* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #865 / Revived #085 on 2024 11 13 *

link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 10:49 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 10:49 p.m.
link

@MikeFewster has written:

@AlanSh has written:

What blurriness? This looks fine (snip of 100% view)

Thank you. This snip shows the sky through the slit of open beak that I commented on in my reply to Bryan.

Actually, the whole photo is blurry.
Where can you see the color blue between the beaks?
Am I colorblind?
link

ArvoJ
Team 770 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 10:54 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 10:54 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

Actually, the whole photo is blurry.

Agreed :) Oversharpened and blurry are not mutually exclusive. This does not void image's appeal however.

Where can you see the color blue between the beaks?

Magnify image - there is stripe of bluish gray.

Am I colorblind?

Unlikely, usual colorblindness can't distinguish between green and red, blues are unaffected ;)
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 10:55 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 10:55 p.m.
link

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

Lisbon Street. Version 2.
I straightened the left hand side a little and made further colour adjustment.
The lower orange angle is correct. The orange line follows steps that are sloping down a hill.
I prefer this version.

This version looks much better and helps convey what the scene looked like.
And, I like this version.
But, I think you should invest in a better monitor.
Deeper shadows would do this photo much better.
Since you always comment on shadows that should be lightened, it must be something to do with your monitor.
Your photos are always slightly overexposed to my eye.
It can't be your camera or the exposure.

Are you confusing me with someone else? I rarely say other people's images should have the shadows brightened. Usually I have been defending photos from others where Dan's edits, in my opinion, have over brightened shadows and in so doing often lost depth. Not this week's image from Dan though where I thought it was underexposed. How does the exposure on Dan's panorama this week look to you on your monitor?
I often find my initial posts to Dprev look too dark when I preview and only look at them at small size. Then later, after posting, when I look at images at full size, they look better. I find the same with other people's images as well as my own. This week, my image didn't look bright enough on preview so I boosted it a bit and reposted without doing a check. I agreed with those who said it was too bright and revisited it.
I note that you are making the same comment to a number of different images from different participants. Which raises the question of whose monitor is off?
Or it may be a matter of taste. If you like, we can begin a discussion on what the eye sees when it looks at a scene, what a camera sees when it looks at the same scene (they are quite different) and the decisions made when we turn what the camera has captured into an image. It is likely to be a lengthy chat so if you want to proceed, we might do it elsewhere rather than block up this week's C&C.

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.
link

xpatUSA
Members 725 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11 p.m.
link

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

Lisbon Street. Version 2.
I straightened the left hand side a little and made further colour adjustment.
The lower orange angle is correct. The orange line follows steps that are sloping down a hill.
I prefer this version.

This version looks much better and helps convey what the scene looked like.
And, I like this version.
But, I think you should invest in a better monitor.
Deeper shadows would do this photo much better.
Since you always comment on shadows that should be lightened, it must be something to do with your monitor.
Your photos are always slightly overexposed to my eye.
It can't be your camera or the exposure.

Are you confusing me with someone else? I rarely say other people's images should have the shadows brightened. Usually I have been defending photos from others where Dan's edits, in my opinion, have over brightened shadows and in so doing often lost depth. Not this week's image from Dan though where I thought it was underexposed. How does the exposure on Dan's panorama this week look to you on your monitor?
I often find my initial posts to Dprev look too dark when I preview and only look at them at small size. Then later, after posting, when I look at images at full size, they look better. I find the same with other people's images as well as my own. This week, my image didn't look bright enough on preview so I boosted it a bit and reposted without doing a check. I agreed with those who said it was too bright and revisited it.<>

As to Lisbon Street V.2. The camera settings indicate perhaps 1/3 EV overexposure for that scene, according to en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Exposure_value I make the Ev 14-2/3 reasonable enough if the aim was to show the shadows mo' better.

Drifting off a bit, it is bothersome when people confuse the brightness of a processed image with sensor exposure ...
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:07 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:07 p.m.
link

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Actually, the whole photo is blurry.

Agreed :) Oversharpened and blurry are not mutually exclusive. This does not void image's appeal however.

Where can you see the color blue between the beaks?

Magnify image - there is stripe of bluish gray.

Am I colorblind?

Unlikely, usual colorblindness can't distinguish between green and red, blues are unaffected ;)

I said:
Despite the heavy cropping and blurriness, it's a good photo!
A photo doesn't always have to be technically very good.

I admit: technically it's a mediocre photo.
But good nonetheless.
link

ArvoJ
Team 770 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:11 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:11 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:22 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:22 p.m.
link

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)

There are highlights in the background that are not taken into account but are acceptable.
But, high key?
Is it appropriate in this photo?
Not really, I think.
link

xpatUSA
Members 725 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:26 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:26 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)

There are highlights in the background that are not taken into account but are acceptable.
But, high key?
Is it appropriate in this photo?
Not really, I think.

