On 6/18/2022 8:46 AM, DZDub wrote:
On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 4:29 AM Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
and I want the suggestion at least of some translucence.
You've likely put your finger on it - blocked red channel. Try shooting
with much more negative EV, then pull up the
rest. In tests, I found that yellow flowers in sun may need as much as -2
EV for best results. Exposure bracketing is
not evil. 😁
Exposure bracketing is likely how I identified the problem. I tend to
shoot -.7 exposure comp all of the time,
As do I, outside, sans heavy overcast.
so between that and some brackets,
I think I'm with you. I believe I often prefer a little more brightness
and "out in the sun" feeling to the light than you.
May just be some difference in monitor brightness.
Some highlights that go off the grid are often OK to me.
It's subtler than that:
On 6/19/2022 11:19 AM, DZDub wrote:
Does anyone know if this is a katydid?
Notice how some bright areas lack any detail/texture at all? That just looks
wrong to my eyes.
Perhaps this example will explain.
See all the textural detail and the red stripes in the -2.0 EV frame? I can bring that up to be as bright or brighter
than the - 2/3 frame - and retain greater texture, etc.
This may not matter to others, but to me, it's key to coming closer to capturing the experience of seeing the flowers in
person. and why I think -2 EV is a starting point for yellow (and bright red) flowers in the sun.
Why is it like this? My theory is that it's due to the leveling off of the top of the response curve of the
camera/firmware. That lowers contrast in highlights, making small differences in brightness disappear. In the vast
majority of shots, it just doesn't matter, and the curve helps hold highlights from blocking up.
With really big areas of subtly tonally differentiated yellow/red, that subtlety fades away. By exposing much less, the
flower is down in a steeper area of the curve with more contrast.
I've tried the alternative, pulling down highlights, fussing with their contrast, etc. but just haven't liked the
results as well, as yet.
Mojo admission. The background was treated to lower brightness and
contrast and Gaussian blurred. It just makes the
subject stand out. So, some of the light you admire is creative.
I assumed the feeling was based on an impression rather than on something
representative. The background greens I often desaturate just a little to
get something of the same effect. I haven't ever used Gaussian blur for
Actual technique is slightly fussy. The selection of foreground must be deleted from the layer to be blurred, and the
selection reversed, before it is blurred, or you get bad edge effects. If non-foreground is not all relatively the same
distance, the blurred layer needs to have a gradient applied or be otherwise masked to differentiate blur with distance.
I just never think of it when I'm squirming in my computer
chair. If I had one criticism that I could offer you, it is that sometimes
in rare cases the feeling of light is wrong to my eyes, like something
sunlit during an eclipse.
Yup, it's a danger
But your yellow lily really works for me (and certainly anything else I've seen
I always hope for perfection, and realize it doesn't always happen. 😉
The pitcher plants I also just posted had the same treatment, but with a
gradient mask, so blurring varies with depth, giving a natural DoF look.
Because people react to the red channel differently, I generally glance at
the red channel hystericalogram. The E-5 handles red pretty well -- I like
it anyway -- and it goes right up to the edge. The EM-1iii is a little
more aggressive in keeping a hold of it. Most of the time, there is very
little to do in post for me. Topaz gets a good rest unless I'm working
with a significant crop. -.7 exp comp gets me what I want almost all of
the time other than a little tinkering with levels.
As above, I want more.
. . .
I love focus peaking in manual mode, but I wish it lingered a bit as I
usually pause, and possibly move, a little before pressing the shutter.
This is a habit of self-steadying from working with SLRs. I think it is
why I am getting better shots at the moment in P mode with focus on the
I always have AF on the shutter button as default. I never shoot in A, S or P Dial setting. I'm an "A" guy, so my
settings for C1-C4 are all A. the problem with the "A" setting itself is that whatever I might change then shows up next
time I power up. With the Cx settings, I know exactly what I have, each time.
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/