euronail wrote:
Not sure if you are specifically talking about the D800e image?
Mainly he's being rude and a little condescending...
Here's the thing - if you shoot JPEG, the camera is doing a certain amount of adjustment for color, saturation, sharpening, etc. by itself. There are generational differences between some cameras. Skin tones are probably tough because there isn't one tone/look they can optimize for and be correct.
If you shoot RAW, you have a similar problem. Un-altered RAW files are going to look flat, etc. and you can either let your post-processing software do an arbitrary set of adjustments or you can develop your own profile that suits your tastes.
You can also set your camera to mimic the look from previous generations of cameras. My "Guide to the D300/D300s" from Thom Hogan had a section that discussed how to set the white balance, color, saturation, sharpening, etc. to generate photos that looked more like previous sensors/cameras. I'd guess that he has something very similar in his D800 guide (http://www.bythom.com/nikond800guide.htm - I highly recommend his work - I learned a ton about my camera and camera technology by going through it, and I'll read it again). Once you've set it up, you can tweak it to your taste.
The D800 is a massively capable and complex camera. Take the time to learn it well and you'll have a lot of fun with it! There are lots of good folks here, so don't worry about posting questions.
I think you got the one remark because you used "tone" which emplies a reference to the color of the skin or hue, but then you used "crisp" which most would feel refers to the contrast on the image. So you were just kind of mixing different qualities when you are asking the question. Todays cameras are pretty customizable for most qualities, so I would think it's not really a camera problem other that a user not knowing how to set the camera up to their liking.
They're both shade but it appears that the d2x image has quite a bit of bounce light coming in off the ground of something else nearby. That being said the d800 image does look flat. The best way to figure out what picture control to use is that a few raw images that you've taken under different lighting conditions and try applying some different picture controls to them in viewnx. I like portrait, +2 contrast, +1 saturation, -1 hue.
JohnBrose wrote:
I think you got the one remark because you used "tone" which emplies a reference to the color of the skin or hue, but then you used "crisp" which most would feel refers to the contrast on the image. So you were just kind of mixing different qualities when you are asking the question. Todays cameras are pretty customizable for most qualities, so I would think it's not really a camera problem other that a user not knowing how to set the camera up to their liking.
What are your current settings on your camera, JohnBrose? Do you use any Custom settings or just keep everything as Default? Can you post an image straight out of your camera which you consider to have "good" skin tone?
eSchwab wrote:
They're both shade but it appears that the d2x image has quite a bit of bounce light coming in off the ground of something else nearby. That being said the d800 image does look flat. The best way to figure out what picture control to use is that a few raw images that you've taken under different lighting conditions and try applying some different picture controls to them in viewnx. I like portrait, +2 contrast, +1 saturation, -1 hue.
The image on the D2X was all natural light, no bounce light. The subjects were sitting in the front porch.
euronail wrote:
Can you post an image straight out of your camera which you consider to have "good" skin tone?
Euronail,
I am not JohnBrose, but here are 2 examples from my very first day with the D800. Factory default settings
I didn't mean you had a reflector. I mean depending on what is around the person you will get a certain amount of bounce light. Light colored ground, sand, or a building on the opposite side can give you quite a bit of nice fill light. The first image look like it has that while the second one does not.
The pictures look really good. Can you share which Picture Control mode you used? There was no post processing, right? Did you do any sharpening in camera or PP?
The pictures look really good. Can you share which Picture Control mode you used? There was no post processing, right? Did you do any sharpening in camera or PP?
You are welcome.
As written, these photos were shot on the first day, all picture control settings were on factory defaults (standard). WB = Auto
These days, I'd rather use less sharpening in camera (basically I set sharpness in picture control to 0) and do some light USM in PP with CNX2. Is nicer, more natural and produces less noise.
So this is a discussion on how to set JPEG controls on a D800 to match an earlier Nikon body? With a greater dynamic range (for low ISO) and and lower noise (for Hi ISO) you would likely have some changes. That's because the VF is just an exposure p/framing tool. Ultimate WB and so many other parameters can be optimized in PP.
I remember when I switched to RAW how stunned I was at the dull low contrast images I got with the RAW defaults in ACR. Soon I realized that you can add the contract (and a lot of other things) but it's considerably harder to unwind it (and sometimes impossible) after the camera has discarded image data to compress to a JPEG. I have no patience for JPEG ps since I learned (thru quite some effort) how to go beyond JPEGs for the image I want. A D800 has a lot of horsepower for just JPEGs.
