Back Modifications (8)
Views 40 Unique 18 Award Shortlist   

Yellow Reworked

By ctxuk  
Following initial critique the rework of my image looking at the points and advice given. I am looking for appraisal on the changes made based on what was raised, also on how I have accomplished it, the rights and wrongs.

I adjusted a copy of the first submittal raw file rather than returning to a base state. Note I didn't follow just from start down and tab one on, I skipped back and forth between HSL and Basic to try to achieve the best balance.

Basic:
Lowered negative exposure compensation overall from -75 to -50
Reduced contrast by 3 pts
Reduced whites from -41 to -52
Increased blacks from +32 to +55

Detail:
Sharpening reduced from 86 to 73

HSL/Greyscale
Hue - No changes
Saturation - Dropped yellows by -12
Luminance - Raised oranges to +28, Yellows to +5, Greens to +17

Following feedback left on my previous original submittal for this, and also on my original Dusk Water submittal, I read and Googled a little to find some clear concise help and advice, I found this to be useful and hopefully beneficial to aid getting a good end result - http://www.lightandmatter.org/2011/tech-photography-articles/understanding-your-histogram-part-1/
Note, it is in 3 parts and all need to be read
I think I will probably read it a lot so have bookmarked it, eventually it will sink in and I will be able to recall even if in darkest deepest depths of Peru.

Hopefully banehawi will drop by and take a look at it as well as any others interested.

Tags: Yellow Flowers and plants Close-up and macro

Comments


paulbroad Plus
12 131 1285 United Kingdom
17 May 2015 6:48PM
The bottom line, as before, is a lack of critical sharpness and you have reduced sharpening?

If the blur is movement then you will not sharpen it. You need something like f16, but a zoom is not goid for the job? Macro is like a long tele lens. It magnufies the image, thus it magnifies shake too.

Other oroblems with a zoom on tubes is variations in magnification and general performance at different zoom settings. The EXIF is obviously not correct. What were your real settings? The zoom will give a larger image on tubes at the shorter focal length, daft as that seems. You can get closer.

Paul

Paul

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

banehawi Plus
15 2.2k 4045 Canada
17 May 2015 6:56PM
Martyn. which of the panels in the mod, from your perspective (view large), shows the Bee best?


W
ctxuk 10 7 1 England
17 May 2015 9:06PM
banehawi

Ok, two differing size image comparisons does not make that an easy question.
The smaller sized left image is cleaner in appearance ie, the lines are sharper on it, for instance the proboscis outine. The right image looks to be more open in the body below the head which is darker coloured, the end of its body has not got so much contrast between the darker brown areas and the yellower areas.

I trust that answers the question, and you will let me know why you ask, where your concern lays. And now, the "but"

I am not allowed to go and pick a wild flower, I believe it's now illegal to do so, if I were to though I would find that -

The image on the left, it's flower yellows colours are washed out in comparison to the real thing. If the flower is washed out, so too in the entire image, correct or incorrect? I already lost some red content in there by reducing them.

paulbroad

I am sorry if it is frustrating what I have done in making the changes. When I reduced the sharpness it was because when I looked at it at 100% size in ACR it had looked worse on the top of the head "after" making all the other adjustments, a speckly appearance on that flat area a little "like looking through frosted glass but clear by nature", that is why I reduced it.
Critical Sharpness - I wont get that now will I? Surely, in that we are talking the time of capture? I just uploaded an image under mods, I don't think I will ever get that with the equipment I own currently or anywhere close to it.
How do I find the real settings? I only have the same Exif information you see as far as I am aware.

Sorry, I am really frustrated by this. I am using the same frame as it is the only way to move forward, if I know where to make changes on this and get it where you are happy with it, then I can move forward. I can shoot as many new frames as I want, but I won't learn what I need to that way. I have done what I thought was right, yet trying to retain the colours I could see at time of capture and yet attempting to get closer to what you say is correct, the yellows under my new version had a very very few single pixel red flags displayed before doing any other changes.
I left this site some time back because of this issue and a lack of comprehension and understanding, I really don't want to do it again, I would rather get this right now so I can move on and use it, after all, what's the point in me continuing if I am so far out in what I see and do?
ctxuk 10 7 1 England
17 May 2015 9:35PM
Just uploaded another mod, it shows my new version left, the original right, both captured from here using the snippet tool and using Opera to display the pages. One was sent left, one sent right on screen so capture was together exact same moment.

