Fujifilm X-mount Image Thread
/forum/topic/1097477/277

1       2       3              277      
278
       279              333       334       end

buggz2k
Registered: Mar 10, 2010
Total Posts: 1718
Country: United States

SOOC, watermark layer, resized, that's it...



Ian Boys
Registered: Feb 09, 2009
Total Posts: 2205
Country: United Kingdom

but why? what made you choose that look and do you think it works? how did you achieve it?



Ian Boys
Registered: Feb 09, 2009
Total Posts: 2205
Country: United Kingdom

Fuji X-T1 (56/23/14) and x100s

#1

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#2

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#3

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#4

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#5

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#6

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#7

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#8

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#9

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#10

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#11

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#12

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#13

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#14

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#15

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#16

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#17

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#18

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#19

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#20

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr

#21

Emma and Stuart by Ian_Boys, on Flickr



buggz2k
Registered: Mar 10, 2010
Total Posts: 1718
Country: United States

Shrug, because it's different?
I will probably work on it, but thought it unique enough to post.
Cheap plastic fantastic, body and lens, Sima 100/f2 wide open with FujiFilm X-E1.

Ian Boys wrote:
but why? what made you choose that look and do you think it works? how did you achieve it?




rji2goleez
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Total Posts: 4731
Country: United States

Beautiful wedding portfolio, Ian! Wonderful toning and contrast to these.



Ian Boys
Registered: Feb 09, 2009
Total Posts: 2205
Country: United Kingdom

Thank you - they're a second attempt at the processing.

I was way too dark the first time and when the prints came back I thought they looked almost OK but my wife told me (in no uncertain terms!) that they weren't. So then I downloaded a stack of wedding images by different people and checked the luminance values on the faces. They were all around 235 on the lightest bits, whereas mine were down at 200 or so. It looked OK on a backlit screen with a black frame in photoshop but not on paper.

So now I set my screen in photoshop to white and check every face. It was annoying to have to redo them all but I learned for next time.



jj_glos
Registered: Apr 11, 2010
Total Posts: 1244
Country: United Kingdom

X-E1 and 23mm:


Jennie by jj_glos, on Flickr



Jennie by jj_glos, on Flickr

35mm

Jennie by jj_glos, on Flickr


fotografur
Registered: Jun 24, 2005
Total Posts: 4508
Country: United States

^
Adorable set. Such relax candid images you'll treasure for years

d~



twelveish
Registered: Feb 10, 2012
Total Posts: 106
Country: Sweden

^ Agreed, there's a certain presence and calm in those photos I really like.

I brought my new XC 50-230 on a short bike run today. Sun was high in the sky, harsh light, nothing real interesting to shoot and not a lot of time for it. But I have to say... seems pretty impressive IQ wise for what you pay. I got a great deal on mine from someone who got it free with the camera and didn't have any use for it. And really, neither do I. But for the price I figured it could be fun to have once in a while. I had already decided not to get the 55-200 since, for me, it would certainly be sitting at home on a shelf the few times I would like to have it, due to size and weight.

Anyway, I met a few very friendly ducks. One of them tried to stand on my shoe but fell off, when I was busy shooting the one in the pics. Quick edit, LR5, RAW, minor adjustments and a few local (clarity, sharpness, nothing fancy...). The BW is Nik.







galenapass
Registered: Feb 09, 2006
Total Posts: 3941
Country: United States

X-E2
55-200



















Tekniqs
Registered: Apr 29, 2014
Total Posts: 32
Country: United States

4G63 wrote:
Business As Usual by Joey_porma, on Flickr


PI?

those mangos are BOMB



4G63
Registered: May 18, 2014
Total Posts: 164
Country: United States

Tekniqs wrote:
4G63 wrote:
Business As Usual by Joey_porma, on Flickr


PI?

those mangos are BOMB


Yes, it was in Roxas Boulevard. I concur, it's my favorite fruit.



justruss
Registered: Jul 05, 2004
Total Posts: 4533
Country: United States

Ian Boys wrote:
Thank you - they're a second attempt at the processing.