Which one? Lisbon V.2. or the car?
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:26 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:26 p.m.
link

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)

There are highlights in the background that are not taken into account but are acceptable.
But, high key?
Is it appropriate in this photo?
Not really, I think.

Which one? Lisbon V.2. or the car?

Lisbon V2
link

MikeFewster
Members 1722 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:33 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:33 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

Lisbon Street. Version 2.
I straightened the left hand side a little and made further colour adjustment.
The lower orange angle is correct. The orange line follows steps that are sloping down a hill.
I prefer this version.

This version looks much better and helps convey what the scene looked like.
And, I like this version.
But, I think you should invest in a better monitor.
Deeper shadows would do this photo much better.
Since you always comment on shadows that should be lightened, it must be something to do with your monitor.
Your photos are always slightly overexposed to my eye.
It can't be your camera or the exposure.

Are you confusing me with someone else? I rarely say other people's images should have the shadows brightened. Usually I have been defending photos from others where Dan's edits, in my opinion, have over brightened shadows and in so doing often lost depth. Not this week's image from Dan though where I thought it was underexposed. How does the exposure on Dan's panorama this week look to you on your monitor?
I often find my initial posts to Dprev look too dark when I preview and only look at them at small size. Then later, after posting, when I look at images at full size, they look better. I find the same with other people's images as well as my own. This week, my image didn't look bright enough on preview so I boosted it a bit and reposted without doing a check. I agreed with those who said it was too bright and revisited it.
I note that you are making the same comment to a number of different images from different participants. Which raises the question of whose monitor is off?
Or it may be a matter of taste. If you like, we can begin a discussion on what the eye sees when it looks at a scene, what a camera sees when it looks at the same scene (they are quite different) and the decisions made when we turn what the camera has captured into an image. It is likely to be a lengthy chat so if you want to proceed, we might do it elsewhere rather than block up this week's C&C.

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

Unless our monitors are way way different.....
The shadows aren't the problem here, it's the vehicle. On my screen and according to the histogram, it's underexposed. But this is where we need to discuss the difference between what the eye sees and what a camera sees. We also need to consider the difference between averaging exposure across the whole scene and using spot exposure measuring. Both are accurate but they aren't what your eye/brain does and what you think you are seeing.
Just in case it really is my monitor and eyes, does any one else think the car image from Kumsal looks too dark?
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:36 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:36 p.m.
link

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@AlanSh has written:

@Kumsal has written:

I hope you didn't just take this photo with your iPhone.

Phones can take good pictures. Let's not disparage individual kit - or who knows where we will end up.

Alan

Sure, the phones can take good pictures.
But, there are still stark differences.
With so little sensor and glass, no computer can keep up.

Not even an iPhone, just an old 6MP Samsung SkyRocket shot being kept up very well by my old Dell on my old NEC Multisync:

Best viewed opened in new Tab.

So much for blanket statements ... 😉

If you are happy, everything is fine.
I am a fool who invests a lot of money in photo equipment.
Others invest a lot of money in cars or houses.
But if you say that your mobile phone can do it just as well: then I say forget it!
link

MikeFewster
Members 1722 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:43 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:43 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)

There are highlights in the background that are not taken into account but are acceptable.
But, high key?
Is it appropriate in this photo?
Not really, I think.

Which one? Lisbon V.2. or the car?

Lisbon V2

I still want to move this discussion elsewhere.
Re the car photo. I agree that the shadows aren't the problem. It's the lighter tones, the car especially, that is underexposed. Kumsal. you say it looks perfectly exposed to you and on your software. What is your histogram showing? Mine shows the whole image as being predominantly to the left. Again, this is where we need to discuss the difference between what our eye/brain does and what a camera does.
link

xpatUSA
Members 725 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:47 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:47 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@AlanSh has written:

@Kumsal has written:

I hope you didn't just take this photo with your iPhone.

Phones can take good pictures. Let's not disparage individual kit - or who knows where we will end up.

Alan

Sure, the phones can take good pictures.
But, there are still stark differences.
With so little sensor and glass, no computer can keep up.

Not even an iPhone, just an old 6MP Samsung SkyRocket shot being kept up very well by my old Dell on my old NEC Multisync:

Best viewed opened in new Tab.

So much for blanket statements ... 😉

If you are happy, everything is fine.
I am a fool who invests a lot of money in photo equipment.
Others invest a lot of money in cars or houses.
But if you say that your mobile phone can do it just as well: then I say forget it!

I am not saying "just as well" ... I meant "well enough", as opposed to your "no computer can keep up", whatever that is supposed to mean.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:48 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:48 p.m.
link

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)

There are highlights in the background that are not taken into account but are acceptable.
But, high key?
Is it appropriate in this photo?
Not really, I think.