Monitor was calibrated before doing the capture

This is "what I see". I know no easier or better way to do it.
ctxuk 10 7 1 England
17 May 2015 11:30PM
Uploaded a series of shots I just did, God being kind enough to supply a captive live subject (funnily enough, the first spider I have seen in the house since living here) He was about 1.5cm in body size.

Last mod shot was the first taken, the first few underexposed, that and the first of them uploaded are both under exposed.
Second uploaded correctly exposed
3rd and 4th Pre WB set, consecutive shots, note colour.

All shots inc PRE WB ones had custom WB set in ACR using dropper. Measured a light area of sink each time ie scratch etc.

All shots taken same lighting -

flash used: On Camera - set to commander mode, I think currently the power reduction is set on -2.3
Side mounted - SB800 set remote, diffuser on, TTL, power reduction set -2.0 (on camera itself in commander menu)

Funnily enough, they came out a lot better than I imagined they ever could. Distance - nowhere near enough to not upset a bee collecting pollen, the spider wasn't impressed. I was not that close shooting the flowers, perhaps I should have been is all I can say.

At least I/we have some idea now what the lens can do combined with extension tubes. Also, the effect a custom Pre WB has (set using white semi opaque cap held in front) Perhaps I should have done better with the bee.
paulbroad Plus
12 131 1285 United Kingdom
18 May 2015 7:56AM
No, you will not correct the image now. Your other shots with flash are also not sharp. You must get the image sharp at the taking stage and whilst some improvement can be made by sharpening images with lens blur or just less than sharp resolution, images with camera movement will not sharpen correctly.

You have movement, shown as double images with flash. Set the shutter speed to the synchronization speed for flash to avoid ambient recording. This comment will seem very long as I have added my macro text document. I have a program written for a local camera club by me with lots of tips for digital. I can send it to you if you let me have your Email address.

Macro photography is not easy.

Macro means from about 1:2, half life size to about 10 times life size. Larger than that range is MICRO. Smaller is close up.

Ideally, when that close, you need a lot of depth of field, so a small aperture, f16 to f22. Wide aperture, shallow depth macro can be impressive, but tends to be more for effect than a technical record. Most lenses do not perform at there best at such small apertures.

Ideally you need a true macro lens. These come in fixed focal lengths only. NONE are zooms. Focal lengths are around 50mm, 100mm and 150mm. Go for the 100mm as it gives a good distance from the subject at 1:1. These lenses are designed to work well at small apertures.

The best macro lenses have internal focusing. The front element does not revolve and the lens dimensions do not change during focusing. It is best to not have a lens with rotating elements at all. Those that change length are best used on manual focus.

Exposure is the main problem. When very close to the subject, light can be restricted for various reasons, and at f22, you need a lot of light. For static subjects, a tripod is required and longer exposures but remember, outdoors, even a breath of wind can mean subject movement.

You need a fast shutter speed to avoid shake, you need a tiny aperture for depth of field and minimum ISO for image quality. Not easy. The answer is flash. However, this close the gun must be on an extension lead off the camera to point at the subject and, in many cases, you will get a black or very dark background.

There are specialist flash units available which attach to the lens filter thread. This is why internal focusing lenses are best. These flash units may have several heads but the most useful is the ring flash. They start at about 100 for simple units and can be quite a lot more with several internal heads and variable power to each.

I use auto focus on the lens when chasing fast moving insects with care that the lens focuses where I want it to. Manual focus always if there is time for accuracy. Flash can be on manual, with test exposures to get the exposure correct. I find my Sigma Ring flash works well with ETTL set, but does need compensation set. Compensation is usually +1 to 2 stops, calculated on each session.

If you do not change ISO or distance, then the settings remain constant.

With the flash, I easily achieve f18, ISO100 and any shutter speed I want up to the flash synch point.

There are a range of possibilities and you must design your own procedure. The above acts as a basic start point only.

Paul

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.