Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rannoch

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Rannoch

    A run out to Loch Rannoch today, not the best of weather.

    The Rain is Coming. by David Miller, on Flickr

    Typical view of Loch Rannoch.

    Loch Rannoch by David Miller, on Flickr

    #2
    Re: Rannoch

    Oh David, there's so much to like with these but their potential isn't being realised as they're crying out for a bit of processing. Sorry

    Cheers,
    John

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Rannoch

      One day John, one day :)

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Rannoch

        I like them David. Reminds me so much of the weather every time I've ever set foot in Scotland
        Trev

        Equipment - According to the wife more than a Camera Shop got

        Flickr:
        https://www.flickr.com/photos/trevb2639/

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Rannoch

          Originally posted by ColytonJohn View Post
          Oh David, there's so much to like with these but their potential isn't being realised as they're crying out for a bit of processing. Sorry

          Cheers,
          John
          Agreed, there's so much more to the first pic for instance...

          Sky n gate.jpg

          A simple lightening of the foreground and darkening of the sky, nothing else...
          Nigel

          You may know me from Another Place....

          The new ElSid Photogallery...

          Equipment: Far too much to list - including lots of Nikon...

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Rannoch

            Looks really good Nigel, but sorry it was a dull day the grass was dull & the sky was that colour, so I have a recording of how the day was, not how I would have liked it to have been in a perfect world. Thanks for the effort, but as a certain lady once said, "this guy ain't for turning".


            Dave (or as the wife calls me Victor)

            Comment


              #7
              Re: Rannoch

              Without offending anyone I hope. I fully agree with you Dave - that's how you saw it, that's how you recorded it.
              Trev

              Equipment - According to the wife more than a Camera Shop got

              Flickr:
              https://www.flickr.com/photos/trevb2639/

              Comment


                #8
                Re: Rannoch

                Originally posted by Daisy M View Post
                Thanks for the effort, but as a certain lady once said, "this guy ain't for
                This leads me to ask, why do we put photographs on the forum. If I put up a photo, I’m hoping people will come up with suggestions as to how they feel the shot could be improved. I might not agree all the time but I wouldn't be determined not to agree all of the time.
                For what it’s worth, I feel Nigel’s edit is a bit too bright but it certainly shows how improvements can be made.

                John

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: Rannoch

                  An oft discussed issue. We could discuss the accuracy of a captured image compared to what we see, given the massive difference in perceived contrast between the eye and the sensor. Also if shooting JPEG for instance then the picture style will have done some in camera 'editing to the image'.

                  Think the edit by Nigel is a bit too far but believe he was just showing what's possible. The detail brought out in the sky is really nice though.

                  Anyway if you are happy with the way it looks then that's all that is important.
                  Canon 5D3, 7D2, 60D, Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS II, Canon 300 f4L IS, Canon 16-35 f4 L, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, Canon 1.4 MkIII extender, Sigma AF 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM, Sigma 150-600 Contemporary, Tamron SP AF 70-300 F/4-5.6 Di VC USD, Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS
                  https://www.flickr.com/photos/16830751@N03/

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: Rannoch

                    Originally posted by Swanny48 View Post
                    This leads me to ask, why do we put photographs on the forum. If I put up a photo, I’m hoping people will come up with suggestions as to how they feel the shot could be improved. I might not agree all the time but I wouldn't be determined not to agree all of the time.
                    For what it’s worth, I feel Nigel’s edit is a bit too bright but it certainly shows how improvements can be made.

                    John
                    Could be a bit over bright, it was a quick rough and ready adjustment on an un-calibrated monitor (work PC).

                    The reluctance to develop one's pictures is something I don't get. I never had the space nor opportunity to develop my own back in the film days so was stuck with commercial processing and take-it-how-it-comes slide film so the ability to get the best out my pictures with digital proved to be a revelation.
                    Nigel

                    You may know me from Another Place....

                    The new ElSid Photogallery...