Which one? Lisbon V.2. or the car?

Lisbon V2

I still want to move this discussion elsewhere.
Re the car photo. I agree that the shadows aren't the problem. It's the lighter tones, the car especially, that is underexposed. Kumsal. you say it looks perfectly exposed to you and on your software. What is your histogram showing? Mine shows the whole image as being predominantly to the left. Again, this is where we need to discuss the difference between what our eye/brain does and what a camera does.

You had to rework your photos a few times, Mike.
They come in overexposed.
It's not about who's right.
A little underexposure, 1/3 stop, won't hurt a car in a museum.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:53 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:53 p.m.
link

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@AlanSh has written:

@Kumsal has written:

I hope you didn't just take this photo with your iPhone.

Phones can take good pictures. Let's not disparage individual kit - or who knows where we will end up.

Alan

Sure, the phones can take good pictures.
But, there are still stark differences.
With so little sensor and glass, no computer can keep up.

Not even an iPhone, just an old 6MP Samsung SkyRocket shot being kept up very well by my old Dell on my old NEC Multisync:

Best viewed opened in new Tab.

So much for blanket statements ... 😉

If you are happy, everything is fine.
I am a fool who invests a lot of money in photo equipment.
Others invest a lot of money in cars or houses.
But if you say that your mobile phone can do it just as well: then I say forget it!

I am not saying "just as well" ... I meant "well enough", as opposed to your "no computer can keep up", whatever that is supposed to mean.

A computer cannot yet replicate what a full-frame camera can do with an open aperture and a fast lens.
Well enough is often not enough!
link

MikeFewster
Members 1722 posts

Nov. 15, 2024, 11:57 p.m. Nov. 15, 2024, 11:57 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@xpatUSA has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@ArvoJ has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

@Kumsal has written:

Camera: LEICA Q3/LEICA CAMERA AG ISO320 28mm 1/60s 𝑓/5.6

In this case, I probably would have said the whole image needed brightening. What you have captured, at least as it looks on my monitor, isn't the way your eye would have seen this scene. If you want to proceed with this discussion, say so and we can look for an appropriate corner of Dprevived to continue. I think it is a discussion worth having.

That's what I was talking about.
The car is perfectly exposed on both my systems, Apple and Microsoft.
I don't need any more details in the shadows, they are irrelevant.

This I agree - details in the shadows are of no interest for particular image.
I personally like images with deep shadows too, esp indoor images, like the car above. Darker images allow specular highlights to pop up and make entire scene more dynamic.

But :)
Mike's Lisbon street v2 is very different scene and does not include specural highlights, also it is outdoor scene, where deep shadows are not always needed. Currently it is almost a high key image, where most of scene is rendered in light tones and little black is also present.

Or (sorry I contradict previous myself here) - on my screen both images look great :)

There are highlights in the background that are not taken into account but are acceptable.
But, high key?
Is it appropriate in this photo?
Not really, I think.

Which one? Lisbon V.2. or the car?

Lisbon V2

I still want to move this discussion elsewhere.
Re the car photo. I agree that the shadows aren't the problem. It's the lighter tones, the car especially, that is underexposed. Kumsal. you say it looks perfectly exposed to you and on your software. What is your histogram showing? Mine shows the whole image as being predominantly to the left. Again, this is where we need to discuss the difference between what our eye/brain does and what a camera does.

You had to rework your photos a few times, Mike.
They come in overexposed.
It's not about who's right.
A little underexposure, 1/3 stop, won't hurt a car in a museum.

I agree that it isn't about who's right but you are not understanding what I am saying.
I'll start a new thread in Technical Discussion to continue this. It will take me a little time to write what I want to say here so give it a little time before checking in. If anyone else wants to join in, please wait a bit until I get the thread going.
link

xpatUSA
Members 725 posts

Nov. 16, 2024, 12:10 a.m. Nov. 16, 2024, 12:10 a.m.
link

@MikeFewster has written:

I'll start a new thread in Technical Discussion to continue this. It will take me a little time to write what I want to say here so give it a little time before checking in. If anyone else wants to join in, please wait a bit until I get the thread going.

Already done while you were typing, Mike.

dprevived.com/t/exposure-of-a-posted-image/6467/post/88641/
link

MikeFewster
Members 1722 posts

Nov. 16, 2024, 12:50 a.m. Nov. 16, 2024, 12:50 a.m.
link

@xpatUSA has written:

@MikeFewster has written:

I'll start a new thread in Technical Discussion to continue this. It will take me a little time to write what I want to say here so give it a little time before checking in. If anyone else wants to join in, please wait a bit until I get the thread going.

Already done while you were typing, Mike.

dprevived.com/t/exposure-of-a-posted-image/6467/post/88641/

I'm still writing. Just checked back. I'll post to the new thread when I have finished. Still a way to go.