Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

3 end

Archive 2021 · Legacy Dream Falls

Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Legacy Dream Falls

James Markus wrote:
Mark, I like simple repeatable axioms. For example: I believe most (95%) lenses are at their sharpest at f5.6, but I know sometimes it would be f4, or f8, or occasionally another f-stop. Another axiom I believe is that a photo or image should speak for itself. If it doesn't convey whatever the message is by itself, and requires paragraphs beyond a mere slug line - then the image has failed. I like your waterfall photo, but it doesn't convey anything approaching the technical gymnastics you did to achieve the result you got.

I usually add the portion “Technicals for the Techie Minded” (or something to that effect) for the very many folks here on FM, that over the years have requested it, and have communicated (PM and otherwise) to me that they appreciate it, and have benefitted from it. For those who benefit and encourage me, I will continue. I like the axiom about how if we do not like something, we can change the channel. 😉

As far as “technical gymnastics”... this ultimate quality 32-bit raw layer workflow is easy. It requires NO Gymnastics!

As far as “it (my image) doesn't convey anything approaching the technical gymnastics you did”

No gymnastics. And point of fact, no one could possibly know the difference of what the image would have looked like without the mentioned workflow applied.

Even more so, the quality is very obvious in the 96”+, 80”, 72”, 60”, 50”, 45”, and 36” gallery enlargement prints (and files - that can also be used for ever increasing large, high resolution displays like 8k...) respectively. Quality enlargements (the larger one prints, the larger the difference) is where we see the substantial difference all the time.

As far as the comments about how data works (to me or to the others on this thread) Roberts' post and reply about the subject is spot on and I will repost it here (with an edit or personal interjection via italics, added for clarity): 👇🏼

People are conflating (combining two or more ideas into one...) Capture bit depth and Editing bit depth. (two different things)

Capture bit depth has certain limitations that mainly affect the image qualities relating to dynamic range, shadow detail and noise because of linear capture.

While Editing space bit depth, which is a floating point zero math where limitations in workspace bit depth affect the precision of the final colors, gradients and shadow fidelity (and more…) when complex (or many) edits are applied irrespective of whether they are cumulative (destructive), applied to an already rasterized (demosaiced) image via layers or to a...Show more →

plateaulight wrote:
The Phase and Hassy are 16 bit capture but only so when they stay in their native format. Once they get output as a tiff they get truncated to 14bit due to the way Adobe handles them however if they were able to be saved as radiance format they would retain the 16 bit data. It’s easily observable on the histogram in Phocus or Capture one before export vs the exported tiff in Adobe. The least significant bits are dropped.

Thank you Robert for this clarification about newer higher end capture bit depths and the handling of such data...

f_a_98 wrote:
Beautifully done!

Huge thank you! I appreciate the encouragement. All the best to you and your loved ones during these times…

Aug 07, 2021 at 11:43 AM

James Markus
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Legacy Dream Falls

Mark, I hope you will think about this a bit, and not respond with the hubris that Robert used. The only conflating I see is Robert's comparing audio to image files. There are some technical problems with the whole 32 bit color thing.

1-No human eye can perceive greater than 8 bit color.

-but if we could...

2-No existing camera captures anything approaching 32 bit color.

-but if there was one...

3-No image file container exists that can store that many color luminosity levels.

-but if there were one...

4-No monitor can display anything approaching the palette of 32 bit color.

-but if such a monitor could be invented (CRT-like?)...

5-No printer exists that can reproduce hundreds of trillions of colors.

Robert lists inkjet printers he uses which use a palette of 8 or 12 ink colors! Inkjets create illusions of perceived colors based on viewing distance, magnification, and dot gain. They are not continuous tone printers like dye sublimation. It is like Georges Seurat painted his pointillism paintings in 3.5-4 picoliter droplets. Reducing a hundreds of trillions of color luminosity levels to a literal handful of colors (8 or 12) - some very interesting math has to occur.

I am admitting that what you and Robert are doing can allow smoother gradients, and I suspect it is from interpolation. My point was that you could have achieved the same image in another more traditional method. And, that the technology required for 32 bit color photography, imaging, viewing, and printing does not exist, yet. I am sure that Robert is a fine passionate printer, but I have never encountered such a statement as this on FM.

plateaulight (Robert Park) wrote...

