that you haven't visited Yosemite, and are not familiar
with the character of the rock in the Sierra.

The dehaze does a contrast push which emphasizes saturation. Then add,
what to my eye is way too much warming, and it becomes unnatural and
garish. When I said that is was a subdued, and overcast day I meant it.

This appears to me to be significantly different from the original
SOOC image.


It is.

Just for the fun of it, I set one of my monitors up to sRGB and left
the other at AdobeRGB. I edited the image first on AdobeRGB and then
viewed it on sRGB. I didn't like it at all. I then had to re-edit it
on sRGB which improved it but it did not look quite the same as the
original AdobeRGB. The major changes were in colour temperature. I
much preferred the AdobeRGB version but as few people will have their
monitors set up for that, this one is the sRGB.


Anyway, you have the RAF to play with, see where a different approach
might lead you.


It might be surprising, but things for that shot were closer to the
SOOC, which really only needed some minor subtle tweaks without pushing
for a saturation and color which isn't there.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/o5wkpz8rpi2dkoz/DSF4603-E3.jpg


I am obviously influenced by AA. I think that image has far mor impact
in BW.

--
PeterN
  #64  
Old May 19th 17, 03:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14,297
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 2017-05-19 10:16:35 +0000, PeterN
said:

On 5/19/2017 1:45 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 05:21:45 +0000, Savageduck
said:

On 2017-05-19 04:55:46 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Fri, 19 May 2017 11:43:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 17 May 2017 21:56:22 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-18 04:49:46 +0000, Bill W said:

On Thu, 18 May 2017 00:37:33 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/18/2017 12:07 AM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 15:55:30 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

There is more to it than that. The colors look slightly off and
the
lightin is peculiar. I have had a quick go at one of your shots
with
Photoshop although this required dabbling in unfamiliar
territory. See
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s6dbcdd34m...3-EES.jpg?dl=0

Now the sky is purple...


Hmm.
Talk about ambiguity.
Song, or LGBT?

Nah, I'm a boring person. It's neither, just an objective comment. I
wish I could do better...

Here is the RAF if you care to try.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pj7bmsr7vabc9dt/_DSF4603.raf

For some reason none of my (up todate) Adobe CC software can open that
file. :-(

I downloaded it once more and this time it works. Here is quick dash
with Light Room. I used the dehaze filter and some fiddling with color
temperature.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3kaynb57vi...-4603.jpg?dl=0

I understand that you just used dehaze and temperature adjustments,
but the entire color balance seems out of whack to me. I also
understand that you haven't visited Yosemite, and are not familiar
with the character of the rock in the Sierra.

The dehaze does a contrast push which emphasizes saturation. Then add,
what to my eye is way too much warming, and it becomes unnatural and
garish. When I said that is was a subdued, and overcast day I meant it.

This appears to me to be significantly different from the original
SOOC image.

It is.

Just for the fun of it, I set one of my monitors up to sRGB and left
the other at AdobeRGB. I edited the image first on AdobeRGB and then
viewed it on sRGB. I didn't like it at all. I then had to re-edit it
on sRGB which improved it but it did not look quite the same as the
original AdobeRGB. The major changes were in colour temperature. I
much preferred the AdobeRGB version but as few people will have their
monitors set up for that, this one is the sRGB.

Anyway, you have the RAF to play with, see where a different approach
might lead you.


It might be surprising, but things for that shot were closer to the
SOOC, which really only needed some minor subtle tweaks without pushing
for a saturation and color which isn't there.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/o5wkpz8rpi2dkoz/DSF4603-E3.jpg


I am obviously influenced by AA. I think that image has far mor impact in BW.


I agree.
The scene of Yosemite Valley from Tunnel View is forever linked to
Adams. My shot on Sunday is aided in that, not by clarity, but by the
hint of mist/haze deeper in the valley. One bit error which can be made
in post is to attempt to use tools such as "dehaze" to an extreme. The
same goes for attempting to get a clean image.
Consider Adams' classic image "Yosemite Valley - Clearing Winter Storm".
https://culturalinterventions.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/anseladams-yosemite-valley-clearing-winterstorm-1942.jpg

I

think I should plan my next drive up to Yosemite for sometime between
November and February.

