What would you do with this image

Started Dec 23, 2011 | Discussions
jyu
jyu
Forum MemberPosts: 86
Like?
What would you do with this image
Dec 23, 2011

This is a picture I took on one of the vacations, just by the side of the road. No PP. I'd like to know what you would do to make this image pop, or in your creative mind, how you would like to change to make it more interesting. Feel free to download, make modification and upload your copy.

Thanks.

-- hide signature --
winparkman
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,618
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to jyu, Dec 23, 2011

If this was shot in RAW, you have considerably more leeway. It is a bit overexposed, I would, darken, rotate it to the right by 90 degrees, increase the contrast and then the rest depends on RAW or JPG plus your software of choice.
--
OK, not so purely a hobby.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Fjrjacko
Contributing MemberPosts: 840
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to winparkman, Dec 23, 2011

Yeah you could do a adjustment with PP , but I would probably take another photo and get it right

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
winparkman
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,618
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to Fjrjacko, Dec 23, 2011

Sometimes you don't get another chance.

-- hide signature --

OK, not so purely a hobby.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
eNo
eNo
Forum ProPosts: 11,732
Like?
Second chances and quality of light
In reply to winparkman, Dec 23, 2011

winparkman wrote:

Sometimes you don't get another chance.

I don't know... I bet at the time he took that photo, that flower wasn't in a hurry to get to its next appointment. A quick review of the rear LCD and an equally quick -EC would have gotten it.

To the OP, the over-exposure here probably happened because the focus point fell on the reds, which the meter tried to turn into a mid-tone. Especially with reds involved, you have to take charge of the exposure and control it manually. Here I would have spot-metered on that flower and closed down my exposure by 1 stop as the first attempt. Again, since the flower isn't going anywhere, you would have the time to check out the histogram and adjust exposure accordingly.

The biggest point that most responses to your question will miss, though, is the one about quality of light. The shadowed subject against a bright background is not the best way to get a solid exposure. Even if you do all the metering to perfection yourself, there's no overcoming bad light -- and in this case, a background that will be distracting regardless of what you do. If you must take this shot, techniques that improve the light, like using a reflector or flash to bring additional light to the subject (while closing the exposure to reduce ambient light) and thus reduce the dynamic range this exposure has to cover.

As for salvaging the photo you do have, I would use a selective exposure adjustments in separate layers (of the sort I describe in my latest article -- see my blog link below) to darken the subject and background by different amounts, thus seeking to emulate the lighting improvement I describe in the previous paragraph.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image

Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Google plus: http://www.gplus.to/imagesbyeduardo
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesbyeduardo/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cytokine
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to jyu, Dec 23, 2011

This is a good example of a beginner's photograph. I would have done the following starting with a good routine:

1) Check the camera is at base ISO. (here it is at 400 and you have thrown away dynamic range when you need it most, because this is a very contrasty scene.

2) Set camera to aperture priority and control the aperture to give the required depth of field (Blur), if the camera speed drops below 1/60th put it on a tripod or table etc., for perfect sharpness it should always be on a tripod (if you can be bothered).

3) Invest in a cheap Nikon AF 50mm 1.8 lens (they are so good and cheap) set the aperture to f 2.8 the camera to spot metering, then take a test shot =beautiful well exposed flower with great looking blur.

4) Try different apertures to see the effects and with this cheap lens, you have a shot that can compare with any of the top Nikon lenses. Here is an example hand held in the wind. Nikon D200 Nikon AF 50mm 1.4D

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
labe
Senior MemberPosts: 2,762Gear list
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image...paint it
In reply to jyu, Dec 23, 2011

-- hide signature --

new to technology,always learning

 labe's gear list:labe's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix IS-1 Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Sony Alpha NEX-3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ray Soares
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,064Gear list
Like?
Good post John; great pic! nt
In reply to Cytokine, Dec 23, 2011
-- hide signature --

Ray Soares

See my pictures at http://www.pbase.com/raysoares

 Ray Soares's gear list:Ray Soares's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon D4 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
winparkman
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,618
Like?
Creating quality of light
In reply to eNo, Dec 23, 2011

The LCD seldom reveals everything and while the flower might remain, the OP might have gotten on down the road. Eno, I hope you aren't becoming un-receptive of your environment. Often in a photograph like this, the photographer relies on intuition and it isn't until finishing the image that reason enters.

Quality of light, per se, is a misnomer. What creates quality is what the photographer does with the light. In this case, a strong backlight may be offset in a number of ways, including EC; certainly judicious use of fill-flash comes to mind, especially with flowers. But a rose...well, a red rose is an easy flower to mess up. But, luckily, the OP has a lot to work with and adjusting this in PP is fairly easy, especially if shot in RAW.

With some work, the OP will be able to create a desirable light quality and because it is slightly overexposed, it is easy to bring out the lovely shadows in the swirl of the petals.

I am glad you mentioned quality of light and how important it is to an image. It gives me hope you haven't completely gone over to the dark and technical side of photography. Merry Christmas, eNo.

eNo wrote:

winparkman wrote:

Sometimes you don't get another chance.

I don't know... I bet at the time he took that photo, that flower wasn't in a hurry to get to its next appointment. A quick review of the rear LCD and an equally quick -EC would have gotten it.

