"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." — Thomas Alva Edison

― Scapes Showcasea sense of place

User avatar
PietFrancke
Mentoris Quartus
Mentoris Quartus
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: WV
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Re: a sense of place

Post by PietFrancke » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:03 am

LindaShorey wrote:
PietFrancke wrote:thank you guys - about brightness... I know I'm not the brightest bulb in the socket. I think my monitor is ok, but for some reason I prefer them darker - I might be more sensitive to light, my IQ, um.. I mean my ISO is around 50. And a bad habit I have is viewing these images on my monitor in a dark room. One thing for sure, every time I print one, I am sorry as it comes out much darker than I thought it would, but I think it is me, not my monitor since I view my images from a number of different monitors and it unlikely they are all off. It is me...


IQ, ISO...too funny :D

I wonder if one factor is that you already know what you're seeing whereas we don't? But I've known people with extreme light sensitivity so that's an interesting possibility.


I think we see what we see. Hey, they look the way I like them. Most images I view strike me as overly bright and washed out, but I try to please myself. It seriously probably is me. We can only know what we ourselves know - a person who is color blind misses out on color for example, but throughout history you have to wonder how many lived their lives and never knew. It is hard to know what another person experiences, we are all very different I think - though we as groups DO set standards and baselines - how else can we communicate?

We all march to different drummers, and then also, there is the flute!

User avatar
Duck
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:31 am
Location: Shelton, CT
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Duck » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:04 am

PietFrancke wrote:thank you guys - about brightness... I know I'm not the brightest bulb in the socket. I think my monitor is ok, but for some reason I prefer them darker - I might be more sensitive to light, my IQ, um.. I mean my ISO is around 50. And a bad habit I have is viewing these images on my monitor in a dark room. One thing for sure, every time I print one, I am sorry as it comes out much darker than I thought it would, but I think it is me, not my monitor since I view my images from a number of different monitors and it unlikely they are all off. It is me...

I used to have the same issue (I'm light sensitive, though less and less as I get older). It took me a while to calibrate my eyes to seeing images on a screen differently. As for the printing darker issue, that is a common problem with uncalibrated profiles. Screens have a stronger luminance due to being projected light in comparison to an image which is viewed with reflected light. There is also a noticeable contrast gain when printing over looking at an image on a monitor. One habit to break is to avoid the temptation of increasing screen brightness to match our eye's comfort zone. We easily get used to screen brightness and an overly bright screen, as you know, will lie to us.
"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Image ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Duck
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:31 am
Location: Shelton, CT
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Duck » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:06 am

PietFrancke wrote:We all march to different drummers, and then also, there is the flute!

Now here is a quote for Steve to use. :thumbup:
"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Image ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
pop511
Mentoris Centurion
Mentoris Centurion
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 2:29 am
Location: Sydney,Australia
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by pop511 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:20 am

Duck;
"Why oh why do we have to say that a picture is under exposed because the exposure range is not dragged all the way to the right."

I should have explained myself somewhat better.
By dragging the exposure range to the right it would not be a dusk/twilight scene but something taken in the middle of the day.
By having faith in what your camera takes and what you perceive you saw is more important.

"I am sorry as it comes out much darker than I thought it would, "
Been there done that..heheh
I know that for me and I mean me only. On the curves adjustment window that shows ten divisions horizontal and vertical, I move the centre point up one division. It seems to work most of the time.

Kind regards;
ed
ed davis

User avatar
PietFrancke
Mentoris Quartus
Mentoris Quartus
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: WV
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by PietFrancke » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:50 am

[quote="Duck One habit to break is to avoid the temptation of increasing screen brightness to match our eye's comfort zone. We easily get used to screen brightness and an overly bright screen, as you know, will lie to us.[/quote]

I like this line of thinking... I may need to lower screen brightness

User avatar
PietFrancke
Mentoris Quartus
Mentoris Quartus
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: WV
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by PietFrancke » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:56 am

pop511 wrote:Duck;
"Why oh why do we have to say that a picture is under exposed because the exposure range is not dragged all the way to the right."

I should have explained myself somewhat better.
By dragging the exposure range to the right it would not be a dusk/twilight scene but something taken in the middle of the day.
By having faith in what your camera takes and what you perceive you saw is more important.

"I am sorry as it comes out much darker than I thought it would, "
Been there done that..heheh
I know that for me and I mean me only. On the curves adjustment window that shows ten divisions horizontal and vertical, I move the centre point up one division. It seems to work most of the time.

Kind regards;
ed


I need to leave this one for Duck to answer, but the expose to the right camp would (might) argue that you will get a better image (less noise, more detail) if it is properly or even over exposed. And then you can still (afterwards) slide to the left resulting in the feel/mood that you experienced in the lower light. On my end, I find myself throwing away potentially great (over bright)images because I cull them too fast, but with a little work such an image can be brought back to what you want.

User avatar
Duck
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:31 am
Location: Shelton, CT
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Duck » Wed Nov 29, 2017 3:16 am

pop511 wrote:I should have explained myself somewhat better.
By dragging the exposure range to the right it would not be a dusk/twilight scene but something taken in the middle of the day.
By having faith in what your camera takes and what you perceive you saw is more important.

An image doesn't have to be, "dragged all the way to the right," in order to be "properly exposed". To me, exposure is when the true tone value of the subject (in this case the sky) has attained a level of brightness that adequately represents that tonality, within a subjective range. In the case with Piet's sunset, the brightness and color saturation of the sky, in relation to the silhouette of the land mass, appears to be dark and muted, leading me to feel the image is underexposed and less than effective in representing the scene. But luminance alone isn't the only consideration here. While the reality of the scene, at time of capture, may have been muted colors there is also the expectation on perception of the viewer.

We have all seen images of gorgeous sunsets, rich and vibrant in their yellows, oranges, reds and violets. We have been conditioned to see images like that when viewing photos of sunsets. I remember thinking, "what the heck did I do wrong," when I tried taking my first sunset image. It was because I put too much faith in the camera to make the decision for me. The camera exposed for 18% gray of the ambient light, resulting in overexposed, washed out images. All my early negatives were a big disappointment because I hadn't learned the true nature of exposure (or image correction during printing), and the fact that the camera will always lie, at that time. But I digress... The truth is that when editing an image we not only edit to restore the deficiencies in the mechanism (camera) but also to match a certain level of expectation, whether our own vision or an established ideal. In this particular case I feel the image misses on both accounts, hence my interpretation that the image is underexposed (not to diss Piet's image making abilities here).

However, as this was a showcase forum I felt a short comment about the perceived luminosity of the image (in case it was a mechanical failure) was better than a lengthy and subjective critique. At that point Piet could have opted to take the conversation in whatever direction he felt worthy, either confirm a mechanical failure (his screen) or confirm a subjective failure (me) or just let it go. As I said, it's all about learning. :thumbup:
"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Image ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Duck
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:31 am
Location: Shelton, CT
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Duck » Wed Nov 29, 2017 3:38 am

PietFrancke wrote:I need to leave this one for Duck to answer, but the expose to the right camp would (might) argue that you will get a better image (less noise, more detail) if it is properly or even over exposed. And then you can still (afterwards) slide to the left resulting in the feel/mood that you experienced in the lower light...

The ETTR system of image making is to take into effect a certain shortcoming of sensor technology (uneven signal gain in low light). One that is quickly being overcome with each successive generation of imaging technology in the sensor. I come from the old school of film and Ansel Adams' teaching of the Zone System where ETTL was used to compensate for certain shortcomings of film technology (non linear exposure in the highlights and reciprocity issues of longer exposures) so I am in the bad habit of underexposing too many of my images and relying on post to fix it. All this does is exacerbate the noise issue.

ETTR is a solution that works in conjunction with your camera's base ISO in order to create a more structurally sound file that minimizes noise gain because you effectively are reducing exposure levels rather than raising them in order to get a useable image. The key is to keep the exposure on the high end (highlights) within the scope of the camera's dynamic range (non clipping highlights with light detail) in order to be able to pull back into the proper exposure range. You are exposing to open up the shadows without clipping your highlights.

Of course we now have the wonderful advantage of editing software that allows the manipulation of 'zones' within the image file.
"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Image ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
St3v3M
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 3758
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 am
Location: 35,000 feet
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by St3v3M » Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:05 pm

Duck wrote:
PietFrancke wrote:We all march to different drummers, and then also, there is the flute!

Now here is a quote for Steve to use. :thumbup:

I have...no idea...what you're talking about...
"Take photographs, leave footprints, steal hearts"

User avatar
St3v3M
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 3758
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 am
Location: 35,000 feet
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by St3v3M » Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:08 pm

Everyone keeps talking about Exposure but no one is showing it so I thought I'd add these, none of which changed the Exposure.

I hope you enjoy them! S-
Attachments
sunset-1.jpg
2-1.jpg
3-1.jpg
"Take photographs, leave footprints, steal hearts"

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests