Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

FM Forum Rules
Macro World Resource
  

FM Forums | Macro & Still Life | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2016 · I need opinion

  
 
Keotik
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · I need opinion


Hello this will be my first post =) i need you guys/girls opinion on this image http://www.rayrayphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Yellow-flowerLR.jpg would you use this on you portfolio or is just bad or an ok image?


Jun 12, 2016 at 01:18 AM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · I need opinion


Keotik wrote:
Hello this will be my first post =) i need you guys/girls opinion on this image http://www.rayrayphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Yellow-flowerLR.jpg would you use this on you portfolio or is just bad or an ok image?


No need to ask for an opinion here. You will get it anyway!

And this is only my opinion. What really matters is whether your image pleases you.

In no particular order:

It (the stem) is so nearly vertical that I would rotate it. However, you have not left enough space around the image to do this. Perhaps prior to cropping, if yo cropped it?

If you are going to have shallow depth of field I think it should be to the near stamens, not the far ones.

I would clean up the two distracting dark marks on the petals.

Personally, I don't like the blue colour down the side of the stem.

I don't have a portfolio so have no opinion on that aspect.

Harold



Jun 12, 2016 at 02:07 AM
psharvic
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · I need opinion


Ray, I'm not a fan of the soft, OOF look. I agree with Harold's suggestions.


Jun 12, 2016 at 06:44 AM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · I need opinion


The soft, OOF look can be nice, but it has to involve an interesting background.

Also, the plane of focus in your image gets sharper toward the rear, not front, which is atypical, making it look like a poorly-focused image rather than a planned shallow-DOF image.

Finally, in addition to what has already been said, I am not sure what equipment you're using, but the background is severely-banded.

You don't have to buy the most expensive equipment in the world, but you should buy equipment that doesn't band that badly on a "normal" shot.

Would I use this in a portfolio? No.

I would use it as a starting point from where you began, so that you can look back as you develop, and see how much you've improved.



Jun 12, 2016 at 10:57 AM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · I need opinion


John Koerner wrote:
Finally, in addition to what has already been said, I am not sure what equipment you're using, but the background is severely-banded.


Good grief! I thought that was a feature of an unwise choice of background. I have long been aware of the potential for banding but have no previous experience of it. I have applied a feature of my software which deals with banding. I suspect that this is far from the best which can be done but it gives some idea for comparison.

Harold









Jun 12, 2016 at 11:19 AM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · I need opinion


e6filmuser wrote:
Good grief! I thought that was a feature of an unwise choice of background. I have long been aware of the potential for banding but have no previous experience of it. I have applied a feature of my software which deals with banding. I suspect that this is far from the best which can be done but it gives some idea for comparison.

Harold


Banding is usually caused by low res sensors trying to render subtle color gradients and being unable to do so smoothly. Rather then delicate gradations and transitions, you see "blotches" (happens when dark areas are made lighter, esp. at higher-ISOs, typically.)

The better the equipment, the greater the color depth/sensitivity of the sensor, the less likely banding will happen.

The cheaper the equipment, the less color depth & sensitivity of the sensor, the greater the likelihood of banding.

Your version is an improvement, but it's still there.



Jun 12, 2016 at 02:15 PM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · I need opinion


John Koerner wrote:
Banding is usually caused by low res sensors trying to render subtle color gradients and being unable to do so smoothly. Rather then delicate gradations and transitions, you see "blotches" (happens when dark areas are made lighter, esp. at higher-ISOs, typically.)

The better the equipment, the greater the color depth/sensitivity of the sensor, the less likely banding will happen.

The cheaper the equipment, the less color depth & sensitivity of the sensor, the greater the likelihood of banding.

Your version is an improvement, but it's still there.


Thanks for that. I know it's still there, the software having done all it would in my inexperienced hands.

Harold



Jun 12, 2016 at 02:34 PM
Keotik
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · I need opinion


thank you all for your replies they are very welcome, when I was taking the picture was taken it started to rain so had no tripod or time to check focus. the gear I use is Canon 80D with a 100MM L macro lens.


Jun 12, 2016 at 07:40 PM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · I need opinion


Keotik wrote:
thank you all for your replies they are very welcome, when I was taking the picture was taken it started to rain so had no tripod or time to check focus. the gear I use is Canon 80D with a 100MM L macro lens.


That is a decent setup, so your problem (IMO) either 1 of 3 things (or all of them):

1) You don't have your camera color set up to Adobe RGB, it's probably set at the factory sRGB;
2) You're shooting straight to .jpg rather than RAW, for post-processing; and/or
3) You were shooting at a really high ISO.

I would venture to say one or all of these factors were at play.

The Canon 80D has one of the better high-ISO capabilities, at least with Canon cameras, but like most crop-Canons it doesn't have the best color potential. Check out SenScore for more details.

A score of 1000 is considered A+ by current standards. 900 = A-, etc.

After you go to the SenScore then click > Scores > APS-C Cameras to see where its predecessor, the 70D, ranks. (They haven't yet tested the 80D.)

You will note the Canon 70D only has 166 color potential compared to the better FF cameras, which rank 1000+ ... thus it is only able to register a minimal amount of the total color potential in each given shot.

The 70D's noise handling is better, but still sub-average at 419. I expect your 80D is better than the 70D, but doubt it's much higher than 500-600.

I shot the similar 7D for many years (which scores even lower than your camera),and would never go over ISO 320-640, without seeing artifacts/noise. I had the 100L also, and it was a good lens for hand-holding, and getting quick AF shots, but it was terrible for critical manual-focus work.

I was able to get a lot of really nice images with this combo, even with its dismal ranking, but only if I operated within a very limited set of ISO parameters, and only within a set of basic color potentials (i.e., un-complex backgounds, etc.)

Jack



Jun 12, 2016 at 08:32 PM
Keotik
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · I need opinion


Hey John Koerner

my camera was at sRGB i have now switch it to Adobe RGB is it the same as you were mentioning?
the picture is a RAW and the picture details is f2.8 1/80 ISO 250



Jun 12, 2016 at 08:59 PM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · I need opinion


Keotik wrote:
Hey John Koerner

my camera was at sRGB i have now switch it to Adobe RGB is it the same as you were mentioning?


Yes.




Keotik wrote:
the picture is a RAW and the picture details is f2.8 1/80 ISO 250


What do you edit your RAW images with?

My workflow is Lightroom, where I convert RAW files to .tiff in the ProPhoto color space. Then I open in my full-size, ProPhoto .tiff images Photoshop where I edit, reduce size, and save to .jpg (in the much smaller sRGB color space) for the Internet, while keeping my layered .tiff file (still in the far superior ProPhoto color space) for possible printing.

Your other parameters seemed okay (ISO, etc.), so I think the banding was caused by your sRGB setting, which basically renders all of the potential colors of the world down to the smallest color space (in the already-small color potential of a Canon sensor). Here is what I mean by sRGB being the smallest color space:



Edited on Jun 12, 2016 at 09:29 PM · View previous versions



Jun 12, 2016 at 09:23 PM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · I need opinion


Oh, and one more thing: none of this means anything if you don't have a color-calibrated monitor.

Jack



Jun 12, 2016 at 09:29 PM





FM Forums | Macro & Still Life | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.