To the OP, the over-exposure here probably happened because the focus point fell on the reds, which the meter tried to turn into a mid-tone. Especially with reds involved, you have to take charge of the exposure and control it manually. Here I would have spot-metered on that flower and closed down my exposure by 1 stop as the first attempt. Again, since the flower isn't going anywhere, you would have the time to check out the histogram and adjust exposure accordingly.

The biggest point that most responses to your question will miss, though, is the one about quality of light. The shadowed subject against a bright background is not the best way to get a solid exposure. Even if you do all the metering to perfection yourself, there's no overcoming bad light -- and in this case, a background that will be distracting regardless of what you do. If you must take this shot, techniques that improve the light, like using a reflector or flash to bring additional light to the subject (while closing the exposure to reduce ambient light) and thus reduce the dynamic range this exposure has to cover.

As for salvaging the photo you do have, I would use a selective exposure adjustments in separate layers (of the sort I describe in my latest article -- see my blog link below) to darken the subject and background by different amounts, thus seeking to emulate the lighting improvement I describe in the previous paragraph.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image

Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Google plus: http://www.gplus.to/imagesbyeduardo
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesbyeduardo/

-- hide signature --

OK, not so purely a hobby.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jyu
jyu
Forum MemberPosts: 86
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to jyu, Dec 23, 2011

Ha ha. You guys are all very helpful. When I took this shot, it was on a cloudy day. Digital photography was still a new concept to me. Before the trip, I took an advise from someone from the Internet to use spot metering all the time. Therefore - now I know - all the photos from the same trip were over exposed. I did look at the LCD after the shot, but thought it might be because of the weather that the rose didn't look good enough. I do own a SB-700 now. But on that trip, the built-in pop-up flash was all I got. I wouldn't think it could help either.

But guys, thanks for all your advices. I will try using the flash to help taking flower pictures from now on, along with under exposing a bit and narrower depth of field - now that I also own a better lens at f2.8, and learn to play with the adjustments in PP. Photoshop is still intimidating to me though.
--
jyu ( http://jensonyu.wordpress.com )

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
eNo
eNo
Forum ProPosts: 11,732
Like?
Re: Creating quality of light
In reply to winparkman, Dec 23, 2011

winparkman wrote:

The LCD seldom reveals everything and while the flower might remain, the OP might have gotten on down the road. Eno, I hope you aren't becoming un-receptive of your environment. Often in a photograph like this, the photographer relies on intuition and it isn't until finishing the image that reason enters.

The histogram? Only takes a second and does nothing to destroy reliance on intuition.

Quality of light, per se, is a misnomer. What creates quality is what the photographer does with the light.

I disagree in part. In many circumstances you have the character, direction and color of light that you have, and there's very little the photographer can do except to notice it, frame the best photo he can for the subject bathed in that light and release the shutter. If you're talking about the portion of that sentence after "except" we agree. If you're implying that the photographer can in every instance mold the light to his vision, there are cases where that can be true and there are others (standing on the edge of a cliff overlooking some natural wonder) where choices are limited to none. It's very hard to place a reflector or add some fill flash for a rock face 5 miles away. OTOH, a ND grad filter (essentially a selective light subtractor) can balance a bright sky over that rock face so that the exposure can handle and adequately capture a smaller dynamic range.

With some work, the OP will be able to create a desirable light quality and because it is slightly overexposed, it is easy to bring out the lovely shadows in the swirl of the petals.

In this case, yes, we agree. As I noted, a flash (off-camera would create better quality by improving the direction of light) would help balance the exposure. A reflector might improve things as well, and do so more naturally (though less brightly) by re-directing available, matching ambient light.

I am glad you mentioned quality of light and how important it is to an image. It gives me hope you haven't completely gone over to the dark and technical side of photography.

Yes, I realized some time ago in my own photos that my exposures were perfect and my photos still looked terrible. Light was too harsh (or dull), came from the wrong direction to properly draw the subject, or had the wrong color. In many ways I'm still grappling with this, as it is far easier to "nail" exposure than to notice, much less harness "good light."

Merry Christmas, eNo.

Merry Christmas indeed!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image

Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Google plus: http://www.gplus.to/imagesbyeduardo
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesbyeduardo/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
larrywilson
Senior MemberPosts: 3,139
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to jyu, Dec 23, 2011

Don't worry too much about post processing yet. Learn your camera and practice getting the capture much, much closer to the proper exposure and depth of field that you want. Check the histrogram for the proper exposure on your camera after capture, then make adjustment to make a better exposure. Don't clip the histrogram on the right side or photo will be overexposed too much. Its really hard to salvage a bad capture, much easier to get it right at capture. I would recommend shooting in RAW or RAW+JPG. Raw files have much more latitude to modify an image in post processing.

Larry

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cytokine
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: What would you do with this image
In reply to jyu, Dec 23, 2011

jyu wrote:

I'd like to know what you would do to make this image pop, or in your creative mind, how you would like to change to make it more interesting. Feel free to download, make modification and upload your copy.

One of the reasons I like the D200 is because the colours I see are the colours I get and while it does not have video and fold out screens, it has has near state of the art IQ at 100 (base) ISO.

All of the controls are to hand and the fill flash in common with all Nikons is second to none.

JYU's original posted copy looks over saturated, my copy looks a little flat who knows? And some people don't care, but having always been amazed by nature I like to record what she intended us to see

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads