Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 11, 2010, 6:14 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default A day at the beach (part 1)

Yesterday we decided to have a bowl of clam chowder for lunch. For those that are relatively new around here, that's code for a day trip over to the Splash Cafe in Pismo Beach. The marine layer was in the entire time we were there, so it was very grey, not the best lighting conditions. But I had a good time and enjoyed the clam chowder anyway.

It's spring, so there's wildflowers on the hillsides(K-7, DA*200):



While it wasn't crowded compared to what it's like in the summer, we weren't alone. It was breezy so excellent kite weather (K-7, DA*200):



K-7, DA*300:



Not many people were venturing into the water - it was too cold! (K-7 DA 10-17)



The kids were all having a great time. This little one didn't want to leave, Mom had a terrible time getting her out of the water (K-7 DA*300):



I've been trying out new ways of processing (I bought Topaz Lab's Detail and have been playing around with different settings). Any suggestions and comments are always gratefully accepted - I lose perspective after a while, so let me know what you think.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 11, 2010, 8:34 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
NMRecording's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern Appalachains
Posts: 866
Default

These are some great shots. My favorite is the one taken with the 10-17 a very nice perspective here! Your first shot is also incredible. It shows so many layers of geography in this image. Great compositions overall. I've never heard of your new program but these images are crystal clear and sharp so whether the pp or the great stock image, keep it up. Whats your method for reduction of images to get the jpegs without artifacting? These reductions make mine look like garbage.
NMRecording is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2010, 9:51 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

My basic workflow is to look at the pictures in Lightroom, deleting ones that have significant flaws or that I don't want. Then I'll make the majority corrections here (i.e., exposure, contrast, CA, white balance changes) and export tiff files (not jpg!) to photoshop (I mostly shoot raw using dng, but I do the same thing even if I've been shooting jpg). In photoshop I'll make any additional changes I want (usually not that much), and resize down to monitor size using bicubic sharper. Then I duplicate the layer and add whatever sharpening here, since sharpening depends on your final output and dimension. Topaz Labs makes photoshop plug-ins, Detail is one that does sharpening several different ways and the one I used here. Their pre-sets tend to be over-the-top for my tastes, so I've created one that seems to be close to what I want (each picture is different and needs different things). It doesn't leave sharpening halos that too much USM can create.

I have the pictures uploaded to zenfolio, a web-hosting site (not free but I got frustrated/tired of the limitations free ones have), so there's no further compression here. Biggest key is to do whatever sharpening you are going to do after you resize and only save to jpg at the very end.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2010, 10:01 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Goldwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 6,515
Default

Looks like too much fun to me Harriet. You're gonna wear yourself out!
__________________
GW

Life's a breeze on a Goldwing...
Goldwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2010, 10:53 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
NMRecording's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern Appalachains
Posts: 866
Default

[QUOTE=mtngal;1078144]My basic workflow is to look at the pictures in Lightroom, deleting ones that have significant flaws or that I don't want. Then I'll make the majority corrections here (i.e., exposure, contrast, CA, white balance changes) and export tiff files (not jpg!) to photoshop (I mostly shoot raw using dng, but I do the same thing even if I've been shooting jpg). In photoshop I'll make any additional changes I want (usually not that much), and resize down to monitor size using bicubic sharper. Then I duplicate the layer and add whatever sharpening here, since sharpening depends on your final output and dimension.


This is exactly my process here It seems some shots with a lot of real nice atmospheric lighting effects get tons of jpeg artifacting. It looks like a wash of colors smearing instead of the fine detail of the object flaring in the sun. It almost seems the nicer my photos are, the crappier they look on the web.


I have to say, jsut today i started using adobe bridge instead of lightroom because of my lack of graphics card. I find Adobe bridge easier to run through your photos quickly and still transition to PS. Lightroom is nice but i question whether the adjustments in CS4 arent just as good? It almost seems redundant to run LR. IMO
NMRecording is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2010, 6:46 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
mole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 8,522
Default

A great day at the beach! Thanks for sharing! #1 is indeed an amazing series of layers that really draws me in...
mole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2010, 7:47 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,327
Default

I like the one with the FE lens.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2010, 12:57 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

MNRecording - how are you saving your pictures? Are you using "save for web"? That particular mode seriously compresses your pictures and that could be what's happening. I never use it (among other things it strips out the exif information, and I want to leave it in) so I save as a regular file, choosing jpg and then using a compression of 9 - I don't notice any difference in quality between 9 and 12. The files end up being bigger than you can upload here (one of the reasons why I use a photo hosting site most of the time). I have usually used 6 to get the file small enough to fit here, and that will create some artifacts.

I like to use Lightroom because it keeps me organized - I'll move out pictures I've completed so I don't find myself processing a picture that I finished with a week before. As far as photo processing, Bridge and Photoshop can do everything that LR does, and then things that LR can't. However, LR is nicely organized - for instance, the 10-17 has a fair amount of CA. If I've taken a set of bracketed shots with it, I'll use LR's CA correction on the individual frames before exporting them to Photomatix for HDR. Then after Photomatix is finished, it automatically imports the new file back into LR, where I can make further changes (I usually add contrast to my HDR pictures) in LR. It's all very convenient, a couple of mouse clicks.

Recently I've been playing with the K100 and an R72 filter. The IR pictures need things that are better done in Photoshop, so I've not bothered with LR, using Bridge instead.

FE pictures are always a matter of taste - some people will really like them while others won't. I thought this one, with its very extreme effect, was quite fun. But it's something that's fun in small doses, not for every-day photography. I'm glad I didn't buy it as a first extreme wide angle - it gave me a better idea of how I'd want to use it and how it would compliment the 12-24, rather than trying to make it into a 12-24 replacement. It means that I'm free to learn how to use the lens on it's terms, not mine (this makes sense to me, not sure it will to others).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2010, 2:32 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Harriet, you've completely forgotten how to take a bad photo. Anything that comes out of your camera these days is top notch. I also like the FE effect in that shot.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2010, 2:48 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,076
Default

love the kite, taken with K7 and 300 mm.
lesmore49 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:58 PM.