Forum
Buying gear? Please use these links to help 14ers.com:

More info...

Other ways to help...

Let's see your black & whites!!

Camera equipment and technique for taking photos.
Forum rules
Please do not use this forum to try and sell your photos or promote a commercial website. For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
User avatar
Posts: 1665
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 12:47 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby highpilgrim » Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:35 pm

Dancesatmoonrise wrote:Hey, BTW - any advice for retrieving lost data in blown highlights? You know, Murphy's law suggests that your best image will include an uncroppable area that's blown. Especially in mountaineering and landscape photography - clouds, snow, rock... How do you guys deal with that?


This may be blasphemy to some, but what works sometimes for me is to shoot two images from exactly the same spot. Shoot one directly at the area that is going to overexpose and the camera will adjust for it. Shoot the second for the general view. You can (if you're careful) overlay the two images where the whole exposure is nearly perfect. I work in PS CS5 and there are great tools in there to do things like this.

I'm no professional, but this provides pretty decent results.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Hunter S Thompson

User avatar
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:23 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby mattpayne11 » Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:42 pm

Great discussion guys!

Mark Curtis wrote:and here's why I DON'T typically shoot RAW:
- File sizes! I take a lot of photographs and shooting RAW really takes up space on hard drives (I have 4 as it is). Also, it takes up a lot more of your sd card space as you are shooting.


I agree this is a down side of RAW, for sure. I convert all of mine to DNG files in Lightroom and as I go through each import I delete the ones I don't like right out of the box. I also go through after I'm done with a project (read - trip report) and delete ones I know I will never use again. But - storage is cheap and I have yet to fill my 1.2 TB drive yet.

Mark Curtis wrote:- JPEG quality improvement. Today's DSLR in camera JPEG engine processing has improved in leaps and bounds in the last couple of years. In fact, in the camera I use....the Pentax K-r....the JPEG detail is getting close to rivaling the RAW files. You have to be quite the pixel peeper to distinguish. Also, HDR is used for JPEG's and allows for a wider dynamic range.


I don't agree about .jpgs having a wider dynamic range or HDR use. I use my raw files (.DNG) to process in Photomatix. Maybe that's a flaw in process, but I have read books that say that you should. Also - it is a fact that RAW files have more dynamic range in them. When I shoot star trails at ISO 100, the frame looks black on import but when applying just a touch of exposure - boom - there's the stars!

Mark Curtis wrote:- Frames per second buffer room. Translation.....in burst mode you can typically take twice the amount of photos using JPEG's instead of RAW. This might be important if you are shooting sports or fast moving wildlife.


I think this depends on two factors - the camera and the memory card used. My camera (Nikon D7000) has 6 FPS continuous regardless of jpg or raw. ""And there is no reduction in continuous shooting frame rate even when high ISO noise reduction or Active D-Lighting is activated."

What does impact FPS is your memory card - I use two of these cards: http://www.adorama.com/IDS16GEPUHSI.html&kbid=66322 in my camera (which has two memory card slots). The better your cards, the bigger the buffer.

Mark Curtis wrote:- Less noise with JPEG's at higher ISO. For low light shots you might be able to extract more detail from shadows, etc. in RAW.....but you might need to run those photos through some kind of noise reduction software in certain situations.


I've not experienced this or read this anywhere until now- are you sure? I use the in-camera noise reduction for long exposures, so I guess it has not been an issue for me.

Mark Curtis wrote:- Post processing. Yes, the RAW files certainly provide more flexibility, but one thing about them is that you can pretty much count on doing a fairly significant amount of post processing to get a great final outcome. With JPEG's there are many times when you don't have to do much at all. For those who enjoy and have time for PP, RAW is great. But for busy folks who have other endeavors in mind it may not be ideal.


Totally agree!