It is an image which influences me. That and many others of his images
of the Sierra of that era. Then I also find the work of Galen Rowell
covering similar territory, but in color just as inspiring.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #65  
Old May 19th 17, 10:29 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/19/2017 5:59 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/18/2017 10:49 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 22:46:09 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/18/2017 10:35 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 02:26:04 +0000, PeterN
said:

On 5/18/2017 8:35 PM, Bill W wrote:


snip


Good to hear. I usually go for accuracy, but decided to just go with
what I felt looked nice to my eye.


I go for impression, rarely for accuracy.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/t2quthg7matfxs8/Boron%20Botanical1filtered.jpg?dl=0



Your are, if nothing else, artistically predictable. ;-)

My impression of a Chihuly.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8w53i3y3m9cv8m/Dale%20Chihuly1.jpg?dl=0


That man belongs in art prison for fraud.


You may not like it, but it is art. He has a major exhibit at the BBG.

Darn, for a moment I thought this thread was going to
drift in to the weird world of artistic impressions.
~~
As for glass, I've only done a little "lamp" work.
That big glass, furnace stuff is very impressive.
--
==
Later....
Ron C
--

  #66  
Old May 20th 17, 12:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,208
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/19/2017 5:29 PM, Ron C wrote:
On 5/19/2017 5:59 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/18/2017 10:49 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 22:46:09 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/18/2017 10:35 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 02:26:04 +0000, PeterN
said:

On 5/18/2017 8:35 PM, Bill W wrote:


snip


Good to hear. I usually go for accuracy, but decided to just go with
what I felt looked nice to my eye.


I go for impression, rarely for accuracy.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/t2quthg7matfxs8/Boron%20Botanical1filtered.jpg?dl=0




Your are, if nothing else, artistically predictable. ;-)

My impression of a Chihuly.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8w53i3y3m9cv8m/Dale%20Chihuly1.jpg?dl=0

That man belongs in art prison for fraud.


You may not like it, but it is art. He has a major exhibit at the BBG.

Darn, for a moment I thought this thread was going to
drift in to the weird world of artistic impressions.


I wouldn't want this hanging on my wall, yet I guess it is art.

http://www.thefader.com/2017/05/18/jean-michel-basquiat-painting-sold-for-a-record-110-million


~~
As for glass, I've only done a little "lamp" work.
That big glass, furnace stuff is very impressive.



--
PeterN
  #67  
Old May 20th 17, 12:06 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,438
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On Thu, 18 May 2017 22:21:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-19 04:55:46 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Fri, 19 May 2017 11:43:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 17 May 2017 21:56:22 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-18 04:49:46 +0000, Bill W said:

On Thu, 18 May 2017 00:37:33 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/18/2017 12:07 AM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 15:55:30 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

There is more to it than that. The colors look slightly off and the
lightin is peculiar. I have had a quick go at one of your shots with
Photoshop although this required dabbling in unfamiliar territory. See
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s6dbcdd34m...3-EES.jpg?dl=0

Now the sky is purple...


Hmm.
Talk about ambiguity.
Song, or LGBT?

Nah, I'm a boring person. It's neither, just an objective comment. I
wish I could do better...

Here is the RAF if you care to try.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pj7bmsr7vabc9dt/_DSF4603.raf

For some reason none of my (up todate) Adobe CC software can open that
file. :-(


I downloaded it once more and this time it works. Here is quick dash
with Light Room. I used the dehaze filter and some fiddling with color
temperature.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3kaynb57vi...-4603.jpg?dl=0


I understand that you just used dehaze and temperature adjustments, but
the entire color balance seems out of whack to me. I also understand
that you haven't visited Yosemite, and are not familiar with the
character of the rock in the Sierra.

