Some RF 16 snowy landscapes

bigshledge wrote:

I mean it should be obvious, don't go overboard with such sliders if they're going to bring in very obvious haloing like that. Just makes things look overly cooked.

Testing it myself, the effect doesn't really kick in unless you wack it beyond 25. I personally wouldn't touch it IMO.

That makes sense. My current default preset has it at 15, which is what I backed it off to for the reprocessed version. The first one I posted was at 45. I've reprocessed all of them with microcontrast at 15.

For now I am relying on DxO PL4 to help me with Lens corrections.

For noise reduction I try and see what DeepPrime does but 50% of the times I simply don't even use PL4 noise reduction.

Produce a TIFF from PL4 and apply Noise Reduction (and if needed AI Sharpening) using Topaz tools.

The above produces very pleasing results when pictures of family/people are involved.

Have not been able to take many landscapes of late but I do use PL4 DeepPrime NR and also ClearView setting in case of landscapes only. ClearView actually takes care of micro contrast and tonality much better than sliding around micro contrast manually.

For context in PL4 this is the tool layout...

Can dig out some samples later in the evening...

cocoanud wrote:

For now I am relying on DxO PL4 to help me with Lens corrections.

For noise reduction I try and see what DeepPrime does but 50% of the times I simply don't even use PL4 noise reduction.

Produce a TIFF from PL4 and apply Noise Reduction (and if needed AI Sharpening) using Topaz tools.

The above produces very pleasing results when pictures of family/people are involved.

Have not been able to take many landscapes of late but I do use PL4 DeepPrime NR and also ClearView setting in case of landscapes only. ClearView actually takes care of micro contrast and tonality much better than sliding around micro contrast manually.

Good idea. I have Clearview set at a pretty low level (20) by default, but perhaps I should use a higher level of that for landscapes. I've been treating it like dehaze in Lightroom, and only bumping it up when the image is a bit hazy to start with.

For context in PL4 this is the tool layout...

Can dig out some samples later in the evening...

Alastair Norcross wrote:

SteveinLouisville wrote:

I really like the RF 16mm the more I use it. It is essentially weightless, and the photos are excellent. I use it mostly for landscapes, as is pretty common, but it can produce some interesting interior shots of a room. One I shot the other day, mostly to check out how well my Neewer flash worked with the RP and this lens. Flash bounced off the ceiling, diffuser panel was used on the flash head. The usual adjust to taste in Lightroom.

Nice shot. The Hello Fresh box and plastic pet/child barrier are wonderfully anachronistic in a room that seems to be otherwise right out of the 50's, or even earlier.

I am told the lady of the house has a "Wes Anderson" vibe to her interior decorating. I assume this means quirky.

Kameratrollet wrote:

cocoanud wrote:

For now I am relying on DxO PL4 to help me with Lens corrections.

Which one would you rather use if you had a lens correction profile?

I think I was careless typing that. What I meant to say was that as of late my most common use of DxO PL4 is to use Lens Corrections only.

(Although, I am noticing with RF 100-400, I might prefer to just keep Vignetting but not use Distortion Correction... but that is not conclusive)

For Noise Reduction I am leaning in favour of Topaz DeNoise. I do see what DeepPrime is producing but like the output from Topaz more (taking pictures of family/people more)

If it is purely a landscape image then I tend to stay within DxO PL4, use DeepPrime and most likely use ClearView.

(Of course different people will prefer different things so do try and see what works in your case. All this matters a lot more in the context of RF 16mm because DxO PL4 can extract a much wider image i.e. ~14mm instead of 16mm)

HTH,

Prompted by complaints about halos in some of the images, I decided to reprocess them with a lower microcontrast setting. Microcontrast is Photolab;s equivalent of Lightroom's clarity. I think it's basically mid-tone contrast. On my default preset I have it set to a fairly small amount: 15. But for these I bumped it up to 45. It did result in the appearance of sharpening halos around the tree branches against the sky. I didn't apply any unsharp mask sharpening, but just stuck with what DXO does in its lens corrections. Anyway, here they are with the lower microcontrast setting. I think they do look better (thank you to the posters for prompting me to do this), but something like this can be pretty subjective, so others might prefer the original versions:

SteveinLouisville wrote:

SteveinLouisville wrote:

I am told the lady of the house has a "Wes Anderson" vibe to her interior decorating. I assume this means quirky.

Nice drapes! Looks like Buck Rogers era?