Search the site:

Browse by category:

This article's comments feed.

A New Technique

Aug 26, 01:56 AM · from the mouth of Jim

So, first of all, I’ve gotta say that I’m not intending that this be interpreted as any type of pissing contest after TyTy posted his pics. I found a couple of new post-processing techniques today and the A.D.D. took over my soul.

This was the result… (click to enlarge)

 

Comment [6]

  1. jake responds with:

    It’s so pretty and spooky. If only there was zombie sitting on the bench. With a little caption… “mmmmmm braaaaaaiiiinnnns… ooops did I forget to pick up milk on the way home…” Ya know, stuff like that. ;)
    · Aug 26, 11:17 AM
  2. Jim responds with:

    Hey girls with other ‘puters, and especially, Macs. Does this image look a bit dark and drab to you? I know that’s incredibly subjective, but I’ve been suspecting for some time now that my calibration unit may be correcting my gamma to about 2.3 instead of 2.2. I’m looking at my image here at work (which is a particularly shitty monitor) and the gamma looks REALLY wrong – not just a little wrong as I would expect it to. This is not the first time that I’ve felt this. Additionally, my test gradient at home seems to be on the verge of blowing out in the highlights.

    In any case, one of the ways that you might tell if this image is dark is by looking at the bench’s highlights. There should be very good contrast from the highlights to the shadows. The top highlights on the bench should be about 2/3 of a stop from white while the rest of the bench should feel very contrasty and splotchy with highlights. The field grass in the foreground should also have some good splotchy contrast. Maybe I’ll overcorrect the image and put a blown out one from my ‘puter’s perspective and see if you like that one better – cuz if you do, then it means my gamma is off.

    Grumble… sorry, all very subjective, but I’m getting very concerned that my $300 calibration system is beginning to lose its own calibration and this does not make me happy.

    Anyway, blahblah… poop.
    · Aug 26, 01:46 PM
  3. Jim responds with:

    One more thing – should also say that all of the fields should be about middle gray to +1/3EV on average; and here at work, I’d say they’re averaging -2/3 to -1 EV.

    Grrr….......
    · Aug 26, 01:54 PM
  4. TyTy responds with:

    First, I don’t see it as any kind of pooping contest. Errr, pissing. Right. This pics I posted the other day were just an excited Tyler posting pictures after screwing around. Certainly no masterpieces there.

    Yours is, however, gorgeous. Easily looks like something you’d find on Photo.net.

    All that being said, I think your gamma may be off. Judging from your description of how it should look, the contrast seems a bit low to me. I’m looking at it on my Mac on an Apple Cinema display, and it does seem a bit dark and low contrast (aside from the horizon), as compared to my interpretation of your description.

    Oh, oh, oh! BTW, I purchased a Hoya c-pol filter yesterday. Woo hoo! It’s should be here next week. Speaking of filters Jimmy, tell me if you have any knowledge of this: When I went to Ireland the first time about 4 years ago, my dad was using an infrared filter on his Nikon Coolpix. The filter was completely opaque black to the human eye, but it produced these b&w photos with this incredible contrast and really wild highlighting on things like trees and grass. Even dark green leaves on trees appeared white. And clouds were magnificent. Are you aware of any such filter for my 52mm lens?

    If you go to my dad’s site, you’ll see scattered thoughout his pages small pictured from Ireland shot with the infrared. Strangely enough, he doesn’t have them as part of his “photographs” section.

    Anyway Jimmy. Nice work. Go win an award or something.
    · Aug 26, 10:47 PM
  5. Jim responds with:

    Thanks for the info TyTy – I’m suspecting I know what’s going on with my monitor and calibrator. I’m using a D-SUB connection (analog) to my new Dell panel and I think that the calibrator is getting too hyper with the contrast. From what I’ve seen hinted at, it is capable of pushing a monitor to its limits. Apparently when running quality panels like the Dell/Cinema display that have incredible backlights, it can end up bumping the backlight up past what the analog signal should really use – they apparently call it “analog clipping” or something like that.

    In any case, I guess the problem is supposed to be avoided with a DVI hookup. Apparently the card and monitor will then digitally agree on everything. So – I’ll have that problem fixed mid this week when I can switch over to a DVI hookup (requires a new card.) :) In any case, if it looks kinda blah on your screen TyTy, then there’s definitely a problem since I’m basically running the same panel ... Thanks for the help.

    As for infrared filters – yes, you can definitely buy a 52mm infrared filter here. I haven’t yet shot any infrared, but Sarah and I have been dying to do so. Unfortunately success in infrared can vary greatly by camera. You’ll probably want to google on the D70 to find out what exact type of infrared filter you’ll get good results with. Ironically, sometimes you can get better infrared results with consumer digital than with dSLRs. Most dSLRs have a filter over the sensor to block all of or part of the infrared spectrum. This is done, apparently, because some sensors get very “washed out” by the infrared spectrum. Since these filters aren’t cheap, I’d definitely do some googling to see if the D70/50 will be a good candidate before buying one.

    -me
    · Aug 29, 01:33 PM
  6. Jim responds with:

    Well, an uber-fast googling gives the apparence that the D70 can be a decent performer in the infrared arena.
    · Aug 29, 01:42 PM
Name
E-mail
http://
Message
  Textile Help
 
 

More Goofiness.