On 6/20/2022 7:53 AM, DZDub wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 5:28 PM Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let's not use this flower -- it is such an ugly flower that it wouldn't be
worth it for me to try to improve it. I did desaturate the densest
yellow. Doesn't make it look good, but it was even worse.
Sure; it's about the insect, not the flower. But do notice that translucency is
obvious, more later\
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.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter to me, but I am not really interested or
concerned about flowers with this shade and density of yellow.
I'm confused, as you have linked to examples that are, to my eye, much the
same, the yellow Irises, for example.
differences but can't always generate enthusiasm for one over another. I
am interested in your claim that your hypothesis applies to red as well.
Do you have a similar example of red?
Yes - and no. Yes, I've done them, probably quite a few. But where they are is the problematic element. We do have a
dark red Spider Lily in the garden, but I'm not sure about something bright red.
I corresponded a lot about this on Jim's flower pix. He had a tendency to post red flowers with big areas of
detail-less, slightly off color, where the red channel had clipped. He got a lot better . . .
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.
To get the results you desire, do you need to shoot the subject at -2 EV,
Clarity of person referred to may be necessary here. You ask "do you need to shoot the subject at -2 EV," Well, yes "I"
need to, because that's how I have worked out to get the results I desire.
I suspect there are other approaches that may work as well or better. In my
limited tries, I haven't found a better way.
or can you dial back the ORF exp comp in OM Workplace to get the same effective
Again "I" could, I suppose, but I won't, so I don't know the answer. I shoot Oly, Panny and Sony cameras, and the
occasional iThingie Raw shot. I use one work flow for all, else there lies madness. I use the LR catalog to keep track
of it all and for initial exposure adjustments, then PS for all further editing.
I did install OM Workspace, and made sure it worked, but haven't used it. All the prior Oly converters were terrible at
recovering highlights. I guess that may be true here, but it doesn't matter to me.
In theory, whether one may do that to the same effect would depend on whether exposure comp. in Workspace affects the
conversion or is applied after conversion. Should be easy enough to test.
. . .
This iris has plenty of detail:
To me the Mean Mr. Mustard color gives the impression that the petal is
thicker and more opaque than it is.
This iris seems a little better to me at suggesting translucence that is
natural to irises:
I think that is mostly a function of the shadow from behind on the lower left petal. Which brings me to the idea that
what really shows translucency is actual changes to brightness coming through the petals. One may think of certain
flowers as translucent from prior knowledge/experience, but it's not going to come through in photos without actual
I think this shot shows lots of translucency.
Here, it seems to me that what does the trick is actual shadows on the back of the petals showing through. The trick may
be composing so there is some of that?
I should also ask you what picture mode you use for starters. I'm assuming
it's "Natural", not that it matters so much in raw.
I don't think it matters at all in LR/ACR. I am presented there with a choice of profiles. I use the default, "Adobe
Color". Again, this helps when using multiple brands, as it tends to lower differences.
The level of
saturation I am seeing with the EM-1iii in Natural picture mode is
somewhere between natural and vivid on the E-5.
EM-1iii might be the first camera I have ever shot in P mode. I also
always have AF on the shutter but focus on the AEL button (or Fn depending
on the camera) and my C2 with A mode is set up that way. I had a brain fut
if I wrote otherwise. I came to enjoy focus on the shutter with longer
lenses and fast subjects. Continuous too -- I don't usually need those to
be too fast. Set that way I found it easier to get this kind of shot (this
Excellent! And yes, AF on the shutter is needed for that sort of shot; I'm hardly quick enough even at that. With
ProCapL and Bird ID, the odds get a lot better. Have you tried ProCapL? It took me some retraining of my index finger,
too finish pressing, rather than backing off, when finished. It results in lots of frames for the bit bucket, but also
shots I'd have missed.
Currently my P mode is set up that way. At the moment the Cx stops are
working great for me. With that being the case, I don't know why I would
ever use A, P, or M on the dial stops. In my limited time with the camera I
haven't discovered why they set it up that way. I'll figure it out sooner
or later. In general, I thought the E-5 was nicely organized, but this is
good too. The bigger adjustment for me is the hair-trigger readiness of
all things mirrorless other than getting the camera on and off or out of
sleep. And it is hard to get used to not having an optical path without
the camera being turned on. When I get really used to all those things, it
will be hard to pick up a DSLR again because mirrorless is better.
I switched ten years ago, with the E-M5. I would never go back!
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/