The photography thread

Brio

Mainly used Lightroom but there was a little cleaning in photoshop. If I had a tripod with me I would have shot an HDR. The secret was to keep a bit of colour in the sky and not have it wash to white.

Brio

To explain that comment of mine above. If any part of you image goes pure white or black there is nothing there to process be it digitally or with dodging and burning.
But you are far more likely to recover shadow detail than do anything with a burnt out highlight.

ThePrettyDamned

cj73 said:

boogieman said:

Brio said:

Oh and they looked crap as shot:
https://flic.kr/p/L1kopg
https://flic.kr/p/28ETH7J

Blimey I see what you mean, that’s night and day different. What software are you using? 

And kudos to @Brio for posting them.  Post processing is as much a part of the artistry now as the actual snapping.  I often take deliberately “rubbish” shots because I know what I can pull out in post.  ie under exposing to maintain stillness or a low iso 

It always has been, including pen and pencil editing, dodging and burning and painting. Post-processing is not new at all. 

Tell you what is though - people using that photoshop technique to get even skin texture. I've done it myself, and without fail, it looks bloody awful, very strange indeed. It's where you are effectively softening the colour layer, but then duplicating a texture layer.

The effect is people with perfect pores covering 100 percent of their face. It looks very strange, and immediately puts me off any portrait, which is a shame - I would say I probably prefer the soft focus look! 

Brio

+1
If there is one Photoshop tool I'd remove it is that smart blur/Gaussian blur tool. Grr.

boogieman

I once de-lined/wrinkled a portrait shot of my wife using a texture softening filter. It looked really weird and she hated the shot, it made her look like a robot. Texture in the skin is what gives character. 

My wife’s niece does photo editing as a job in the US, she’s very good at it and gets commissions from most of the big ad agencies and fashion magazines. She’s always said it’s knowing where to stop that’s the real skill. Although apparently you will never see a genuine shot of that Kardashian lot, they are tweaked to the max every time. 

Brio

That there Ansel Adams was the bloke who started it...
He was the Serge Ramelli of his generation.  

ThePrettyDamned

Brio said:

+1
If there is one Photoshop tool I'd remove it is that smart blur/Gaussian blur tool. Grr.

I think I prefer plain blur to the modern frequency separation technique... But not by much. 

I do use some very limited skin softening techniques, but it's to improve, not perfect. A black hair coming out of a mole isn't what people want but they do want skin to look real. 

I really like the skin softening tool in nik. It is far too powerful and makes everything look plastic, but you can either use 1-2 percent and careful masking in nik (which is easy) or it can be a smart layer in photoshop. 

beed84

Grumpyrocker said:

beed84 said:

I didn’t get any camera gifts for Christmas but, as I’ve decided to focus on landscape photography, I am thinking of treating myself to a wide angle lens for my Olympus OM-10. I also need an appropriate tripod. Any budget recommendations?

A couple of years ago I picked up one of these Carbon tripods. Not actually this brand, but clearly the same tripod from the same factory. There are a few choices on Amazon, I think I paid around £80-90 for mine. I am a landscape shooter but after many years of trying to use a tripod, feeling I should us a tripod, but realising I hated using one even for landscape - I stopped - was gratifying to see James Popsys channel on YT where he's one of the few landscape shooters that hates using tripods too. That said this tripod has had loads of use over lockdown as I've been using it for work video shooting. Very pleased with it. Obviously you can go more expensive than this - but this obvious copy of more expensive ones may actually come from the same Chinese factory anyway. 

Compact Travel Tripod via Amazon.

What I like about this tripod is how small it folds. It's really light too. So you really don't notice carrying it around all day. There's also the option to use one leg as a monopod. 

 

Thank @Grumpyrocker ;; that’s very helpful. It’s probably a bit more than I’d like to spend right now, but it’s something to consider once I’ve improved. It’s also useful to know that you and others prefer shooting landscape photography without a tripod. As such, I think I’ll try to get to grips and experiment with the kit I have (camera and standard 50mm lens) before I start forking out on gear that may or may not be beneficial. I will check James Popsys out too   

Brio

I really like the skin softening tool in nik. It is far too powerful and makes everything look plastic, but you can either use 1-2 percent and careful masking in nik (which is easy) or it can be a smart layer in photoshop. 

The whole NIK package is pretty cool. I'm glad I downloaded it when it was free.

I think it is now paid for again?

Grumpyrocker

Brio said:

I really like the skin softening tool in nik. It is far too powerful and makes everything look plastic, but you can either use 1-2 percent and careful masking in nik (which is easy) or it can be a smart layer in photoshop. 

The whole NIK package is pretty cool. I'm glad I downloaded it when it was free.

I think it is now paid for again?

It's now owned by DXO and costs money.

But you can still find downloads of the old Google version which still works. I use the Google version within Affinity Photo. 

Until recently that is - I picked up Luminar 4 - and that does some of the same things and is more modern. 

ThePrettyDamned

beed84 said:

Grumpyrocker said:

beed84 said:

I didn’t get any camera gifts for Christmas but, as I’ve decided to focus on landscape photography, I am thinking of treating myself to a wide angle lens for my Olympus OM-10. I also need an appropriate tripod. Any budget recommendations?

A couple of years ago I picked up one of these Carbon tripods. Not actually this brand, but clearly the same tripod from the same factory. There are a few choices on Amazon, I think I paid around £80-90 for mine. I am a landscape shooter but after many years of trying to use a tripod, feeling I should us a tripod, but realising I hated using one even for landscape - I stopped - was gratifying to see James Popsys channel on YT where he's one of the few landscape shooters that hates using tripods too. That said this tripod has had loads of use over lockdown as I've been using it for work video shooting. Very pleased with it. Obviously you can go more expensive than this - but this obvious copy of more expensive ones may actually come from the same Chinese factory anyway. 

Compact Travel Tripod via Amazon.

What I like about this tripod is how small it folds. It's really light too. So you really don't notice carrying it around all day. There's also the option to use one leg as a monopod. 

 

Thank @Grumpyrocker ;; that’s very helpful. It’s probably a bit more than I’d like to spend right now, but it’s something to consider once I’ve improved. It’s also useful to know that you and others prefer shooting landscape photography without a tripod. As such, I think I’ll try to get to grips and experiment with the kit I have (camera and standard 50mm lens) before I start forking out on gear that may or may not be beneficial. I will check James Popsys out too   

Here is a cheaper option if you find one on ebay. I paid £25 for mine. 

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/vanguard-veo-2-go-235ab-aluminium-travel-tripod-1705093/

Yeah, it's kinda pricey. But it's small, light, sturdy enough for the canon 6D DSLR and smaller lens. Perfect for a mirrorless camera. 

Has grippy rubber feet you can screw in to reveal studs for when you're on the beach. 

It's a lot of money new, but you'd be amazed what you can find on ebay. 

ThePrettyDamned

Grumpyrocker said:

Brio said:

I really like the skin softening tool in nik. It is far too powerful and makes everything look plastic, but you can either use 1-2 percent and careful masking in nik (which is easy) or it can be a smart layer in photoshop. 

The whole NIK package is pretty cool. I'm glad I downloaded it when it was free.

I think it is now paid for again?

It's now owned by DXO and costs money.

But you can still find downloads of the old Google version which still works. I use the Google version within Affinity Photo. 

Until recently that is - I picked up Luminar 4 - and that does some of the same things and is more modern. 

I really want to escape adobe but nothing does what lightroom does yet  

I tried capture 1 a couple of years back and it was like a shit version of lightroom with brilliant developing. I honestly wanted both, but wallet dictated only one and lightroom works better. 

So most of my photos are raw adjustments in lightroom, then into photoshop to use the NIK suite where needed. 

Grumpyrocker

ThePrettyDamned said:

Grumpyrocker said:

Brio said:

I really like the skin softening tool in nik. It is far too powerful and makes everything look plastic, but you can either use 1-2 percent and careful masking in nik (which is easy) or it can be a smart layer in photoshop. 

The whole NIK package is pretty cool. I'm glad I downloaded it when it was free.

I think it is now paid for again?

It's now owned by DXO and costs money.

But you can still find downloads of the old Google version which still works. I use the Google version within Affinity Photo. 

Until recently that is - I picked up Luminar 4 - and that does some of the same things and is more modern. 

I really want to escape adobe but nothing does what lightroom does yet  

I tried capture 1 a couple of years back and it was like a shit version of lightroom with brilliant developing. I honestly wanted both, but wallet dictated only one and lightroom works better. 

