• Welcome to the Two Wheeled Texans community! Feel free to hang out and lurk as long as you like. However, we would like to encourage you to register so that you can join the community and use the numerous features on the site. After registering, don't forget to post up an introduction!

Before and After Image views...

bwdmax

Forum Supporter
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
2,298
Location
Victoria
First Name
Gary
Last Name
Turner
As for post processing, toss out a dated image and I'll post the before/after along with what was done. No secrets here... well 'cept maybe the levitation shots. :deal:
How about 11/24 just for fun.

I can see in my minds eye a working horse getting a long well deserved drink or a cow dog jumping in to cool off and lapping at the water as he goes.
 

WoodButcher

Admin
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
12,431
Location
Austin, TX
First Name
Rusty
Last Name
Myers
Re: M38A1 / 2016 Pic-A-Day

Hey Scott, post your unedited sunrise shot from the other day. Here is mine straight off the camera. Radically different colors and I was standing right next to you. Canon vs. Nikon for one thing. Canon tends to be colder on colors. I was using Auto white balance.

We might want to take this to a new thread though.

 

M38A1

Admin
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
19,802
Location
North of Weird
First Name
Scott
11/24/2016

Before:
i-W3kvJTV-XL.jpg


Actions:
Graduated Filter
Clarity
Contrast
Highlights
Black Clipping
Exposure adjustment
Radial Filter
Crop rectangle
Temperature

After:
i-7kQnK74-XL.jpg


It seems like a lot of stuff applied, and yes - the images are drastically different. Yet that's by my design. I wanted this warmer and to highlight certain elements, thus the radical change.

You also have to remember I shoot RAW, meaning I have a LOT of data to work with in order to manipulate aspects such as these. By nature, the RAW file is a bit on the 'flat' side, ie: it just needs work and really doesn't look that great IMO straight out of the camera.

Shooting both RAW and a .jpg image and laying both down at the same time on my card is a different ballgame. The RAW is flat and the .jpg just 'pops'. That's due to the algorithms in the camera which do a lot of little tweaks as the image is layed down on the memory card. The image I see on the back screen is the .jpg version and will always look better than my RAW file. 99% of the time I'll shoot RAW and work those files to where they should be. The .jpg's are already there for the most part.

So why don't I shoot .jpgs all the time? For the purpose of this days exercise... There isn't enough data in the .jpg file to do these types of changes compared to the data available in the RAW file.

If I know I'll be shooting 2500+ images for a client in a day, I'll shoot .jpg. I've shot as many as 10,000+ images for a client in a day and they were all .jpg for that very reason - straight out of the camera they look really good. But for smaller work, including the Pic-A-Day, I'll shoot RAW to have the control over an image.


.
 

M38A1

Admin
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
19,802
Location
North of Weird
First Name
Scott
12/10/2016

Before:
i-VLDGLPQ-XL.jpg


Actions:
Crop rectangle
Contrast
Add graduated filter
Black clipping
Sharpening
Blue saturation shift
Aqua saturation shift

After:
i-7TXhXTB-XL.jpg


This one was pretty straight forward. Shooting a 24-70mm lens on a full frame at something sooooooo far away I knew it was going to be a pano-crop as I call it. Otherwise there was simply too much foreground in the image. So I started with a crop then just went from there. I didn't spend but a few minutes on this as it was pretty close.


.
 

WoodButcher

Admin
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
12,431
Location
Austin, TX
First Name
Rusty
Last Name
Myers
I'm going to add my two cents worth. I was right next to Scott when he shot that sunset image. I have a Canon camera and it tends to Auto white balance on the cooler side, whereas Scott's Nikons tend to the warner side. So here is one of my shots from that morning. First is straight off the camera. A bit dark and much more pink than Scott's. Also with a 24-70mm lens, but I'm on a crop sensor camera so you multiply that focal length by 1.6 to get the effective length. In this case that is 112mm. Hence my narrower field of view compared to his.

i-zq4hwqS-L.jpg


Here is my initial edit without having seen Scott's:

i-STXSZBt-L.jpg


I did a little cropping, clarity, contrast, exposure. I added a gradient filter from the top to tweak the exposure just on the sky. And I slightly tweaked the temp (white balance) to the warmer side, but not much. My memory was that it was a little pink anyway.

Here is my re-edit to make it a bit more like Scott's:

i-QjB8mMr-L.jpg


Basically, I tweaked, tint a little, temperature and exposure.
 
Last edited:

bwdmax

Forum Supporter
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
2,298
Location
Victoria
First Name
Gary
Last Name
Turner
Thanks for the explanation. I am not a photographer by any means, but I am always interested in another's craft. People who are good at things always make them look easy, but there is way more going on than is seen to the casual observer. I can appreciate the investment in time that it takes to produce quality work.
 

WoodButcher

Admin
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
12,431
Location
Austin, TX
First Name
Rusty
Last Name
Myers
So, in addition to individual editing tendencies (call it style) there are also some camera/sensor factors that affect the shots. I can point you at a gallery were Scott, a Nikon friend of his, and I shot. All my shots were way cooler (blue) than the two Nikon shooters. I could have made a global tweak to get mine in the same range, but didn't notice the difference until we had them side by side.
 

bwdmax

Forum Supporter
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
2,298
Location
Victoria
First Name
Gary
Last Name
Turner
So, in addition to individual editing tendencies (call it style) there are also some camera/sensor factors that affect the shots.
I think that is exactly what I was after. Style vs camera and how the two are married in the post processing.
 
Top