carstenw wrote:
Hmm, a little overdone as you said, but I see what you mean. The problem is that every time I go in this direction, I get in trouble around here from others My original is already an enhanced reality, but in a subtle way, that it could be real. That is mostly what I try for. I could probably go a *bit* further in your direction without getting hassled by the HDR police though
Be gentle... I think I would apply small local contrast enhancement to your HDRs, very subtle. Hard to say without knowing what color space you use and what black point you used for images going into PhotoMatix. But ASSUMING you use AdobeRGB for processing, and you have set blackpoint to zero (not clipping blacks before they go into PhotoMatix) = same way as I do most of the time ==> you could try USM (PhotoShop, ImageMagick implementation requires little different parameters) with 18-25% and pixels size 25-30px (in fullsize photo of course before any downsizing etc. activities), adjust sliders in this range until you find good look with added contrast but without the artificial HDR look. Usually PhotoMatix kills local contrast and you need to add little to get the original look back, but it's very easy overdo.
wfrank wrote:
Feel like I'm being there, nice ones Phillip! Hope you're enjoying that fine lens :-)
+1
Phillip, really really good tones on your greens, best I have ever seen from crop camera even white balance was off 100-150K on last (compared to what I would have selected). Saturated, but didn't turn neon green.
Made this HDR, and after loading the TIFF-file back to Apple Aperture compared to middle exposure and I was surprised how little the photo had actually changed, but how completely it changed the way how image looks. Difference was more like shooting in direct sunlight vs. shooting on the optimum light when edge of cloud goes between your subject and the sun. For comparison easiest to open both in own tab and switch tabs back and forth: HDR and middle exposure
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1,4/50 @ f/5.6, HDR(1/30s, 1/125s and 1/500s), ISO 100
PS. Sun was shining just outside image area to lens with full power, and only flare artifact is in top of the photo. Amazing flare resistance and avoidance of veiling flare.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Made this HDR, and after loading the TIFF-file back to Apple Aperture compared to middle exposure and I was surprised how little the photo had actually changed, but how completely it changed the way how image looks. Difference was more like shooting in direct sunlight vs. shooting on the optimum light when edge of cloud goes between your subject and the sun. For comparison easiest to open both in own tab and switch tabs back and forth: HDR and middle exposure
Hmm, interesting. I prefer the HDR, looking at the photo as an objet d'art, but the regular exposure has significantly more 3D feel. I feel how the hill is bumpy and goes backwards, whereas the HDR feels more vertical without depth clues.
Btw, I do usually add a little contrast in LR, and I have been adding a little clarity as well, which I believe is meant to solve the same problem as a gentle large-radius USM. In LR2 that slider was the death of subtleness in the image, but I have heard that LR4 is much better. I haven't actually compared to USM directly yet, which I should really do before I process too many images...
Contas, I don't mean to upset you, but did you process those a lot? I feel the colour is really dead-looking. I thought this was one of the strengths of the Foveon sensor?
Phillip, really really good tones on your greens, best I have ever seen from crop camera even white balance was off 100-150K on last (compared to what I would have selected). Saturated, but didn't turn neon green.
thanks, nice hearing such a thing from someone who values such details
carstenw wrote:
Contas, I don't mean to upset you, but did you process those a lot? I feel the colour is really dead-looking. I thought this was one of the strengths of the Foveon sensor?
I do not suprise why you said such things but remember the last discussion about Foveon here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1103664/1#10534468
But seem you are unchanged, this part of FM forum is for alternatives, but you openly state that you are a Ni..Loyal and criticize other system users, may be more suitable for you is move to Ni..forum?
Now about my above posts, I wrote no sharpenning .... it means that I emphasized that I did not do such things, that never happens to Canon and maybe others Bayer's sensor systems to get an acceptable image to post.I won't blah here about Foveon sensor, the pics say themself.My pics are also suffered banding or posterization, this is a common among digitals not Foveon's exclusive, and this fenomenon is well documented, disscussed in all over forums of all digital system and Ni.. is included, and that nothing to do with hardware like sensors or camera, just a jpeg compression or exposure blow-out problems and it can be corrected in Photoshop.
I hope you will not bother other system users, your pics would say who you are.
I was not criticizing you, as you wrongly conclude, I was asking about the colours in your shots. In your two shots there are practically no greens, and only weak or burnt-out colours in general. I simply wanted to know if you processed for this look, or if this is the sensor's output. If it is your processing, I will just wait for other shots, since I am curious about Foveon sensors. On the other hand, if that is really the sensor's output (and banding as well!), in my opinion this camera would make a great doorstop or paperweight.