Nobody in this country has more experience than I do making massive ultra quality enlargements and editing files for the absolute best possible result in epic sizes so I do speak with authority in stating that the outlined process that Mark and I have worked tirelessly on is without question the very best quality workflow available today for prepping the best file for printing with the tools we currently have. Anyone that is stating things in contradiction is a sideline heckler lacking the empirical evidence to build their case or just a web based low rez end workflow.

Aug 07, 2021 at 01:50 PM

plateaulight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Legacy Dream Falls

James,

Once again you are conflating capture bit depth and the editing space. They are wholly independent. To use a very simple breakdown one could simply ask why does Adobe do all of its internal calculations at 32 bit regardless of the files output bit depth? It has to do with quantization errors and the more edits involved or the more radical the edit is the more those errors show up. FYI in case you don't know it dye sublimation is an inkjet print and only seems contone because of the massive blurring and dot gain incurred from the transfer process. Lightjet prints are also clearly dots equal to approx 2.5 picolitres mixed from 3 colors RGB under high magnification so I see no validity to your argument.

Using arguments like the eye can only see 8bits would indicate that we should go back to 8 bit capture however as we all know that the finer the gradient/steps are, the better the file editing process and end result becomes. We all know that 14 bit capture is far better than the earliest low bit cameras so why even go there?

Editing in higher bit depth is numerically and demonstrably superior especially when heavy edits come into play, why is that so hard to comprehend and why is it so hard to comprehend the superiority of performing all of the edits you would ever want BEFORE rasterizing to 16bit and baking in the lossy gama curve from Adobe into your file permanently. Significant editing to a 16bit rasterized file with the gama curve locked in is seriously handicapped in comparison to the workflow Mark and I use REGARDLESS if it is printed in 8 bits or as we do in our lab at 16 bits.

James Markus wrote:
Mark, I hope you will think about this a bit, and not respond with the hubris that Robert used. The only conflating I see is Robert's comparing audio to image files. There are some technical problems with the whole 32 bit color thing.

1-No human eye can perceive greater than 8 bit color.

-but if we could...

2-No existing camera captures anything approaching 32 bit color.

-but if there was one...

3-No image file container exists that can store that many color luminosity levels.

-but if there were one...

4-No monitor can display anything approaching the palette of 32 bit color.

-but if such a monitor could...Show more →

Aug 07, 2021 at 03:19 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Legacy Dream Falls

Why are we even discussing this detail of processing on the landscape image board...take the discussion to the post processing and printing board where it belongs and keep this board for displaying landscapes.

Aug 07, 2021 at 06:33 PM

Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Legacy Dream Falls

chez wrote:
Why are we even discussing this detail of processing on the landscape image board...take the discussion to the post processing and printing board where it belongs and keep this board for displaying landscapes.

Thank you. As I said above, if people want to argue with me about this, simply PM me.

Aug 07, 2021 at 07:48 PM

Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Legacy Dream Falls

James Markus wrote:
Mark, I hope you will think about this a bit, and not respond with the hubris that Robert used. The only conflating I see is Robert's comparing audio to image files. There are some technical problems with the whole 32 bit color thing.

1-No human eye can perceive greater than 8 bit color.

-but if we could...

2-No existing camera captures anything approaching 32 bit color.

-but if there was one...

3-No image file container exists that can store that many color luminosity levels.

-but if there were one...

4-No monitor can display anything approaching the palette of 32 bit color.

-but if such a monitor could...Show more →

Hi Jim

I hope you will read much more carefully the responses provided here. I believe you are unfortunately, completely missing the point.

How the data is carefully handled EARLIEST in the post-processing pipeline/chain has a PROFOUND effect on how it ends up being (real world) once it arrives at final output. Capture bit depth and Processing bit depth are totally different! And it takes no gymnastics, as you implied.

Especially for enlargement or files made for large high quality display.

Very, very few have real (the 10,000+ hour rule or maybe the 20,000 hr rule?) hard grinding it out (full time in the real world) expertise in this (beyond theory) and for those interested in maximizing their image quality for the future maybe check out where the rubber actually meets the road? And where the future of post-process is heading (even now).

If you want to really put your money where your mouth is, how about joining our workshop, and then if you do not see the profound quantum leap forward we are describing, well no charge (have your money back no questions asked)!

