wfrank (trying to use peoples' screen names), it appears that the characteristic of image depth (my PC term for three dimensionality) may be off limits here now; so I will send you some thoughts via PM later on what I think may be at play in your stone elephants image. They are lens-specific in this instance, I believe.
That's Iwasaki Jo, a "Hill Castle" built in the early 16th century. It's in Nisshin which is still in Aichi-ken yeah. What you're seeing is mostly a reconstruction done in '87. It has kind of an interesting place in history. At one point sometime in the early fifteen hundreds, it was sieged upon by raiding thugs (today called "troops") and all the farmers and business men ran up from their homes, stores, and fields and formed a defense. About 500 ran up but only 200 lived! They won tho and preserved freedom in the area.
I dig the 花見 shots! Nice pastel palette! The 桜前線 is just hitting here right now. So I guess my image uploads will have lots of blossoms for the next few weeks. Do you guys get 梅見 umemi there too (plum tree blossom)? I actually like that better but no one here comes out for it like they so hanami (cherry). ...Show more → akul wrote:
Very interesting. You got me interested so I did a wiki search. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iwasaki_Castle
So, Nobunaga Oda built it, but the castle changed its master many times. I was so bad at Japanese History in junior high, so that I did not even take Japanese History in High School. Now living in the US, I sometimes wish I did a little more study then. 桜前線 hit New York city in the middle of the week ( depending on where in the city. Central Park is past 満開 ( full bloom ), and it is halfway into 葉桜 (flower with leaves ). While along hudson river, where temperature is usually lower, they are now at 満開. Japanese people stake out in Central Park when it is at the peak, but this week, the weather was bad, so that did not happen. Otherwise, I would not have been able to take the shot. Umemi （梅見）is not popular here. I love plum flowers, but I just don't see them around here.
It must be the cultural nostalgia that I still have to shoot cherry blossom, as cherry blossom is one of the few things I really miss about Japan. With that disclaimer, here is another one. One can argue this shot could be taken with any lens as it does not showcase typical Zeiss strength. ( Very low setting in 'clarity slider' in ACR. )
I used to hate history in HS too. Now I think it's my favorite subject. I spend almost as much time reading history as I do playing around with cameras. Mostly I'm interested in the events of the past 200 years or so but a few countries have very rich and interesting histories back around a thousand or two yeas and Japan is one of them! Such ancient history is more of an incidental curiosity for me tho. I mean I actually spend a lot of time researching events within the past 200 or so years but much farther back than that and I'll only casually read a reference or two (or three) if I happen onto something which relates to it - like my bike ride to that hill castle for example.
Thanks Bifurcator and Wilhelm! I have been photographing mossy trees last couple of weekends and this time took my two "C/Y Kings of the 3-d" lenses, the C/Y 100/2 P and the C/Y 35/1.4 and try to generate some non-flat shots for Samuli. After seeing Samuli's lush greens I decided to green up my greens a bit by using the old LAB mode steepen the A curve trick. We will see if Samuli sees volume and 3-d in my shot.
The sharpening is standard Denoir/Samuli sharpening method for web.
@Wilhelm, I always like the color you have in your city shots. Been meaning to ask you if you use any special plugins to get that or do you adjust your colors using just photoshop?
I think lenses with strong tangential MTF performance scores usually rendor shapes more in a 3-d manner.
Also bokeh style matters some and how quickly the lens transitions from in focus to out of focus.
wayne seltzer wrote:
...
The sharpening is standard Denoir/Samuli sharpening method for web.
@Wilhelm, I always like the color you have in your city shots. Been meaning to ask you if you use any special plugins to get that or do you adjust your colors using just photoshop?
I think lenses with strong tangential MTF performance scores usually rendor shapes more in a 3-d manner.
Also bokeh style matters some and how quickly the lens transitions from in focus to out of focus.
Thanks Wayne! No I only do PS. I try to equalize light. I'm sure I overdo it sometimes but to me it often yields something more true to what my eyes saw - having superior DR compared to the camera sensor.
