I think i may be using too much......

asis80 · 11-07-2007, 03:59 AM

saturation or something. Or probably I shot these series in too bad of light or something. Even tho it was sunny here for that moment, the shot turned out way too dark. Shutter speed was either at 1/800 or 1/500, aperture was F8, ISO was at 80 or 100, i forget, i never set it above 100. But before i PS'ed this shot it was way dark, imagine this shot but like 2 shades darker.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=127291404

I don't know, i guess i need to really learn how to post process. I didnt use much unsharp mask. I'm trying tho....one thing i like about this shot, and after i resubmitted this the screener made the comment also......that it looks like the train was put into an oil painting. The left side looks painted, i thought that looked cool.

ben

WOW, i really messed it up. this is after trying to touch up
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=443485&key=0

Cyclonetrain · 11-07-2007, 04:21 AM

Both your photos are on the extremes of noise. But thats not this photos only problem. As I see it, you were on the wrong side of the train, causing most of the train (but not the nose) to be in shadow. For some shots, this works, but not this one.

asis80 · 11-07-2007, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclonetrain

Both your photos are on the extremes of noise.

yea i know but what could be causing that in post processing, like what am i doing wrong. yea as for the other side of the tracks, there's a mean ass farmer who owns that property and i respect other peoples properties. didnt wanna catch the shot, and sit and wait for the end of the train while he comes down and reams me out, but i totally understand

Mgoldman · 11-07-2007, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asis80

But before i PS'ed this shot it was way dark, imagine this shot but like 2 shades darker.

That sounds like your problem right there - if you do not get the exposure right the first time then through processing you are also adding noise, or simply, you are adding and modifying pixels that were not there.

Saturation is similar - turn it all the way up and see how the noise is introduced. And, keep an eye on your sharpening adjustments.

And, as you mentioned - sometimes you just get the wrong light.

/Mitch

asis80 · 11-07-2007, 05:12 AM

Yea, only thing that bugs me is it was BRIGHT and SUNNY yet the shot turned out way dark. It's a brand new Canon A640. Could the lack of color/overcast/ and just plain blahness cause it to turn out dark? I hate to use auto because it boosts ISO's out the roof and shutterspeed to a blur! haha

Mgoldman · 11-07-2007, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asis80

Could the lack of color/overcast/ and just plain blahness cause it to turn out dark? I hate to use auto because it boosts ISO's out the roof and shutterspeed to a blur! haha

You have blue skies yet you say it was overcast - that would imply that the saturation was boosted too much. If you were shooting on manual it would be intersting to see the "test shot" taken before the train showed. If you were using shutter /apeture priority, your camera may have compensated for a brighter part of your image by for instance, trying to darken a bright sky, or even the headlight.

/Mitch

asis80 · 11-07-2007, 05:39 AM

Naw, the only thing i use is manual or for anything but railfanning, auto. That day, the light was patchy, you either caught it at the right time or you didn't. I always do boost saturation up a little too much sometimes to compensate for that "dead" look.

JimThias · 11-07-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Overprocessed: The photo appears to suffer from either excessive use of a grain removal tool, leading to a washed out oil-painted look, or overuse of the shadow/highlight tool in Photoshop, which can give the image a 'fake' appearance and create halos around darker objects.

That's a sweet rejection. First time I've seen it...and dead spot-on. haha

asis80 · 11-07-2007, 09:42 PM

lol ill probably see more of it

Crusader · 11-08-2007, 03:49 PM

asis80-
Back in the 1980s, remember how everyone said CDs don't skip. Then we all learned that they do. Well, everyone today (including myself) seems surprised when the latest digital flibbety-jibbety camera fails to see what our eyes see. I've had a few recent shots taken with a Canon XT come out woefully underexposed, and while post-processing in P'shop brightened them up, it caused other problems...like grain.

Sometimes new doesn't mean improved. And it certainly doesn't mean foolproof. Nor does it mean we can bypass the fundamentals and hope the camera will fix it all for us. I know this from painful personal experience.