I was way too dark the first time and when the prints came back I thought they looked almost OK but my wife told me (in no uncertain terms!) that they weren't. So then I downloaded a stack of wedding images by different people and checked the luminance values on the faces. They were all around 235 on the lightest bits, whereas mine were down at 200 or so. It looked OK on a backlit screen with a black frame in photoshop but not on paper.

So now I set my screen in photoshop to white and check every face. It was annoying to have to redo them all but I learned for next time.


It's a good lesson: Workflow needs to match output. I use different screen brightnesses depending on if my final output is print or screen. And I often do a first process in Aperture at full screen (dark), and then go back through the selects on a final pass in windowed mode with a whitish background... for the exact reason you're describing. I also have to be careful about ambient light in the room when processing.

This is all on a hardware calibrated monitor, btw.



rji2goleez
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Total Posts: 4731
Country: United States

Here's my first attempt at focus stacking. 235 images using the intervalometer on the X-T1. Images were shot at a 2 second interval. Clouds were moving quite fast so I may want to try a 1 second interval for comparison. Still, an interesting result.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10795
Country: United States

Just curious. Why would you need that many images for a focus stack on a scene like this?. There should be adequate depth of field here in one shot....maybe two if you were picky. I've seen ultra close macro shots at 5x magnification that only use 100 shots. Also, how did you move focus accurately with a 2 second delay?



rji2goleez
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Total Posts: 4731
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
Just curious. Why would you need that many images for a focus stack on a scene like this?. There should be adequate depth of field here in one shot....maybe two if you were picky. I've seen ultra close macro shots at 5x magnification that only use 100 shots. Also, how did you move focus accurately with a 2 second delay?


The purpose was not for depth of field but to capture the moving clouds across the sky. I had read about the work of Matt Malloy and wanted to try the technique for myself. See http://matt-molloy.artistwebsites.com/ He has some pretty cool images using this technique. I can imagine that the number of images can vary greatly as can the frequency of shots taken depending on the scene. Basically, I just selected a bunch of images and processed through a script in PSCS.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10795
Country: United States

Ok. Not really focus stacking then (that's specifically stacking images for increased depth of field with a moving focus point). Stacking images for motion works pretty well at night like this, but the intervalometer is going to cause issues (like the stutters you see here, which you may like, but I personally think looks like an error, but that's me) because of the huge delay between exposures. Better (again, in my opinion) to pick up a nice thick ND filter to enable a minimum of 30 second exposures, then stack if you want longer (I have a 10 stop and 3 stop which allows for 2-5 minute exposures in daylight, which I've done and I prefer to stacking...for longer, I'd stack). The key is to have the vast majority of the image made up of actual exposure time. If you're shooting without NDs and stacking every two seconds, you're only capturing a very small fraction of the actual time and movement and you won't get good results.

Also, to avoid stacking delays at all (since the X-T1 requires a minimum of 1 second between exposures) pick up a remote release, set it to continuous shooting and lock the button down. I recommend the Vello RS-C1II remote...it's made ostensibly for Canon, but works with any camera that can use the mini sub (mic) port for a remote release, and the Fujis work great this way. It's flawless on my X-T1, and it costs a fraction of what the Fuji RR-90 costs. I reviewed it here: http://admiringlight.com/blog/mini-review-vello-rs-c1ii-remote-release-fuji-x-t1/



rji2goleez
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Total Posts: 4731
Country: United States

In fact, I just ordered the Vello-C1II remote the other day based on your review. It should arrive on Tuesday (love Amazon Prime). Can't beat the cost! I agree with all you are saying and this was just a test more to run and play with the PSCS script as well as seeing a result. Thanks for the reminder to set to continuous shooting too. It will be fun to continue to explore this . . .



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10795
Country: United States

Yeah, for the cost it's a no-brainer. It seems well built and the wire is nice and thick, so it should resist damage pretty well, but of course one never knows how durable some of these things are when used over the long haul. But frankly, for the cost, I might pick up a spare just in case.



jj_glos
Registered: Apr 11, 2010
Total Posts: 1244
Country: United Kingdom

X-E1 & 60mm f2.4:


Jennie by -jj_glos-



Jennie by -jj_glos-


1       2       3              277      
278
       279              333       334       end