For sharpening I use a script/Action originally from Alex Nail. It often gives oversharpened look - despite having three levels to choose from. You wouldnt happen to have a link to those methods you mention - or are they manual?
wayne seltzer wrote:
I have been photographing mossy trees last couple of weekends and this time took my two "C/Y Kings of the 3-d" lenses, the C/Y 100/2 P and the C/Y 35/1.4 and try to generate some non-flat shots for Samuli.
Thanks just what I needed - we got today 6 or 8 inch more of the white sh#t so it's not going to be anytime soon I'm shooting greens again. I was so full of hope, it already started to melt and was melting few weeks. Well, while monitoring the melting progress I guess I have to get my greens just from photos on the forum.
wayne seltzer wrote:
After seeing Samuli's lush greens I decided to green up my greens a bit by using the old LAB mode steepen the A curve trick.
...quite saturated greens you have there...
I haven't needed to beef up colors much - just sometimes I like to add 1 click vibrancy in Apple Aperture. Mostly I handle it via exposure, if you underexpose 1/3 stop it adds tons of saturation. When I shoot with polarizer I actually more often reduce saturation to make it more natural looking.
wayne seltzer wrote:
We will see if Samuli sees volume and 3-d in my shot.
You picked rather difficult subject (moss isn't easiest texture to show shape of surface), but your execution is very good, not too blurry background and enough blurry, details are captured well and not lost on downsizing for web.
To be through I checked image in addition to my normal display also with TV, ipad and laptop. I get quite easily feeling that the rock is in front of the scenery at background. What I can see from how the moss grows in rock (left side of rock is bulking out and right side is recessed), I can also "see" but illusion disappears quite easily (most probably due to rather difficult subject). To me it appears to have shape and volume, but illusion comes and goes.
How maybe to improve:
- Show the foreground, preferably so that it starts to go out of the focus just before or at bottom edge of picture (I can see and guess that this would not be possible without excavator...)
- Might work better if there would be more DOF e.g. f/5.6, f/8 might be too much
- Exposure could be 1/3 stop less (the moss on top right of the foreground rock looks little too bright, might be the LAB green tweaking caused as well)
- Might also help if you could move point of view few feet to left, now the background on right is much closer than the one on left causing background be more blurred on left side - symmetry may make the image work better, also the rock itself might look more interesting, when it's not it's "flat" side towards camera
BTW. Where is the photo from (state)? The moss on trees and rocks look quite similar as it looked on Smoky Mountains, where I was able to spend many weekends when I was working in South Carolina.
wfrank wrote:
For sharpening I use a script/Action originally from Alex Nail. It often gives oversharpened look - despite having three levels to choose from. You wouldnt happen to have a link to those methods you mention - or are they manual?
2010 I made PDF-file, and since I'm not very good cleaning my temp directories, it was still there: http://www.vahonen.com/temppi/stepsharpening.pdf
I would not use these directly, but something similar as supersharp without the USM at final size (keep it in the script, just uncheck the step so PS won't execute the step) and maybe removing one or two steps (or at least sharpen filter from those steps). More or less anything works, as long as you avoid "easy" downsizing ratios (e.g. moving from 3000x2000 to 1500x1000). Experiment with the base script and find how the effect each line in script does and tune for your own needs.
Once you develop them to your needs you can create droplets with PhotoShop and you don't anymore open PhotoShop, just drag and drop TIF images to droplet, and you are done. Very easy to add watermarks and frames etc. to your images as well.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Kind of almost lost hope (didn't get the inspiration I was hoping for - doesn't mean that there was something wrong of pics shown in this thread, just that I didn't get the "right" spark to fire my inspiration) but then I got to page 77, where you got 28-85 and then carstenw's post and I got what I needed.
Thanks very much, Samuli, that is very kind of you. I have been admiring your work with evergreens for such a long time now, every time I see them I feel an urge to pursue something really in depth instead of all this walk-around bullshit that I sometimes fall back on. I have been in a long lull now, since the fall, but I am beginning to feel the urge coming again to do something more serious. I need to choose a long-term project.