We have even had critical Adobe employees attend this workshop and say “No one is doing what you guys are doing.” And also stand up in class and explain why it is working.

Or, how about this: make a big enlargement like a 50”, 60”, 72”, 80”, 96”, or 10 foot print, and then give me your raw file, and I will make one (I will not charge for any of my labor) and then see which is better (for yourself) and by how much!?

I will guarantee this very moment publicly, a very extraordinary quantum leap forward in the quality of the file I produce for you! Why, because of what we are describing!

I’m ready if you are. Then all following this thread can see the real world results of what we are sharing.

Maybe check out the three video tutorials on my YouTube page where I have taken, or Robert has taken, extremely low megapixels to humongous, incredibly detailed, extremely high-quality gallery prints. My last one was entitled “10 bad megapixels to a 10 foot fine art gallery print!” What I’m describing here is the essential foundation to all of it! And, No, just as the videos describe, there are no push button software answers.

This 32 bit raw Layer, Ultimate Quality Workflow is opening up a world of LEGACY FILES for all photographers who thought that their old, low MP images could not make super high-quality prints or enlargements. It’s the utter foundation.

And for those who don’t think that printing is very important. There’s more high-quality large printing going on now than ever before in history. Also we are on the verge of extremely huge high-quality 8K and beyond screens/displays which will display extremely high resolution files very large. So quality is still absolutely important.

Aug 07, 2021 at 08:30 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Legacy Dream Falls

A simple test is to take some photographic prints by excellent photographers and printers who are not using such techniques and compare them to prints made by those who claim that they produce quantum leaps in quality, mix them up without identifying the prints, and ask unbiased observers if they can tell which are which.

Aug 07, 2021 at 10:56 PM

plateaulight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Legacy Dream Falls

gdanmitchell wrote:
A simple test is to take some photographic prints by excellent photographers and printers who are not using such techniques and compare them to prints made by those who claim that they produce quantum leaps in quality, mix them up without identifying the prints, and ask unbiased observers if they can tell which are which.

This happens in my lab on a regular basis. Many clients send their layered tiff along with the raw + sidecar in order to get the best result. When new clients ask what is the best format to submit files we ask what platform do they use ( PS or LR). If it has been edited in LR then we ask to export a DNG with raw data embedded. We generally are able to make significant improvements when we get the raw and use our techniques.

You have to understand that we see hundreds of images a month from hundreds of clients each of which has their way of editing. In general, the ones who’s workflow follows the herd are greatly outclassed technically by our clients who have taken our workflow advice or workshop.
Mark and I are in a unique position and it would be wise to take note of free tips from a person who has the direct experiences that I have had the fortune to obtain.

Aug 08, 2021 at 06:30 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Legacy Dream Falls

plateaulight wrote:
This happens in my lab on a regular basis. Many clients send their layered tiff along with the raw + sidecar in order to get the best result. When new clients ask what is the best format to submit files we ask what platform do they use ( PS or LR). If it has been edited in LR then we ask to export a DNG with raw data embedded. We generally are able to make significant improvements when we get the raw and use our techniques.

You have to understand that we see hundreds of images a month from hundreds...Show more →

That's interesting...

... but it is also not what I proposed.

Like you, I know what I'm doing when it comes to post-processing and printing. I can find differences among files and prints if I look very closely at them.

But what I'm suggesting is that a "quantum difference" should be easily verifiable using a standard process of asking viewers to compare prints using various processes and assess their ability to distinguish among them.

I'm a fan of the old school ABX tests in which subjects are provided with three samples, A, B, and X, where X is identical to either A or B. Subjects are asked whether X matches A or B.

An additional layer to this test which embraces the subjective qualities of photographic prints might also ask subjects to express a preference for one over the other. (I've been part of some tests like this where participants agreed that there were differences between the A and B samples, but there was no agreement about whether A or B was the better one.)

Aug 08, 2021 at 10:04 AM

Rajan Parrikar
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Legacy Dream Falls

G Dan Mitchell wrote:

A simple test is to take some photographic prints by excellent photographers and printers who are not using such techniques and compare them to prints made...

Nothing stops you from submitting prints. (We also want non-excellent photographers to participate.)

Aug 08, 2021 at 10:13 AM

plateaulight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Legacy Dream Falls

gdanmitchell wrote:
That's interesting...

... but it is also not what I proposed.