The dehaze does a contrast push which emphasizes saturation. Then add,
what to my eye is way too much warming, and it becomes unnatural and
garish. When I said that is was a subdued, and overcast day I meant it.


What about this one? I've touched nothing which directly affects the
color. No dehaze. No saturation. Basically all that I affected was the
luminance. https://www.dropbox.com/s/35bheu8pon...4603a.jpg?dl=0

This appears to me to be significantly different from the original
SOOC image.


It is.

Just for the fun of it, I set one of my monitors up to sRGB and left
the other at AdobeRGB. I edited the image first on AdobeRGB and then
viewed it on sRGB. I didn't like it at all. I then had to re-edit it
on sRGB which improved it but it did not look quite the same as the
original AdobeRGB. The major changes were in colour temperature. I
much preferred the AdobeRGB version but as few people will have their
monitors set up for that, this one is the sRGB.


Anyway, you have the RAF to play with, see where a different approach
might lead you.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #68  
Old May 20th 17, 12:20 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/19/2017 7:03 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/19/2017 5:29 PM, Ron C wrote:
On 5/19/2017 5:59 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/18/2017 10:49 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 22:46:09 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/18/2017 10:35 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 02:26:04 +0000, PeterN
said:

On 5/18/2017 8:35 PM, Bill W wrote:


snip


Good to hear. I usually go for accuracy, but decided to just go
with
what I felt looked nice to my eye.


I go for impression, rarely for accuracy.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/t2quthg7matfxs8/Boron%20Botanical1filtered.jpg?dl=0





Your are, if nothing else, artistically predictable. ;-)

My impression of a Chihuly.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8w53i3y3m9cv8m/Dale%20Chihuly1.jpg?dl=0

That man belongs in art prison for fraud.


You may not like it, but it is art. He has a major exhibit at the BBG.

Darn, for a moment I thought this thread was going to
drift in to the weird world of artistic impressions.


I wouldn't want this hanging on my wall, yet I guess it is art.

http://www.thefader.com/2017/05/18/jean-michel-basquiat-painting-sold-for-a-record-110-million


Saw that on the news today. Surly doesn't fit my decor .. to say
nothing of my bank account. ;-)

~~
As for glass, I've only done a little "lamp" work.
That big glass, furnace stuff is very impressive.



--
==
Later...
Ron C
--

  #69  
Old May 20th 17, 12:21 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14,297
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 2017-05-19 23:06:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Thu, 18 May 2017 22:21:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2017-05-19 04:55:46 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Fri, 19 May 2017 11:43:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 21:56:22 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2017-05-18 04:49:46 +0000, Bill W said:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 00:37:33 -0400, PeterN
wrote:
On 5/18/2017 12:07 AM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 15:55:30 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

There is more to it than that. The colors look slightly off and the
lightin is peculiar. I have had a quick go at one of your shots with
Photoshop although this required dabbling in unfamiliar territory. See
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s6dbcdd34m...3-EES.jpg?dl=0

Now the sky is purple...


Hmm.
Talk about ambiguity.
Song, or LGBT?

Nah, I'm a boring person. It's neither, just an objective comment. I
wish I could do better...

Here is the RAF if you care to try.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pj7bmsr7vabc9dt/_DSF4603.raf

For some reason none of my (up todate) Adobe CC software can open that
file. :-(

I downloaded it once more and this time it works. Here is quick dash
with Light Room. I used the dehaze filter and some fiddling with color
temperature.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3kaynb57vi...-4603.jpg?dl=0


I understand that you just used dehaze and temperature adjustments, but
the entire color balance seems out of whack to me. I also understand
that you haven't visited Yosemite, and are not familiar with the
character of the rock in the Sierra.

The dehaze does a contrast push which emphasizes saturation. Then add,
what to my eye is way too much warming, and it becomes unnatural and
garish. When I said that is was a subdued, and overcast day I meant it.


