PentaxLife Forum: Photography

benjikan on "Post Processing Technique Adendum"

benjikan — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:05:50 +0000

Post Processing Variation to “Add Dimension to Your Flat Photos”

Original is HERE http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/?p=796

Hello all of you Pixel Peeping Maniacs…LOL!!! When I
posted my work flow, nothing is carved in stone. There will be
variations dependent on the contrast of the original photo as well
as the shadow definition. You may for example wish to stop at the
0.3 pixels from 200 to 330 percent and keep it as such. You may
wish to pop up the contrast by using the 40 to 60 pixels from 10 to
15 percent to give it more depth. You may decide not to add this
process knowing that you will add a duplicate layer in Soft light
which will enable you yo go higher in the Fill and Opacity
coefficient. You mat not wish to sharpen at 0.3 percent at 300
pixels but just do the contrast pump formula of 40-60 pixels at
10-15 percent. You may wish to de-saturate your duplicate layer to
give great B&W dimension which subsequently reduces the saturation.
You will add saturation once flattening the layer…etc etc etc. I
use which ever process works best for me.

http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/?p=192

benjikan on "Continuous vs Flash Lighting and Everything in Between Pt 5"

benjikan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:16:30 +0000

Continuous vs Flash Lighting and Everything in Between Pt 5

In Part 4,we were left facing the subject, we had tested the light and had to determine the difference between the foreground and background intensity. That was a very personal decision. You also had to decide how much of the principal subject was going to be lit.

Now that you have done your test shots and are satisfied with how it looks, you can commence shooting with this very simple lighting set up. The first thing to consider is, how will the focal length change the overall look of the image and to this end I highly recommend using a wide to medium telephoto zoom. The reason I say this is that the closer you come in to the image the less intense the contrast will appear between the foreground and the background. It is for this reason, that I want you to experiment with a 16,17,18 to 45,50,70 lens. This is much more dramatic than you can imagine using this lighting technique.

In the last segment I also mentioned considering a different approach and this has been one of the very seminal moments of illumination for me in my 25+ years in photography and that is "Always break away from your assumed position and orientation, without changing the lighting of the principal person or object..." This approach has always given me some of my best images. In other words, when you have set up the lights for a particular orientation i.e. you are here and she is there, start to move away from that position and start to rotate around the subject having them follow you with a slight change of the head position and eye orientation, then gradually having them follow your movement or moving against your movement. Lay on the floor, or stand up on a cube, or come in really really tight or pull back really far and place her at the bottom right quadrant of the image, taking up only 20 percent of the surface area.

As you start to do this you may find that there might be some additional lighting that you wish to introduce, especially in very wide angle shots for this scenario.

We shall get in to more detail in Part 6

http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/?p=572

ratcatcher on "Ratcatcher's Gallery"

ratcatcher — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:44:03 +0000

It was taken hand held on a DL2 with 18-55 lens.

Vitali on "Ratcatcher's Gallery"

Vitali — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 04:09:53 +0000

I like this long exposure stream
http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/ratcatchers_gallery/picture670727.aspx
Excellent work with color.

ratcatcher on "Ratcatcher's Gallery"

ratcatcher — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 18:03:12 +0000

Hi All

I'm just interested in what you think of my pic's

Thanks Richard

http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/ratcatchers_gallery/default.aspx?ppage=1

elhocid on "K10D Picture Anomaly"

elhocid — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:40:55 +0000

This is normal chromatic aberration and can be easily fixed by software using RAW file format.
It is not specific to camera, it is caused by the lens you are using. Wide zoom lens do often have this problem.

RacerX69 on "K10D Picture Anomaly"

RacerX69 — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:10:44 +0000

I am in the process of building a new house and am making every effort to document the build with photographs. We had a bit of snow this past week, and the building system is ICF (insulating concrete forms) which uses white styrofoam blocks to form the exterior walls. The scenes are slightly monochromatic, a lot of white, (dark) green trees and grey skies. Many of the pictures have a purpleis h\blue line between the white and dark areas.

Here is a cropped portion of one of the images (I hope the image comes through) http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h194/racerx6948/00178BasementWalls12-28-07PurpleLin.jpg

Is there a setting I can use to prevent this? Can I "fix" the images I already have using the camera , the Pentax Photo Lab or Adobe Photoshop (I have CS2)? I am already guessing that it might be a white balance setting, but I am not sure. I am still pretty green with digital photography.

Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions.

Bob

RacerX69 on "K10D Picture Anomaly"

RacerX69 — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:10:02 +0000

Here is a cropped portion of one of the images (I hope the image comes through) <a href="http://s64.photobucket.com/albums/h194/racerx6948/?action=view&current=00178BasementWalls12-28-07PurpleLin.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h194/racerx6948/00178BasementWalls12-28-07PurpleLin.jpg" border="0" alt="Purple Lines"></a>

Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions.

Bob

RacerX69 on "K10D Picture Anomaly"

RacerX69 — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:08:31 +0000

Here is a cropped portion of one of the images (I hope the image comes through) [IMG]http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h194/racerx6948/00178BasementWalls12-28-07PurpleLin.jpg[/IMG]

Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions.

Bob

Vitali on "Pentax K100D Super now supported by Bibble"

Vitali — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:45:19 +0000

Adobe Lightroom 1.2 and Adobe Camera Raw 4.2 plug-in now support Pentax K100D Super RAW files.

ammonyte on "K10 D and infrared"

ammonyte — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 22:54:43 +0000

The K10D isn't as sensitive to IR as it's predecessors. The 72 in Hoya R72 refers to the wavelength (720 nanometers) which (I think) is the 50% cutoff. More details about IR photgraphy are here http://www.dpfwiw.com/ir.htm and here http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index.html?ir_comparisons.html

thepentaxhammer on "K10 D and infrared"

thepentaxhammer — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 19:12:49 +0000

Thanks for the reply, but I doubt the folks at ebay would be able to figure out what type of an infrared filter would work best on a Pentax K10D. That's why I've been trying to find answers at forums such as this, with members like you guys that have experience with photography, and in particular... this camera.

Once I can find what type of filter would be best, then maybe I can find on to purchase at ebay.

Vitali on "K10 D and infrared"

Vitali — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 08:30:04 +0000

Try to search at eBay. May be there you'll find more options.

thepentaxhammer on "K10 D and infrared"

thepentaxhammer — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:09:53 +0000

I've been taking infrared photos with my K10D and a Hoya R72 filter. While I can take photos this way what I would like is to be able to take shorter exposures. My normal exposure time is 8 seconds with the aperture wide open, and ISO at 200 - 400. If I go for higher ISO speeds, then I get way too much grain.

What I would like is to find a different infrared filter that isn't as dark as the Hoya R72. The local camera store (a real camera store, not a Best Buy type of store) just doesn't know much about infrared photography, except for with infrared film. I don't want to convert the camera to do only infrared, so that's not an option either.

Does anybody know of any other IR filters that would work with the K10D?

Vitali on "Pentax K100D Super now supported by Bibble"

Vitali — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 11:40:56 +0000

Bibble 4.9.8e now supports Pentax K100D Super RAW files and Pentax DA 70mm F2.4 Limited lens.

As always this is a free update for existing licensees of Bibble 4.

http://www.bibblelabs.com

paulandapentax on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

paulandapentax — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:54:45 +0000

I voted on 4 or 5 scanned shots...

digitalphil on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

digitalphil — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:34:42 +0000

One last comment I feel I must add. Once you are accepted as a member, you then are also allowed to be on the jury. This was a nice surprise and eases my mind a tad. But still surprising results!
BTW...anyone note how many film (scanned) images there were? Of all the images I voted on...none were film like mine...hmmmm, what's with that?

paulandapentax on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

paulandapentax — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:25:08 +0000

I had my first three submissions rejected also. I'm no pro however. One of which I thought was really nice though. My best work has not been done with Pentax glass though. I am new to photography and the K10D is my first slr. My problem is with the issue of lenses. Honestly, Pentax lenses are difficult to find right now and the selection of available ones aren't that great...or they're priced higher than my car...I choose to follow the rules (because I can understand Pentax wanting Pentax products only showcased) and not submit shots with my Sigma glass. I see a lot of shots that say "unknown lens" being added and I suspect that some shots aren't shot with Pentax glass.

There certainly are a lot of shots that got in before the voting started which to be fair, should have to go through committee too. Some of which are quite bad. I thought, though, that this gallery was also to showcase amateur photographers. There should be a standard...but how high? Oh well..

elhocid on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

elhocid — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:25:38 +0000

Don't be sad about it. If I were the judge deciding on who to allow, you would be rejected as well digitalphil.
Additionally I would reject some of those already in. There are too many photos with questionable qualities on PPG.

Vitali on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

Vitali — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 06:15:26 +0000

You are not alone, digitalphil.

Many people on other Pentax forums and online communities were complaining about sometimes strange and unexpected decisions of PentaxPhotoGallery editorial stuff.

benjikan on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

benjikan — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:26:17 +0000

I tend to agree with your analysis...

digitalphil on "Pentax photo gallery...questionable!!!"

digitalphil — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:36:14 +0000

I must state my displeasure with the new online Pentax Gallery. I have been shooting for over 20 years and have many accolades from people regarding my work. So I submitted to Pentax and was just as quickly rejected. I am insulted! My work can be seen on my site and speaks for itself.