Mark Curtis wrote:- One other thing that is a cool feature on my K-r is the ability to shoot in JPEG.....but having the ability to add RAW for each shot without switching to that mode (only as each photo is taken however). I will incorporate this as I am shooting if I feel I have an especially exceptional shot......or a shot where the dynamic range is extreme and might require some future extracting of detail. It also will do RAW + JPEG (as most DLSR's do, but then you are really talking about a lot of space! :-)


I need to use RAW+JPEG more often but I have yet to really find much of a use for it. I could see it being useful for a wedding where you want to get pictures up quickly for a slideshow though.
Mark Curtis wrote:Don't get me wrong. I agree with all of the positives of RAW mentioned by Matt. And for professionals it is probably heresy to suggest using anything but. I just wanted to point out there are some advantages to using JPEG's. And inherent in those points is the idea that the newer cameras are doing a much better job of providing a pleasing image to many shooters who want to take advantage of those positives.


You bring up great points. I think shooting RAW is really only useful for people that do a lot of PP like myself. Otherwise, it is a waste of space and time. LOL.

Mark Curtis wrote:Finally, while I have no doubt the advantages of Lightroom are boundless, I would throw a caveat into the use of a post processing graduated filter. That is to say, even in RAW where the chances of reversing the effect of blown highlights is greatly enhanced, there are limitations to how much the shot can be overexposed and still be able to retrieve those highlights. You can only pull back just so much. If you use a filter in the field you have more control over those situations where the dynamic range is extreme.....and don't want to take the time and effort to take two different exposures and merge.

[/quote]

I agree - really want to get a filter! I also want to get one of those filters that reduces the number of stops! Sexy clouds!


highpilgrim wrote:This may be blasphemy to some, but what works sometimes for me is to shoot two images from exactly the same spot. Shoot one directly at the area that is going to overexpose and the camera will adjust for it. Shoot the second for the general view. You can (if you're careful) overlay the two images where the whole exposure is nearly perfect. I work in PS CS5 and there are great tools in there to do things like this.

I'm no professional, but this provides pretty decent results.


Good call man! I agree. I like to sometimes use the function in photomatix for exposure blending. It is good for situations like this. The key is to have a very steady image or you will see ghosting artifacts and other nasty stuff.

P.S. Jim - congrats on getting published - I'm jealous!

User avatar
Posts: 2263
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 3:35 pm

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Matt » Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:03 pm

I just try to take the best photo that I can with my little Canon HS230.
Sometimes, I hit the "enhance" button in iPhoto, but feel like I should just try and work on my shooting technique and perfect using the "manual" setting the camera offers.
It feels like cheating when the quality of a photo depends on something besides the camera.
I like to think that much of photography is being in the right place at the right time, as well as having the eye to spot what looks cool to you and capture it accordingly. Sharing what I see doesn't have to involve altering what I saw. Sometimes, it's luck, sometimes it's legwork. Ansel Adams didn't use Photoshop, Aperture, or Lightbox, but his photos are timeless.
This is not to say that I don't embellish some of the ones I choose to blow up and hang on the walls of my house, though.
We are all greater artists than we realize -FWN
A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone. -HDT
Peak List

User avatar
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:28 pm
Location: Windsor, Colorado

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Mark Curtis » Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:29 pm

Just to clarify, I wasn't trying to suggest that JPEGs have a wider dynamic range than RAW. I may have stated it confusingly. What I meant to say was that by using HDR it increases the range for JPEGs vs JPEGs alone. The question is whether or not that is critical to the scene for which you are shooting. As was suggested by Dancesatmoonrise, the Colorado mountains are typically a place where it is quite relevant. I know the camera I have now is greatly improved for that latitude.....even with the JPEG's.

As far as the continous shooting.....all I can say is not all of us have a D7000! :) My K-r also does 6fps, but it does impact the buffer (regardless of card) when using RAW. I agree the higher class card will help, but most cameras are better suited for JPEGs for the type of shooting described. Plus, most of us are not shooting for Sports Illustrated......here's a shot I took of my son playing soccer with the K-r and one of the kit lenses, a JPEG at 200mm: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v259/ccd333/IMGP0317-4-1.jpg Let's put it this way, if you need more detail than that, then you SHOULD be shooting for Sports Illustrated! I got the K-r with 18-55 and 50-200 lenses brand new for $495. Most of the shots I have posted here were with that camera and one of those lenses (a couple of the others with an older Pentax....the *istDL). Check out the mountain goat shots in the Wildlife thread (mine are the ones with the goofy captions! :roll: ) if you want to see more of what a sub 500 dollar camera can do using a JPEG setting.

