Retouching Foveon Images [IMG]

I recently had a friend of mine ask about the files the Foveon sensor produces and whether the lack of an AA filter makes re-touching a more difficult process. I do a lot of professional re-touch work so I have worked with files from just about every modern pro digital camera plus a lot of scanned films. I no longer have any Sigma cameras so I just downloaded one of Carl's RAW packs so I could give him a quick demonstration of what is possible. Carl I hope you don't mind!

I downloaded SPP4 for mac to do the conversions, I have to say I like the way it handles the X3F files more than previous versions for color images, B&W I am still on the fence about. The edits were made in PSCS5, I was on my friend's computer so I cannot vouch that it was color calibrated. I feel that the images that the Foveon sensor produces have a LOT of room to work with in terms of retouch. There is a lot more head room in DR and good pixel detail in the files than a lot of far more expensive professional cameras. I do feel that there are still too few pixels to work with from the current Foveon chip, hopefully that will change in the future!

Anyway here are just two quick samples I made using Carl's photos. Hopefully it will help others get a feel for how much the files can be manipulated without losing the integrity of the image's quality. The original image with no edits from the RAW capture is on the left, it is straight out of SPP4 as a 16 bit TIFF with no adjustments made on the sliders. On the right is the edited 16 bit TIFF file. The images were converted to Jpeg in PSCS5 and saved in sRGB for web.

Click to view larger.









PS. Be sure to check out the SPP4 editing videos that Carl has up on his site, they are excellent as always!

Whoops, that should be "Foveon Images." Typo in title.

Sorry, but i´m really shocked!

Sigmauser01 said:

Whoops, that should be "Foveon Images." Typo in title.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, that is not even a joke, that is really awful!

What do You want?

Please ask guzzibreva1,
whether he gives You the raw to re-touche this one:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1027&thread=36191711

I doubt, that the .jpg will do for You...

--
Uli

Please explain. All I see in the link is a blurry mess.

Sigmauser01 said:

Please explain.

Click to expand...

I am for example completely lost as to what do you want to show us ? do you think people are idiots completely uncapable to load some .X3F into for example SilkyPix and then run it through couple dozen of tastes available ? and then run raw converter output through for example miriads of plugins ? this is 2x2 = 4 ... are you trying to show that there are options available besides "auto" in SPP ?

--

I don't follow you either. What are you trying to say? If you think this was done with a simple consumer plug-in you might be the idiot of which you speak. There is a lot of good information to work with in a Foveon RAW file, especially if you are retouching it. That is all.

Sigmauser01 said:

I recently had a friend of mine ask about the files the Foveon sensor produces and whether the lack of an AA filter makes re-touching a more difficult process. I do a lot of professional re-touch work so I have worked with files from just about every modern pro digital camera plus a lot of scanned films. I no longer have any Sigma cameras so I just downloaded one of Carl's RAW packs so I could give him a quick demonstration of what is possible. Carl I hope you don't mind!

I downloaded SPP4 for mac to do the conversions, I have to say I like the way it handles the X3F files more than previous versions for color images, B&W I am still on the fence about. The edits were made in PSCS5, I was on my friend's computer so I cannot vouch that it was color calibrated. I feel that the images that the Foveon sensor produces have a LOT of room to work with in terms of retouch. There is a lot more head room in DR and good pixel detail in the files than a lot of far more expensive professional cameras. I do feel that there are still too few pixels to work with from the current Foveon chip, hopefully that will change in the future!

Anyway here are just two quick samples I made using Carl's photos. Hopefully it will help others get a feel for how much the files can be manipulated without losing the integrity of the image's quality. The original image with no edits from the RAW capture is on the left, it is straight out of SPP4 as a 16 bit TIFF with no adjustments made on the sliders. On the right is the edited 16 bit TIFF file. The images were converted to Jpeg in PSCS5 and saved in sRGB for web.

Click to expand...

I think these look great. Perhaps a bit more "developed" than I would prefer personally, but I can see that they have that "classic" look that so many Canon and Nikon shooters seem to love. Good to see that our cameras can compare to the "big guys."

-Scott

--
http://www.lightriverphoto.com
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/scottalangreiff/popular-interesting/

You managed to lose all the fine details of the original RAWs (look at the cheeks and eyes of the woman in the first picture, for example) and your colours are way off.

If you want to prove that you can retouch Sigma RAWs, so that the results look like they came from a cheap P&S, then you have succeeded.

Thanks Scott, I always enjoy your photos.

Keep drinking that Haterade. Great job.

For everyone missing the point of the post:

I was simply making the statement that the Foveon RAW files have a lot of great information in them for re-touchers to use. Nothing more, nothing less. The post has nothing to do with the style that these images were (very quickly) edited in. I can see it went way over your heads. I hope your arms are long.

Furthermore:

I am not anyone's therapist. What’s with all the hate? Do you guys just really love negativity? You seem to really enjoy projecting your insecurities on other people for no inexplicable reason. You need to deal with your issues on your own time, not take up other people’s time by posting them on the internet. Stop being so selfish.

Thanks for the wise words.

I liked the retouches. I think there is easily a lot of disgruntled forum users willing to take their own frustrations out on others so I wouldn't be worried about that (I've done it myself after a bad week once). Otherwise, I would say there are a lot of purists among foveon users who might not be so keen on artistic license (that's my opinion, take it as you will). As for clients, Well, I work in TV and I have seen many Promo posters with this effect (some call it the painted or dramatic look) and their are always a host of marketing and promo producers craving it
--
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaeming/
Which of my photographs is my favorite? The one I'm
going to take tomorrow.

• Imogen Cunningham

I thought You would explain.