Who cares what do you think?, keep it to yourself, especially you, the owner of the most long boring pics series I've ever seen, with constant angle of view, lack of creativity, seaking inspire in disgusting dirty places.Maybe you received too many formal salutes, so you thought you have some "power" to dominate here and drive it your way.Your acting told me that you are a small-minded pity person, who is playing a PC game, say "Everest -Climber" with er full backpack of equipments and er 5 lives but is dreaming that you are a real rock climber - wake-up !.
That's always easier said than done! My pics are landscapes at f/4.0 and infinity focus, you may also have landscape and Pls, make an input the same at f/4.0 and infinity focus and Pls, do like I did, no sharpenning, no contrast and colors changing.I promise will not count your Chromatic Aberration as a fault.
contas wrote:
Who cares what do you think?, keep it to yourself, especially you, the owner of the most long boring pics series I've ever seen, with constant angle of view, lack of creativity, seaking inspire in disgusting dirty places.Maybe you received too many formal salutes, so you thought you have some "power" to dominate here and drive it your way.Your acting told me that you are a small-minded pity person, who is playing a PC game, say "Everest -Climber" with er full backpack of equipments and er 5 lives but is dreaming that you are a real rock climber - wake-up !.
That's always easier said than done! My pics are landscapes at f/4.0 and infinity focus, you may also have landscape and Pls, make an input the same at f/4.0 and infinity focus and Pls, do like I did, no sharpenning, no contrast and colors changing.I promise will not count your Chromatic Aberration as a fault....Show more →
joakim wrote:
Isn't it just a white balance issue? They look like they could be made a i little warmer.
I don't think so. Trying different white balances never seems to reach a point where the colours look real. Tuning for realistic greens gets very wrong colours in other parts of the image. There could be an issue of atmospheric haze though, although I am not sure if that would have this effect. The only proper way to settle this would be to photograph something closer with known colours, such as a colour chart, and then compare to other sensors. But somehow I don't think we will be getting that from contas.
Contas has a lot of posts in the alt flowers thread using the same combination. I think colors are muted here because of haze. Distance to subject is considrable, shot at 120mm.
contas wrote:
Who cares what do you think?, keep it to yourself, especially you, the owner of the most long boring pics series I've ever seen, with constant angle of view, lack of creativity, seaking inspire in disgusting dirty places.Maybe you received too many formal salutes, so you thought you have some "power" to dominate here and drive it your way.Your acting told me that you are a small-minded pity person, who is playing a PC game, say "Everest -Climber" with er full backpack of equipments and er 5 lives but is dreaming that you are a real rock climber - wake-up !.
That's always easier said than done! My pics are landscapes at f/4.0 and infinity focus, you may also have landscape and Pls, make an input the same at f/4.0 and infinity focus and Pls, do like I did, no sharpenning, no contrast and colors changing.I promise will not count your Chromatic Aberration as a fault....Show more →
contas, language differences or not ...you are likely the ugliest example for this forum. Your post doesn't belong here and is as ugly as any picture you could possibly show.
contas wrote:
Who cares what do you think?, keep it to yourself, especially you, the owner of the most long boring pics series I've ever seen, with constant angle of view, lack of creativity, seaking inspire in disgusting dirty places.Maybe you received too many formal salutes, so you thought you have some "power" to dominate here and drive it your way.Your acting told me that you are a small-minded pity person, who is playing a PC game, say "Everest -Climber" with er full backpack of equipments and er 5 lives but is dreaming that you are a real rock climber - wake-up !.
That's always easier said than done! My pics are landscapes at f/4.0 and infinity focus, you may also have landscape and Pls, make an input the same at f/4.0 and infinity focus and Pls, do like I did, no sharpenning, no contrast and colors changing.I promise will not count your Chromatic Aberration as a fault....Show more →
but none of them have bright greens. The greens are all either yellowish or muted. It could be the light, the season, or something else, but it could also be the camera. I will wait for more, maybe also with other lenses, just to rule out the lens (which I also own, btw, fantastic lens).
briantho wrote:
Contas has a lot of posts in the alt flowers thread using the same combination. I think colors are muted here because of haze. Distance to subject is considrable, shot at 120mm.
I think these are typical results caused by the weather conditions in this part of the world. A combination of heat, humidity, high UV... etc. I have tons of shots just like that.
Are all leafy greens that muted colour in real life, or is it an in-camera effect due to UV etc.? Is it possible to capture bright summer greens as we see them in Europe?
My original is already an enhanced reality, but in a subtle way, that it could be real. That is mostly what I try for. I could probably go a *bit* further in your direction without getting hassled by the HDR police though _972.jpg "2026 © Samuli Vahonen")