Finally, here is a quote from a professional review of the K-r: "JPEG processing leads to sharper images than their Raw counterparts, and JPEG images shot at higher ISOs also benefit from greater noise reduction". It does go on to say there is more scope for post processing alteration of both noise and sharpness in RAW, but the point is made for relevance to out of camera shots.

User avatar
Posts: 1665
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 12:47 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby highpilgrim » Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:36 pm

Matt wrote:Ansel Adams didn't use Photoshop, Aperture, or Lightbox, but his photos are timeless


Yeah,Matt, but he was a master of darkroom technique including dodging and burning. His pics are spectacular, partly due to all the compositional skills he had mastered, but also because he knew how to use the technology of the time to amplify everything he had captured in the image.

I'm not sure that Ansel would have shunned all of the new technology. He'd just use it more adroitly.

Greg
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Hunter S Thompson

User avatar
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:23 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby mattpayne11 » Wed Aug 10, 2011 10:57 pm

highpilgrim wrote:
Matt wrote:Ansel Adams didn't use Photoshop, Aperture, or Lightbox, but his photos are timeless


Yeah,Matt, but he was a master of darkroom technique including dodging and burning. His pics are spectacular, partly due to all the compositional skills he had mastered, but also because he knew how to use the technology of the time to amplify everything he had captured in the image.

I'm not sure that Ansel would have shunned all of the new technology. He'd just use it more adroitly.

Greg


Well stated. Ansel Adams was an average photographer (with great composition skills) but he was a master in the darkroom.

Mark - I get what you are saying now - sorry I got confused hehe.

User avatar
Posts: 1551
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:13 am
Location: Littleton, CO

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Tory Wells » Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:53 pm

LOVE all the photos...thanks for sharing, folks! =D>
"Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earthbound misfit, am I." -David Gilmour, Pink Floyd

"We knocked the bastard off." Hillary, 1953
"It is not the mountain we conquer but ourselves." Hillary, 2003
Couldn't we all use 50 years of humble growth?
-Steve Gladbach

User avatar
Posts: 1551
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:13 am
Location: Littleton, CO

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Tory Wells » Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:56 pm

Boulder Falls...
Image
"Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earthbound misfit, am I." -David Gilmour, Pink Floyd

"We knocked the bastard off." Hillary, 1953
"It is not the mountain we conquer but ourselves." Hillary, 2003
Couldn't we all use 50 years of humble growth?
-Steve Gladbach

User avatar
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:28 pm
Location: Windsor, Colorado

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Mark Curtis » Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:40 pm

ph-10840_filtered-2.jpg
ph-10840_filtered-2.jpg (286.22 KiB) Viewed 644 times


IMGP3226-8.JPG
IMGP3226-8.JPG (341.88 KiB) Viewed 645 times
Attachments
ph-10008-2.jpg
ph-10008-2.jpg (295.63 KiB) Viewed 620 times

User avatar
Posts: 2146
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:47 pm
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Dancesatmoonrise » Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:53 pm

Mark Curtis, dammit, you're a master!!

User avatar
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:28 pm
Location: Windsor, Colorado

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby Mark Curtis » Sat Aug 13, 2011 10:23 pm

Dancesatmoonrise wrote:Mark Curtis, dammit, you're a master!!


Naw, I just have a LOT of fun! :) I just might, though, show those six words to my wife! :lol:

User avatar
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:23 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Let's see your black & whites!!

Postby mattpayne11 » Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:44 pm

I meant to post this sooner - Mark your work is really great man - keep it coming!

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests