Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · How much enhancement
  
 
Camperjim
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · How much enhancement


The sky opened up over a mountain top and was very impressive. At least in my memory. The out of camera image was not so impressive. I have tried to enhance the image to match my memory but I may be overdoing it. Or it could be a case that you really had to be there and the image will never capture that impression. I would appreciate feedback and suggestions on this one.










Enhanced




Oct 19, 2012 at 04:03 AM
AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · How much enhancement


Try selecting the sky separately from the mountain for processing to avoid developing a slight halo above the mountain and perhaps using noise reduction to reduce color artifacts from the sky.


Oct 19, 2012 at 04:44 AM
oldrattler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · How much enhancement


Jim; You caught some amazing light here... This would be difficult to shoot with the strong contrast, so IMO you did good...I tried the following adjustments::: I ran this through ACR, Nik viveza, Color Efex Pro, & CS5... Primarily lightened the snow & added structure to the clouds...







Oct 19, 2012 at 11:02 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · How much enhancement


Took a stab at it ... mining the mountain seems to be tougher than first considered.

I'm quite certain that it was much more glorious than we'll be able to represent.

+1 @ Ben's comment (diff thread) @ the image is only 1/2 ... the experience is the other 1/2. To which I'll add ... sometimes, it is 100% the experience and the image doesn't even factor in ... the camera was merely the catalyst to take you there.






Edited on Oct 19, 2012 at 02:27 PM · View previous versions



Oct 19, 2012 at 02:09 PM
ben egbert
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · How much enhancement


Hi Jim, thats an amazing thing to see in person. Always difficult to capture such things. Somewhere between you enhanced and original I would say.




Oct 19, 2012 at 02:24 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



silvawispa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · How much enhancement


There's stunning potential in that shot.

Rusty's rework has a lot of goodness to it.

I reckon you have the pixel information to find something fantstic in that swirl.



Oct 19, 2012 at 04:53 PM
Camperjim
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · How much enhancement


I think Rusty's version is pretty close to what I would like to recreate. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that the camera just falls a long way short of what we consider to be reality.


Oct 20, 2012 at 04:19 AM
AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · How much enhancement


Camperjim wrote:
I think Rusty's version is pretty close to what I would like to recreate. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that the camera just falls a long way short of what we consider to be reality.


Exactly! That's why I made the effort to learn Photoshop. Maybe the camera doesn't lie, but it can dramatically understate.



Oct 20, 2012 at 06:12 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · How much enhancement


AuntiPode wrote:
Exactly! That's why I made the effort to learn Photoshop. Maybe the camera doesn't lie, but it can dramatically understate.


That's exactly why digital photography was designed with a linear gamma profile, so that it could make the capture, then the processing profile could be custom designed infinitely to accommodate infinite situations (in theory at least).

Granted, most folks prefer the expedience of using the camera's processing or the more routine way of doing things that are global, simple or preset algorithms. I'll likely never really master PS, but I'm still an ardent believer that what comes out of the camera is only the start, rarely the finished product. Philosophically, it seems like digital cameras only make negatives and apply (mostly) standard processing. For scenes that require non-standard processing profiles, it requires the touch of a thinking, decision making person as to how to proceed with such atypical captures ... kinda like the difference between a short order cook vs. a chef ... one replicates and executes, the other designs and creates.

Glad, my pp struck a chord on this one, but I still feel like I came up way short on what it could/should be.

People advocate shooting RAW for a lot of reasons, one being that future development of software improvements will let you "revisit" images later. I'm inclined to think that the "future development" is my learning curve of knowledge and skill at handling PS (much to learn, long way to go). I think about AA and how his years of progression in the darkroom progressed, or like Kaden today with his tenuous efforts. Many people don't have the tenacity as AA or Kaden regarding processing vs. shutter capturing, but I'm still inclined to think that for some, the greatness of an image is in the finishing as much as it is in the capture.

Years of shooting chrome, meant that you had to develop your capture skills because there was essentially no latitude in the film profile @ processing. Now in digiital, we have to develop our processing skills, because there is no profile (i.e. linear) at capture and the camera's processing can't cover the demands of what we expect from it when we give it such wide and variable ranges to contend with.

Still ... must have been glorious to see in person, the image burned in Jim's mind will always outshine the injustice we can likely provide.




Oct 20, 2012 at 12:16 PM





FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password