What about this one? I've touched nothing which directly affects the
color. No dehaze. No saturation. Basically all that I affected was the
luminance. https://www.dropbox.com/s/35bheu8pon...4603a.jpg?dl=0


This is a rendition which to my eye works. As I said in another
response to Peter, the haze/mist deep in the valley was an integral
part of the scene that day and to try to fix all of the haze throws the
entire image off balance. There is nothing with this rendition that
appears to disturb the scene with regard to color balance, saturation,
vibrance, or sharpening.

I would say that if one would care to try for an "Adamsesque" B&W
rendition, this version would be a pretty good starting point.



This appears to me to be significantly different from the original
SOOC image.


It is.

Just for the fun of it, I set one of my monitors up to sRGB and left
the other at AdobeRGB. I edited the image first on AdobeRGB and then
viewed it on sRGB. I didn't like it at all. I then had to re-edit it
on sRGB which improved it but it did not look quite the same as the
original AdobeRGB. The major changes were in colour temperature. I
much preferred the AdobeRGB version but as few people will have their
monitors set up for that, this one is the sRGB.


Anyway, you have the RAF to play with, see where a different approach
might lead you.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #70  
Old May 20th 17, 12:34 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default X-T2 @ Yosemite Today SOOC

On 5/19/2017 7:21 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-05-19 23:06:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Thu, 18 May 2017 22:21:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2017-05-19 04:55:46 +0000, Eric Stevens
said:
On Fri, 19 May 2017 11:43:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 21:56:22 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2017-05-18 04:49:46 +0000, Bill W said:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 00:37:33 -0400, PeterN
wrote:
On 5/18/2017 12:07 AM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 15:55:30 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

There is more to it than that. The colors look slightly off
and the
lightin is peculiar. I have had a quick go at one of your
shots with
Photoshop although this required dabbling in unfamiliar
territory. See
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s6dbcdd34m...3-EES.jpg?dl=0

Now the sky is purple...


Hmm.
Talk about ambiguity.
Song, or LGBT?

Nah, I'm a boring person. It's neither, just an objective comment. I
wish I could do better...

Here is the RAF if you care to try.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pj7bmsr7vabc9dt/_DSF4603.raf

For some reason none of my (up todate) Adobe CC software can open that
file. :-(

I downloaded it once more and this time it works. Here is quick dash
with Light Room. I used the dehaze filter and some fiddling with color
temperature.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3kaynb57vi...-4603.jpg?dl=0

I understand that you just used dehaze and temperature adjustments, but
the entire color balance seems out of whack to me. I also understand
that you haven't visited Yosemite, and are not familiar with the
character of the rock in the Sierra.

The dehaze does a contrast push which emphasizes saturation. Then add,
what to my eye is way too much warming, and it becomes unnatural and
garish. When I said that is was a subdued, and overcast day I meant it.


What about this one? I've touched nothing which directly affects the
color. No dehaze. No saturation. Basically all that I affected was the
luminance. https://www.dropbox.com/s/35bheu8pon...4603a.jpg?dl=0


This is a rendition which to my eye works. As I said in another response
to Peter, the haze/mist deep in the valley was an integral part of the
scene that day and to try to fix all of the haze throws the entire image
off balance. There is nothing with this rendition that appears to
disturb the scene with regard to color balance, saturation, vibrance, or
sharpening.

I would say that if one would care to try for an "Adamsesque" B&W
rendition, this version would be a pretty good starting point.


I'm now wondering if a subdued color rendition could
improve on a classic "Adamsesque" B&W rendition.

[Um, no .. I'm not going to try.]
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For those Who Care to Play: Acros SOOC + RAF Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 113 May 14th 17 02:51 PM
SOOC pictures from Västerås city festival Sandman Digital Photography 4 July 5th 16 05:49 PM
A SOOC JPEG vs RAW Comparison Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 3 May 10th 16 07:54 PM
Another SOOC JPEG Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 2 April 23rd 16 03:48 AM
Thoughts on SOOC Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 98 March 11th 16 04:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.