Like you, I know what I'm doing when it comes to post-processing and printing. I can find differences among files and prints if I look very closely at them.

But what I'm suggesting is that a "quantum difference" should be easily verifiable using a standard process of asking viewers to compare prints using various processes and assess their ability to distinguish among them.

I'm a fan of the old school ABX tests in which subjects are provided with three samples, A, B, and X, where X is identical to either A or...Show more →

Dan, There is nothing subjective about it. For a simple illustration here is a link to a greyscale 8bit file with a simple gradient and a curves edit that is causing some banding. The gradient is especially useful as images with details everywhere mask issues that are there regardless and show up in upsizing and output prep. This is easily a cumulative depiction of the commonly used editing routine on many images where targeted edits are applied in layers but in a single scenario for illustrative purposes. If you feel that the edit is overly aggressive feel free to drag it into a highly detailed file and see how subtle it really is in comparison to what I see come in on client edited layers.

How do you get the banding out? Please post your result and detail your method.
The link to the layered tif file is below as well as my fixed file. If you post your result and want to know I will send you my workflow.

8 Bit greyscale banding tiff for PS editing

RP cleaned jpg

Aug 08, 2021 at 03:09 PM

goloveia100
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Legacy Dream Falls

Really impressive!

Aug 08, 2021 at 06:13 PM

SergeyT
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Legacy Dream Falls

plateaulight wrote:
...

This is all very similar to editing digital audio and it is well understood by people in that arena however the digital imaging side seems to not have grasped some fundamental aspects of editing digital data. While CD may have been the standard at 16bit 44.1K it is now common to see 64bit and 128bit depth editing suites vs the early 32bit audio suites.

...
Since you brought up the analogy with audio...
There are people who did not go to school and these who went but did not learn much.
And there is a market for such people, filled up with stuff like this https://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-Analog-Audio-Interconnect-Cables/dp/B07FF6YS79/ref=sr_1_8?dchild=1&keywords=audio+cable&qid=1628621610&sr=8-8 , https://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-NRG-Firebird-High-Current-3-0m/dp/B07JHX9WMS/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=power+cable&qid=1628623282&sr=8-9 . Price tag and lack of basic knowledge makes them confident to claiming that these mega-$ cables that they purchased "sound better" than the $10 ones. Yep, their mega-$ power cables also have a distinct "sound" (whatever that means).

Aug 10, 2021 at 02:28 PM

plateaulight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Legacy Dream Falls

SergeyT wrote:
Since you brought up the analogy with audio...
There are people who did not go to school and these who went but did not learn much.
And there is a market for such people, filled up with stuff like this https://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-Analog-Audio-Interconnect-Cables/dp/B07FF6YS79/ref=sr_1_8?dchild=1&keywords=audio+cable&qid=1628621610&sr=8-8 , https://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-NRG-Firebird-High-Current-3-0m/dp/B07JHX9WMS/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=power+cable&qid=1628623282&sr=8-9 . Price tag and lack of basic knowledge makes them confident to claiming that these mega-$ cables that they purchased "sound better" than the $10 ones. Yep, their mega-$ power cables also have a distinct "sound" (whatever that means).

I happen to not be a fan of Audioquest cables but cables do have an impact on high end systems and you do not have to buy super expensive cables to get the right synergy in your system. Unfortunately most people will never get to experience a system that can emotionally move you.

Aug 10, 2021 at 07:44 PM

SergeyT
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Legacy Dream Falls

plateaulight wrote:
...you do not have to buy super expensive cables to get the right synergy in your system...
Similar principles would apply to image making, wouldn't they ?

Aug 10, 2021 at 08:28 PM

plateaulight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Legacy Dream Falls

SergeyT wrote:
Similar principles would apply to image making, wouldn't they ?

Yes to some extent especially with high end audio. You do not need a $250,000 light jet to get outstanding prints. It is all about how you use it not how expensive it is although industrial machines are expensive to make. A great machine in the wrong hands does not guarantee outstanding results, it takes enormous technical knowledge to coax everything out of a printer or camera. Unfortunately most people think that it’s all in the cameras tech or the printer somehow just gives they best result by pushing a button because they read the instructions.

Keep in mind, we are specifically talking about the editing process not the printer so the aforementioned expertise is exactly what we are referring to here and what allows a much better end result.