My critique:

I don´t see any speciality related to Foveon- images.

...no special contrast - in and around different (color-) details

...no special sharpness - even at this size

...no extra wide dynamic range

...no special colors!

...not even the noise like in the link.

-

So, I´m asking You:

Where do You see the FOVEON related characteristic in those pictures?

...maybe I missed one?

I just want to know, why You presented them as a special example for FOVEON (.X3F)!

But maybe other upset people can tell...
...or anyone who is reading and watching!

If the .X3F would be free available, I could look at them in full size and full detail, but in this size I see no chance to judge over the efford You made, or the possibilitys the .X3F has for the user.

Any way, there are nice and interesting people on those pictures, but this has nothing to do with .X3F!

I hope You understand now, why i´m so irritated, especially because of Your second post, which exactly describes, what I honestly thought.

So I suggested, that You really made a joke with this, but the reaction of You and others show´s me, that there really isn´t much to laugh at, exept that I was maybe right, that it wasn´t a joke.

Sigmauser01 said:

Please explain. All I see in the link is a blurry mess.

Click to expand...

--
Uli

Sigmauser01 said:

What’s with all the hate?

Click to expand...

look, you want to show some postprocessing - take a look at ol'wizard ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/olwizard/ ) ... otherwise spare the bandwidth.

--

i think you're dev'd photos have atmosphere. and i bet they'd make great prints.

as for the Haterade guzzlers, geez? it's just embarrassing and sad that people even think that, and sadder still that they think it's okay to post it.

as for negative comments about sharpness or details in shadow or anything else that screams of looking at 100% pixels, instead of prints at a normal viewing distance... people who say that are normally stuck. they can't get their photos to improve, because their vision is still stuck on the pixels, not the art.

for them, Buzz Lightyear said it best - "You're a sad strange little man, and you have my pity!"

Kye,

without beeing involved in haterades (like others here...)
...I got better things to do (just like others)...

This theme has obviously an "unlucky" name for the shown examples - nothing more!

It is about retouching FOVEON images, so I guess, one would expect pictures, that show the special FOVEON qualities and a retouching for obtaining an even better FOVEON look.

And as we could read here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1027&thread=36109999

and here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1027&thread=36148095

The main difference between FOVEON and the others is what happens on pixel level - what else could it be?

It is a tool with this special functionality.

According to the title of the thread, I would expect some sort of CONNECTION to the contend, if it isn´t meant as a joke.

Sorry, that I have (just like others) not the humor or knowledge to understand this one...

Maybe we should look at it, as if it is only about retouching, but in my opinion, the thread starter simply has to often and to direct pointed to FOVEON and it´s special abilities:

"I recently had a friend of mine ask about the files the Foveon sensor produces and whether the lack of an AA filter makes re-touching a more difficult process. "

"I feel that the images that the Foveon sensor produces have a LOT of room to work with in terms of retouch. There is a lot more head room in DR and good pixel detail in the files than a lot of far more expensive professional cameras. I do feel that there are still too few pixels to work with from the current Foveon chip , hopefully that will change in the future!"

Sorry, that I´m not able to interpret this one in Your way - that would really make the thing less time consuming - but in my opinion really boring and misleading.

Cheers!

--
Uli

Uli: Why do you insist on Shouting at us in Bold . It's very annoying and unnecessary.

Usee said:

Kye,

without beeing involved in haterades (like others here...)
...I got better things to do (just like others)...

This theme has obviously an "unlucky" name for the shown examples - nothing more!

It is about retouching FOVEON images, so I guess, one would expect pictures, that show the special FOVEON qualities and a retouching for obtaining an even better FOVEON look.

Click to expand...

--
Regards,

Vitée

Capture all the light and colour!



http://www.pbase.com/vitee/galleries

Thank You for giving this hint!

I didn´t meant to shout at You, but to make it more easy for the quick reader to see what may be interesting points for understanding the whole writing (please remember, English is not my main language), I put some things in bold letters (I like it, when a text is differentiated in this way, so I thought others like it too - and I know some who does).

I hope that not everyone meant that I was shouting, but You can surely tell me, who is "us" ?

Maybe You recognized when I´m quoting someone, that I´m also put the main point in bold letters - and how could I force the quoted one to shout his own writing?
(...just like I did it now with "us" in Your writing)

Anyway, I hope we now understand eachother better, but I think, I´ll keep this habit and put the "directions for reading my writings" in my signature.

Again, thank You for this hint!

SigmaChrome said:

Uli: Why do you insist on Shouting at us in Bold . It's very annoying and unnecessary.

Usee said:

Kye,

without beeing involved in haterades (like others here...)
...I got better things to do (just like others)...

This theme has obviously an "unlucky" name for the shown examples - nothing more!

It is about retouching FOVEON images, so I guess, one would expect pictures, that show the special FOVEON qualities and a retouching for obtaining an even better FOVEON look.

Click to expand...

--
Regards,

Vitée

Capture all the light and colour!



http://www.pbase.com/vitee/galleries

Click to expand...

--
Uli

Usee said:

But maybe other upset people can tell...
...or anyone who is reading and watching!

Click to expand...

For the life of me I cannot understand this comment in the longer response. What on earth is there to be upset about?!?!?!?!?!?!?

The subject of the thread is straightforward. The opening sentence explains it all.

"I recently had a friend of mine ask about the files the Foveon sensor produces and whether the lack of an AA filter makes re-touching a more difficult process. "

He answered the question his friend asked through narrative and two examples. Retouching Foveon images (in RAW form) where there is no AA filter is NOT more difficult. That's pretty simple.

What's to be upset about??????????????????????????

Best Regards,

BT