@Wihelm, I spent a lot of time trying to find the pg in the Zeiss thread where Denoir listed his sharpening alg. for me but I couldn't find the page. But I will just list is here how I remember it and how I do it in PS:
1) Filter->Sharpen (two times)
2) Image resize (Bicubic with no sharpening) to 3000 pixels on long side
3) Filter->USM 0.5 radius, amt: 125-150 depends on the picture
4) Resize to 2000 pixels on long side
5) Filter->Smart sharpen amt: 75% 0.3 radius
6) Resize to 1024 pixels on long side
7) Filter->Smart sharpen amt 100% 0.2 radius (repeat one more time if necessary)
@Samuli, thanks for your comments about the 3-d ness and how to improve it. I live in California Bay area and we only have mossy areas like this in the mountain areas near streams.
Sorry to hear about your recent snow storms. I will try to post some other shots from there and I will try to go back and spend some more time, this last time was a very quick shooting session.
I was trying to shoot over a boulder in front of the rock so I didn't have enough room to get in a little foreground before the bottom of the rock. I could if I used a shorter focal length lens. May try the 35 next time. I could also spend more time and try different viewpoints next time too.
Today I tried the 85/1.4, either it was too sunny or I just couldnt find anything worth shooting. Pretty hard to be fixed when having had the convenience with a zoom a while. Tricky focale for me, or tricky lens - need to think more.
Does anyone know in what way the CY85/1.4 differ from it's newer ZE(/ZF) counterparts?
This is from the 28-85 vault, could be named "Spring is still sleeping" (being envious of all greeness in images pouring into FM :-)
wayne seltzer wrote:
@Wihelm, I spent a lot of time trying to find the pg in the Zeiss thread where Denoir listed his sharpening alg. for me but I couldn't find the page. But I will just list is here how I remember it and how I do it in PS:
1) Filter->Sharpen (two times)
2) Image resize (Bicubic with no sharpening) to 3000 pixels on long side
3) Filter->USM 0.5 radius, amt: 125-150 depends on the picture
4) Resize to 2000 pixels on long side
5) Filter->Smart sharpen amt: 75% 0.3 radius
6) Resize to 1024 pixels on long side
7) Filter->Smart sharpen amt 100% 0.2 radius (repeat one more time if necessary)
wayne seltzer wrote:
5) Filter->Smart sharpen amt: 75% 0.3 radius
6) Resize to 1024 pixels on long side
7) Filter->Smart sharpen amt 100% 0.2 radius (repeat one more time if necessary)
Note that denoir uses "sharpen for gaussian blur" and not "for lens blur" in this recipe. If you use "for lens blur" then you should use much lower sharpening strength, like 10-20% in the final sharpening step (I usually do 10-20% twice, because two mild smart sharpens seem to bring out more detail than one stronger one).
By the way, I've found that with my 5D (mk1) files, the initial ordinary sharpen before resizing can be disastrous for bokeh sometimes, so in these instances it's worth leaving it out or masking the affected areas.
I'm loving the character of the 28-85 in your shots, but the CA in the corners is a bit disturbing to me. The 35-70 doesn't seem to have this at all.
Your welcome Wihelm! I hope I remembered it correctly, others pls. correct me if it is wrong.
I wish this was put on the forum sticky page.
@AhamB, thanks for adding that clarifying part, yes that is important.
Wilhem, good "feeling" in "Spring is still sleeping", can almost smell the spring.
I decided today to walk from work to home, and while doing that shoot some photos as well. I chose 35-70 for my tool. I was surprised of the results: quite flat rendering, subjects didn't get any shape appearing as cardboard, depth separation was quite OK. Colors were as strong as I remembered.
Just picked up a C/Y 50 1.7 to use on my 7d. My adapter back focuses quite a bit, even more than the -20 MA I tried to use. Might have to send it back. Using the focus confirmation works pretty well for me, I'm going to enjoy shooting manual lenses this way.
loosh wrote:
My adapter back focuses quite a bit, even more than the -20 MA I tried to use. Might have to send it back.
Please ask yourself how an adapter would cause back focus before you undertake the totally pointless endeavour of sending it back and getting another "that doesn't back focus". With a lens that has just one group (no zoom/floating elements), an adapter does absolutely nothing but put the lens at a certain distance from the mount, and if you reach infinity alright and don't have tilt/decentering problems, there's nothing another adapter will change for you.
Do you guys get 梅見 umemi there too (plum tree blossom)? I actually like that better but no one here comes out for it like they so hanami (cherry).
Kewl!