Mitchel109 on "Another PP Workflow Variation"

Mitchel109 — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:28:40 +0000

thanks for the double sharpening technique....
works great

mitch

Mitchel109 on "A Drop of Reflective Light.."

Mitchel109 — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:26:31 +0000

ahhh light. its what we see. and for some photographers, its what we control. and when we control it, we are stylizing what <i>you</i> see.

so gaining control of light is the first step in this situation. (exclude available light photography from this post)

take a step back. decide on the energy, style, feel, look...whatever....then experiment.
or, if you have the experience with lights, just do the job.

i have one sidelight.
i can use it to cast defining shadows, help illuminate a larger scene, make some rimlighting, etc.

i had a thought the other day. to describe it is cliche. its the 'painting with light' idea.

when you learn how to use your light, you arent just blasting the frame with illumination.
its like adding salt to food...brings out the flavor.

i guess if im going to go the way of the cliche then ill need to start calling my flash my lightbrush...or something...

Vitali on "A Drop of Reflective Light.."

Vitali — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:03:46 +0000

Yes. This is one of the elements that makes difference between snapshot and photograph.

Tracnac on "New K10D Images for NoName Magazine"

Tracnac — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:25:27 +0000

Love the Pink series...

Remember me when I shot a model session by mistake in tungsten film.

Thanks for sharing...

benjikan on "I'm Officially Online"

benjikan — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:56:15 +0000

Thanks Guys...

Ben

1r2R1 on "I'm Officially Online"

1r2R1 — Wed, 16 May 2007 09:30:20 +0000

Congratulations - Toutes mes félicitations :)

keithw on "A More Precise Workflow Method Explanation + USM"

keithw — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 14:17:19 +0000

Hi Ben

Very interesting. Having just joined the "big boys" with my purchase of the GX10 I've been wondering about shooting RAW. Your description gives a great insight into the effort required to produce top quality photos.

Thanks for that

Keith

benjikan on "A More Precise Workflow Method Explanation + USM"

benjikan — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 17:10:36 +0000

The workflow I employ that is intended for press or print. When shooting in RAW which is always the case, I open an image via Bridge in to PS3 which automatically opens in Adobe Camera Raw. As stated (Now this is an alternative method to the one given at "Pentax Life") I will sharpen the image at 25 to 35 percent in ACR, Luminance Smoothing "0" and Color Noise reduction at "50". I generally click OK at this stage, (unless I am way off in my exposure, which if I am, I have to seriously re-consider my chosen profession)

When open in PS3 in 16 bits, I create a Duplicate Layer. Now here is where you can go both ways. (sounds a bit suspect) Depending on what I wish to accomplish in terms of saturation, I will either De-Saturate the image or leave it as a color image. The two are radically different in there outcome. Once I have created the Duplicate Layer, I will go in to the Layers Menu "TAB" and click on Normal which will open a large choice of different options. I will "Click" on "Soft Light". When doing so and dependent on the contrast of the image, you will notice a radical increase in contrast and saturation if you left the original image in color. Generally with my stuff and I say generally as it totally depends on the lighting I have employed, I will set the "Opacity" and "Fill" sliders from 50 to 85 percent each. Once I am satisfied with the result, I will flatten the image, as it is not yet ready for re-touch, this is a pre-retouch manipulation that I do on every image in preparation for the Post Production retouch. Once in PS, I will in many cases use the Shadow Highlight tool at my Default setting being,

Shadows:
Amount 2%
Tonal Width 50%
Radius 30%

Highlights:
Amount 2%
Tonal Width 50%
Radius 30%

Color Correction +20 Mid-tone 0

It may change dependent on the conditions.

Now, if the "Duplicate Layer" I made used the "De-saturation" process, after I have flattened the layer, I might augment the overall Saturation by 10 to 20 %. If I wish to keep the image with "That" desaturated look I may do nothing. It depends on the effect I am looking for.

If I did not use the "De-saturation" process and left the "Layer" in color, I may "De-saturate' the overall image by 10 to 20%.

If I do not sharpen in PS, I will do the following for a more "RADICAL" look. After I have imported in to PS from ACR, I will Unsharp Mask (Accentuate) from 120 to 330 percent at 0.3 pixels and I will Unsharp Mask again at 10 to 15% at 40 to 60 pixels to really "POP" the contrast. I will go to "Shadow Highlight" and do the required manipulations to compensate for a loss of shadow detail.

I am now ready for the "Retouch Artist"

When retouch is done and up-sized if necessary, I will sharpen again at 100 to 180 percent at 0.3 pixels.

That is my systematic "Workflow" method.

Ben