Aug 10, 2021 at 09:04 PM

SergeyT
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Legacy Dream Falls

The irony is, it may take time and efforts to study and "unlock" the secrets of a device or methodology and then it becomes pretty much "a push of button" going forward.
Level of sophistication of a device or methodology employed into creation of an image do not necessarily translate into an increased probability of making the image more artistic.

Aug 10, 2021 at 10:07 PM

plateaulight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Legacy Dream Falls

SergeyT wrote:
The irony is, it may take time and efforts to study and "unlock" the secrets of a device or methodology and then it becomes pretty much "a push of button" going forward.
Level of sophistication of a device or methodology employed into creation of an image do not necessarily translate into an increased probability of making the image more artistic.

True however the increased ability to do more in the creative editing stage without degradation opens up the portal to expanded artistic possibilities.

Aug 10, 2021 at 10:20 PM

zurura
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Legacy Dream Falls

Beautiful image Mark. The colours looks so awesome.

Cheers,
Gautam

Aug 11, 2021 at 01:47 AM

Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Legacy Dream Falls

goloveia100 wrote:
Really impressive!

A very big thank you! I really appreciate the encouragement.

plateaulight wrote:
I happen to not be a fan of Audioquest cables but cables do have an impact on high end systems and you do not have to buy super expensive cables to get the right synergy in your system. Unfortunately most people will never get to experience a system that can emotionally move you.

Robert, you certainly have a sound system that moves a person!!!! I can't wait to hear it again!!! I’m no audio expert, but as a past musician (once one always one) I know incredible sound!

plateaulight wrote:
Yes to some extent especially with high end audio. You do not need a $250,000 light jet to get outstanding prints. It is all about how you use it not how expensive it is although industrial machines are expensive to make. A great machine in the wrong hands does not guarantee outstanding results, it takes enormous technical knowledge to coax everything out of a printer or camera. Unfortunately most people think that it’s all in the cameras tech or the printer somehow just gives they best result by pushing a button because they read the instructions.

Keep in mind, we...Show more →

I might add that I tell people in our print workshop every year that I am not convinced that Robert hasn't taken apart all his printers to the individual parts, and made them work in a way they were never meant to work, by reengineering them. That goes for the RIP software as well! And YES a high end print like a Lumachrome HD or your new Ultra Vibrant Acrylic Prints (whatever you are calling them) is a place where things that people may have not been able to see something, well you can see it there! I think the analogy is good. But making use of the highest bit depth, and the most lossless techniques, that the manufacturers are both giving us and are developing make nothing but sense to me, if ultimate quality is the aim. It's not even debatable to me if I see a difference! Every day! I just worked on another black and white yesterday that I was able to move, change, stretch and adjust tones and whack noise, and blend like crazy an image using the 32-bit Raw on Raw workflow, that there is NO WAY I could have with conventional methods. It would have fallen apart badly. Yet, the tones are pristine! It's almost unbelievable to me.

plateaulight wrote:
True however the increased ability to do more in the creative editing stage without degradation opens up the portal to expanded artistic possibilities.

I could not agree more! That's exactly what I was just implying/saying in my last reply. In fact we can now go back to old legacy work (I have been going back to files I almost threw away that were 3.2MP or 6MP and full of noise and artifacts, and not shot well, underexposed, lack of data…) and make huge gallery quality images out of them, that I never believed I could. The very BASE of this ability is the stretching, skewing (I do not mean those last 2 words literally) the clean up, and distribution of adjustments and masking/blending one can now make at the highest bit depth level. The 32-bit Raw on Raw workflow is out of this world.

In fact the super long exposure minimalist black and whites I have been shooting for almost 20 years (that I never posted or ever expected to print) I NEVER thought I could ever make into a huge quality image! No way. Well I’m doing it now! And we teach every step! Those old files would practically fall apart at the beginning of the workflow otherwise. But the creative liberty, the techniques, the stretching of tones, and all the stuff that goes into that genre of photography, I believe has entered into a brand new and extremely exciting era! But few know about it. YET!

zurura wrote:
Beautiful image Mark. The colours looks so awesome.

Cheers,
Gautam

Hi Gautam! Thank you kindly! Hey BTW, You are the same Gautam on IG! You do such nice work!!! Thank you for your constant encouragement!

Aug 13, 2021 at 02:45 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Landscape Photographer \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end

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