So, with that said, keep experimenting with ISO, aperture, and shutter speed combos under different lighting conditions. Find out what works and what doesn't. If I had to guess about your original shot...a moving train at shutter 1/500 and ISO 100 seems ok. I'd suspect that aperture was the problem. Maybe a 5.6 under those conditions, rather than an 8.

asis80 · 11-08-2007, 04:18 PM

haha, i was using F8. I'll try to stop it down a little next time. With these cold november "gray" but sun is still shining days i use ISO100. Anything over that to me just doesnt work. I'm new to photography and post processing so it's gonna take a while but in the meantime I thank you for your help! I really do, I use all these comments and suggestions when I'm photo'ing and processing to help me out! Thanks again!

JimThias · 11-08-2007, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asis80

haha, i was using F8. I'll try to stop it down a little next time. With these cold november "gray" but sun is still shining days i use ISO100. Anything over that to me just doesnt work. I'm new to photography and post processing so it's gonna take a while but in the meantime I thank you for your help! I really do, I use all these comments and suggestions when I'm photo'ing and processing to help me out! Thanks again!

If you're shooting at ISO 100 on a grey day, by NO means stop down from f8. You're just going to have to slow the shutter speed down even more to compensate for the decrease in light. If anything, "stop UP" to f5.6 or whatever your lens allows.

JRMDC · 11-08-2007, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crusader

I'd suspect that aperture was the problem. Maybe a 5.6 under those conditions, rather than an 8.

I will assert, without any proof whatsoever, that the difference between a shot at f/8 and one at f/5.6 has ever been sufficient to determine the difference between RP acceptance and rejection.

It's just one stop!!!!!

Bad post-processing, that can trash a shot. Using f/5.6 when f/8 was warranted, and overexposing and losing the highlights a bit, maybe, maybe. But taking a shot where f/5.6 was warranted, underexposing by one stop at f/8? No, the problem is post-processing. I've underexposed many a shot, quite fixable.

Sounds to me like the original was waaaaay underexposed and either was not fixable or ben didn't find the right fix.

JimThias · 11-08-2007, 05:00 PM

I agree, Janusz...but at the same time, give me an example of a situation shooting trains where either f8 was warranted over f5.6 or vice versa. The DOF probably doesn't make much difference, so in that case, an adjustment of shutter speed would more warranted than an adjustment of f-stop.

JRMDC · 11-08-2007, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias

I agree, Janusz...but at the same time, give me an example of a situation shooting trains where either f8 was warranted over f5.6 or vice versa.

I agree, exactly!, but you have missed my point. Advising the photographer to change his settings by one f/stop is not going to help him/her to get the photo right.

Quote:

The DOF probably doesn't make much difference, so in that case, an adjustment of shutter speed would more warranted than an adjustment of f-stop.

The bigger point is that there was a big mistake make in either exposure, processing, or perhaps both. I still can't tell which, but I suspect it's not just a matter of changing one setting by one f/stop. If you are taking a sunny shot, it should not be "way dark" and one f/stop will not make it so.

Crusader · 11-08-2007, 08:30 PM

Was just tinkering with the numbers he gave me. Honestly don't know why it would have been 'waaay' underexposed at either a f5.6 or an f8, given the other settings he described. I was just trying to get him to experiment with what might yield a better original shot...so maybe less P'shop work would be needed.

JimThias · 11-08-2007, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC

I agree, exactly!, but you have missed my point. Advising the photographer to change his settings by one f/stop is not going to help him/her to get the photo right.

Agreed. I would more likely advise to change the shutter speed, however dramatic enough, to get the correct exposure. Pick an aperture, stick with it. Let the shutter speed dictate the correct exposure. And if the speed isn't fast enough to freeze movement, then start tinkering with the ISO and aperture.

Quote:

The bigger point is that there was a big mistake made in either exposure, processing, or perhaps both. I still can't tell which, but I suspect it's not just a matter of changing one setting by one f/stop. If you are taking a sunny shot, it should not be "way dark" and one f/stop will not make it so.

Hmm...well, that depends now. If you have the correct exposure, let's say at f5.6 and 800 shutter speed, if you stop down once with the shutter speed, that would make the speed then 1600. If you stop down with the aperture, f8 and 800 would produce the same amount of incoming light at f5.6 and 1600. In both cases, the exposure would be a bit dark.

asis80 · 11-09-2007, 04:01 AM

just let me interject.....thanks for the help guys!