So most of my photos are raw adjustments in lightroom, then into photoshop to use the NIK suite where needed. 

I've got Alien Skin Exposure. It pretty much does what Lightroom does, it's almost a copy. But it's available without a subscription.

I've got that, Luminar 4, and Affinity Photo. I've no need for an Adobe sub again. 

menamestom

Enjoying my XT-20 but I do miss the reach of longer lenses I had with my DSLR.
I have the XF 18-55, but would like something around 300mm aps-c

Wondering what the options are, I used to like a bit of casual wildlife/bird photography.  I'm thinking perhaps an x-mount adapter to open up a world of other lenses, if so which to choose?  I appreciate this would probably mean manual focus only.

Other options are go back to DSLR or one of the 1" superzoom cameras.  Not sure I'd part with the Fuji as I like it, but there seems to be nothing but quite expensive options with their lenses, so thinking about a 2nd camera which might be cheaper than a 2nd lens. (I'm thinking the XC50-230 hasn't got quite enough reach and is a bit slow at the long end anyway).

Thoughts?

goldtop

The problem is that Fuji won't do whatever licencing is necessary for the 3rd party lens makers (Tamron, Sigma) to create lenses. So you cough up for Fujinons or you try adapted lenses with the compromises that involves.

stickyfiddle

The Fuji 100-400 is exceptional. Expensive but a wonderful lens. Otherwise might be worth a look at the 55-200, which is not quite 300 but meant to be excellent.

They do a prime 200 as well iirc but that's about 5k iirc. 

Grumpyrocker

menamestom said:

Enjoying my XT-20 but I do miss the reach of longer lenses I had with my DSLR.
I have the XF 18-55, but would like something around 300mm aps-c

Wondering what the options are, I used to like a bit of casual wildlife/bird photography.  I'm thinking perhaps an x-mount adapter to open up a world of other lenses, if so which to choose?  I appreciate this would probably mean manual focus only.

Other options are go back to DSLR or one of the 1" superzoom cameras.  Not sure I'd part with the Fuji as I like it, but there seems to be nothing but quite expensive options with their lenses, so thinking about a 2nd camera which might be cheaper than a 2nd lens. (I'm thinking the XC50-230 hasn't got quite enough reach and is a bit slow at the long end anyway).

Thoughts?

There are rumoured to be Sigma lenses coming to Fuji this year. It may be announced at the Fuji event that's happening soon.

Also going to be announced in the next week or so is the new 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - which covers some range that's been absent from Fuji cameras at a decent price point. This lens will be compatible with the 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters. I expect this lens to be much less expensive than the 100-400mm or 50-140mm.

I've got the 50-140mm f/2.8 but it was bonkers expensive even used. Am tempted to trade it in and get the 70-300mm as that's something I'm likely to get more use out of. 

menamestom

Been looking at the 70-300, looks good.  I think price wise and size wise makes more sense for me that the 100-400, especially for the XT20.

While I await that I’m thinking of a prime, probably around 23mm.  There are some quite good value manual options - Zonlai 22m f1.8, 7artisans 25mm f1.8 and Meike 25mm 1.8 so looking at those.  Or might just go for the 23mm F2.

The xf18-55 is great though, but learnt on a manual prime so they always have a bit of attraction.

dazzajl

menamestom said:

Been looking at the 70-300, looks good.  I think price wise and size wise makes more sense for me that the 100-400, especially for the XT20.

While I await that I’m thinking of a prime, probably around 23mm.  There are some quite good value manual options - Zonlai 22m f1.8, 7artisans 25mm f1.8 and Meike 25mm 1.8 so looking at those.  Or might just go for the 23mm F2.

The xf18-55 is great though, but learnt on a manual prime so they always have a bit of attraction.

I've never met a 70-300 type lens that wasn't pretty horrid. They are usually very compromised objects designed to give a good level of reach at pretty low price point but it does look like Fuji have bucked the trend here doesn't it. Not that Fuji ever make bad lenses but not all are created equally. And all the Samyang, 7Artisan type lenses that we have to choose from are amazing value, not an easy choice ahead at all.

jellyroll

Photobooks/zines.....any recommendations for best quality print services? Hopefully without sounding too arsy, I'm after the best, not the cheapest...
Thanks, chaps.