Reading mode: Light Dark

Okay, here's what I'm asking for (politely of course) RE: E-3

Go to last post
I like your photos. You don't seem to have any focusing problems or problems with the colors. But, they were taken in full sunlight on a clear day. I imagine that there are E-3 flaws, but none are apparent in most of the photos I have seen.

--
Olympus E510, 40-150, 50-200
c-50,
Canon Elan 7, 40D, 28-90, 100-300, 50 f/1.8, sigma 10-20
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75673106@N00/
 
Hey look guys...I'm wanting to be there and it's great seeing the regulars chime in with some nice examples, and good samples I'm seeing. Julie - as always, I find your shots awesome, and that car shot was really rich. Of course it goes without saying that Jono is a legend around here.

Now all of you know after being exposed to me after all these years, that I usually can't help myself. I look for certain things in the beginning, but then eventually I succumb.

Keep posting these because many of us are watching. You guys are the pioneers with this E-3.
--



 
Louis_Dobson said:
2) Most people don't want over-saturation. They LIKE boring, grey,
palid scenes. That's what they call "natural" (ie looks like it was
taken with the technically limited cameras they grew up with).
Click to expand...
I'll enjoy a properly exposed photo by a -competent- photographer who understands light, shutter and aperture over a dime-store, over-saturated ill-thought Photoshopped tourist photo any day. I believe that's what people want, as that's what I see hanging in people's houses. I must be right, as that's what I see selling best, at least where I sell my photography.

And as for technically limited cameras, that's total BS as well. Face it, you're doing your over-saturation, which you like so well, in Photoshop. Hell, Louis, you don't need a $4,500 D3, you could pull off the same stunt with a D50 or an E-500 (which you have unless you lost it at sea while sliding off a cliff) and whatever version of Photoshop currently resides on your Win2K computer.

Bottom line: there are photographers who understand the dynamics and science of photography, and there are those who enjoy Photoshop, 37 adjustment layers and the saturation (instant gratification) slider, at which point it then ceases to be photography, and also at which time it becomes fodder for the ten cent postcard enthusiasts to enjoy looking at (but mostly not buying) while shopping for sunglasses, Coppertone and limes at an ABC store in Lahaina.

--
Regards,
Steve
 
Louis_Dobson said:
2) Most people don't want over-saturation. They LIKE boring, grey,
palid scenes. That's what they call "natural" (ie looks like it was
taken with the technically limited cameras they grew up with).
Click to expand...
Most people DO want over saturation and the cartoonish images returned by quantity-cams of every make (to include the E-510 at default settings) attest to that fact. OVER saturated and UN-natural sells. On the other hand many of us simply want some freakin accuracy out of our output. And that's a far cry from generally liking output that's pallid, grey and boring (which MOST people do not).

Any notion or claim that the E-3 is somehow lacking or suffers a shortcoming because the camera generally returns accurate colors and tones (as opposed to "pleasing" colors and tones) is complete hogwash. Over saturated eye candy is easily obtained in the menus or development sliders.

Regards,
Oly

--



http://www.pbase.com/olyinaz
 
The moderators are testy lately. We don’t want every thread in here frozen, do we?
(c:)

--
Stay Well,
Pete K.
 
I went to the LA Auto Show also and have a picture of the Porsche GT2 taken with the E-510 almost exactly from the same angle as the shot by Torsten. You'll have to check out Torsten's site to see his version. http://www.misterfrag.com/LAAutoShow/

Olympus E-510



Now if you were to evaluate colors based on these two pictures alone, you'd probably walk away thinking the E-3 colors are muddy or brownish as some have stated. But the only difference probably is that I've taken the time to get the WB correct. So be careful comparing colors when the shot and development parameters aren't controlled. These quick snap decisions on a camera's capabilities (or lack thereof) are funny. I am sure the E-3 s a fine camera and look forward to the day I am able to purchase one.

George
 
Hi Oly

and maybe I was a little cheeky to Ben in posting those shots (sorry Ben) in that I increased the saturation a great deal more than I normally would have done.

I want my cameras to produce colours which I perceive to be accurate - and I usually leave them that way, but not always!

The great beauty of the E1 was that you really didn't need to worry about what the camera was doing with colour - it got it 'right', my feeling is that the E3 is doing the same thing, I have never felt this with any other brand of camera, where colour has always been an issue one way or another.

For me it's always evening light which is the big test, I won't name brands, but with some cameras it always ended up being a kind of muddy yellow - nothing seemed to fix it.

My limited experience of the E3 tells me that the colour can be 'trusted' just like the E1 (even if the WB can't always!)

kind regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
 
Posted some shots in that direction:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=25712689

Jono then posts several shots taht you may like but you don't quite tell him if it's ok or not. What gives?

I haven't really have had any time pretty much to make photographs, but I am in San Diego right now, hopefully Ill be able to take some photos tomorrow.

There are some tree scenes around here, Ill try that.

--
Raist3d (Photog. Student & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
 
refering to the whole process - film, camera, darkroom technique, paper. Admitedly the camera is a very minor part - indeed in the film world it makes no difference at all.

If you try and use the saturation slider for instant gratification the colours just blow - it takes some skill and effort to get the saturation and contrast out while keeping detail.

And, for me, those carefully exposed low saturation shots are not what I see in the real world. They are just what we have become used to seeing from a camera.

What interests me is the degree of variation in the way humans actually see. The eye itself is pretty basic, and the picture is constructed in the brain, as you well know. We are aware of both a scanned view, and the small area we are directly looking at, at the time.

I have tried a small experiment on this before - producing three shots with various degrees (including 0) of DR and saturation enhancement, showing them to people at the site, and seeing what they said. Quite interesting results, that produces...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
Amen to all you said.

Photography is about the capture of light, not about digital painting (however superb that can be as an art form in its own right).

--
Raist3d (Photog. Student & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
 
Ben Herrmann said:
Hey look guys...I'm wanting to be there and it's great seeing the
regulars chime in with some nice examples, and good samples I'm
seeing. Julie - as always, I find your shots awesome, and that car
shot was really rich. Of course it goes without saying that Jono is
a legend around here.

Now all of you know after being exposed to me after all these years,
that I usually can't help myself. I look for certain things in the
beginning, but then eventually I succumb.

Keep posting these because many of us are watching. You guys are the
pioneers with this E-3.
Click to expand...
Pioneers in what? I don't see how being an early adopter of a photographic tool makes anyone a pioneer in anything honestly.... at least not in photography, for sure.
Ben Herrmann said:
--



Click to expand...
--
Raist3d (Photog. Student & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
 
I picked up an E-3 12-60 kit from LCE in Winchester late afternoon yesterday. I took along a CF card and a charged battery, plonked them in the camera at the shop counter, put the strap on and got them to put the boxes in a carrier bag for me. There was only about half an hour of daylight left, so I had a quick walk around the Cathedral Square.

All these images are taken with literally the “out the box” settings, no time to figure out how to change anything as the light was going fast, so real point and shoot stuff :-)

Some slight cropping on a couple, but everything else is default-out-the-camera jpg in the order I shot them - of course, I'm not going to show you the really duff ones!

Colin







 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top