                    Equipment: Far too much to list - including lots of Nikon...

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: Rannoch

                      I still don't get it. Why do we need to muck around with a shot in Photoshop/Lightroom etc. If I take a shot of a scene and it's a dull overcast day, then that's how I want to remember it. If I was not happy with what I saw in the view finder in the first place I would not have pressed the shutter. Why would I want to make that shot look like the sun was shining on it when I got home. Likewise if I take a shot of a bird in a hedgerow with a few sticks and twigs in the shot, why do I need to clone them out when I get home. I was happy to see and record that bird, why make it into what I term a 'Field Guide Image' with just a plain uninteresting BG. Because some people think that's how it should look.
                      Trev

                      Equipment - According to the wife more than a Camera Shop got

                      Flickr:
                      https://www.flickr.com/photos/trevb2639/

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: Rannoch

                        If I take a shot of a scene and it's a dull overcast day, then that's how I want to remember it.
                        I agree with Trev. The majority of images I take, I want them to be exactly as I saw them through the viewfinder, although there are some others that I am trying to be arty with. The problem is that most of the time, the camera is unable to render the image as I saw it. There are two main problem areas:

                        Dynamic Range:

                        The human eye/brain combination has a dynamic range of around EV12. That's 12 stops if we translate that into camera language. The best of the current cameras have a range of EV7 and many are less than that. So the camera image is not going to deliver the tonal and colour range that I originally saw ............ by some considerable margin at times.

                        Exposure:

                        The algorithms within the Digic processor are set up for an 18% grey scale. It has been determined that for the vast majority of images taken, an 18% grey scale base will provide an acceptable exposure in over 90% of images. However, if you regularly take landscapes, you will know that they don't come out quite like you saw them. The sky is a little too bright and the foreground is a little too dark.

                        A set of neutral Graduated filters will balance the exposure between sky and foreground, allowing the photographer to get the image as near as reasonable in camera, but mostly, it will still be lacking the dynamic range of the human eye. Shooting in RAW and a little work post editing can bring the image pretty close to what you saw, but there is an inherent problem with that .................. the temptation to go too far with the sliders! I used to teach Photoshop and one lesson I drummed into my students was: "Do what you need to ............ not what you can!"

                        There will come a time when cameras can recognise a scene and expose accordingly, with a dynamic range that equals, or exceeds the human eye, but until that day comes, I am stuck with some post capture polishing to get the image as I saw it, rather than how the camera rendered it.
                        Colin

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Re: Rannoch

                          You've echoed my thoughts exactly Colin. I try and keep adjustments to a minimum. But I'll definitely remove the odd twig etc if it appears to be growing out if a birds back/head. I've plenty of images of birds/animals on both 'clean' and 'habitat' backgrounds, all achieved in camera. Personally I think both have their place.
                          Canon 5D3, 7D2, 60D, Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS II, Canon 300 f4L IS, Canon 16-35 f4 L, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, Canon 1.4 MkIII extender, Sigma AF 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM, Sigma 150-600 Contemporary, Tamron SP AF 70-300 F/4-5.6 Di VC USD, Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS
                          https://www.flickr.com/photos/16830751@N03/

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Re: Rannoch

                            I can see all side to the debate and believe they are all valid , My post processing skills are very limited hence I dont have much scope to change much if I get it badly wrong so I just take what I see and if I have the time I will try and compose the shot with some interesting environmental aspect but as the wildlife togs know you dont always get that time so I take what I can and yes sometimes the backgrounds are not studio backgrounds but as Ant said clean backgrounds can look amazing . All in all photography is about personal taste and if the photographer is happy then ultimately that is all that matters .
                            Steve ( LSINWP )
                            1DX, and 7D2 ,500mmf4mkii, 300mmf2.8, 400mm f5.6 , 100mm - 400mmmk2 ,70-200mm f2.8 ,24-105mm f4, 100mm f2.8 macro , 1.4x converter, 2x converter and a big dose of luck !!

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X