Post processing products and techniques - Part 10 (JPEG and raw)

[edhume]

I have put a pdf here in the tutorial folder. I decided to tackle one of the areas I have found most puzzling with SP7Pro. Hope you find it interesting/useful.

 

[gardenersassistant]

I have put a pdf here in the tutorial folder. I decided to tackle one of the areas I have found most puzzling with SP7Pro. Hope you find it interesting/useful.

 

[gardenersassistant]

I have put a pdf here in the tutorial folder. I decided to tackle one of the areas I have found most puzzling with SP7Pro. Hope you find it interesting/useful.

 

[spike29]

I have put a pdf here in the tutorial folder. I decided to tackle one of the areas I have found most puzzling with SP7Pro. Hope you find it interesting/useful.

--
Nick
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gardenersassistant/collections/
GardenersAssistant Photography Videos - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBgEwRDfiQMYTPORSzDxvw
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...-dslr-primes-a-journey-of-exploration.531050/

Nice one Nick! i like it!

may i add some things? (i bin playing a lot with this sliders to grasp there adjusting capabilities.)

I found this very useful in using the dodge/burn slider as a level correction tool:

Highlight recovery in your PDF: in the color burn slider and color burn/hdr you can alter the correction strength by using the chapter 4.9. Highlight Controller tool.

by altering : Emphasis on Chroma/Luminance,Emphasis on Saturation/Hue, Luminance restoration.Dynamic range expantion.

Mostly by shifting chroma and saturation to the left. (0) and lowering luminace restoration.. You can get some (extra) more hightlight recovery out of the slider.

(it is pre or post adjustable when using burn)

I shall add an example of this. I didn't think I had a good example but motivated by your reminder here I have been looking at it again this evening. I think I understand it better now and it looks good. (In fact I have been doing some comparisons tonight and I think I may be switching from DXO + Lightroom to DXO + SP7 for my invertebrates. I haven't checked out flowers yet but my hunch is that it will be just as valid for flowers.)

I have the impression from tonight's experiments that getting better colour recovery from "move chroma, saturation and luminance restoration to the left" works for burn and burn/dodge but not for the HDR versions. It looks like the HDR versions give deeper shadow recovery but don't provide the colour restoration in highlight recovery. You might want to check this out to confirm (or unconfirm) this hypothesis. (I've only done 3 or 4 examples so far.)

I will test some i think your right, the HDR is more general lifting shadows.

And to check if bright area is still recoverable you can use the eyedropper (Exposure Bias Tool (F2) on that bright area.(if giving error like invalid exposure point the area is to bleeched and lost texture for fully recovering without disturbing something else.)

I don't think it is as straightforward as that. I found that ANAYV's waterfall has plenty of areas that give that error message but are in fact recoverable.

correct, it is not a 100% yes / no, more a indication of the brightness/texture.

i think when there is no texture in the bright part it can't find a exposure balance. so when lowering the exposure until texture visible the eyedropper will work afterall.

if changed exposure this is the deepest exposure degree (-ev) in this picture

Don't follow this. Can you explain more?

If you "auto exposure" on the brightest part/area of the image it is lowering the EV to the point that that point is exposed properly (the rest will be underexposed/dark) So in my use is this the maximum -EV in side this image for exposure adjustment in High dynamic range images.

then use the auto exposure eye drop on a main object or use the autoexposure button to establish a more balanced EV correction. (This give you some EV points)

And after that still go manual (i do often auto exposure or eye dropper and adjust manualy from that point wile using dodging/burning.

So i use it more as a rough adjustment before starting to tune.

(sometime just dodging to lift shadow is enough, or you can just "undo" and use Auto Exposure Value button to get the average exposure value adjustment of the hole image. That can be your starting point wile using colorburn/dodging HDR. Because somewhere in between those two exposure-point's is the sweetspot. (it is not 100% but i find most of the time a starting point by using exposure eyedrop and auto and undo and slide manually the ev somewhere between those two points before using dodge/burn/HDR)

I'm not keen on exposure bias eyedropper or auto exposure bias. They both seem to have too much of a random element for my taste. I prefer to work with the sliders and work with a combination of what I can see, what the histogram shows, and what the over/under-exposure warnings show (I've got the thresholds for the warnings set really tight,99% for highlights and 1% for shadows,

(that is a good tip, i will adjust in my sp7pro.)

so they only show up really close to the edge of complete over/under-exposure. I don't find it helpful to have warnings further out).

And second:

Fine color controller has some presets: sky blue enhancement or green enhancement, sunset those are nice to do a quick correction or give a starting point.

Again, I'm not keen on presets. I prefer to use my eye while making adjustments to judge what I like the look of.

The Sky blue enhancement is working nicely imho.

at last: the Tone Curve adjustment:

(this one is a bit tricky: im not totaly (understatement) comfortable with this tool, but sometimes i get more out of this than the burn/dodge sliders by S-ing its line.

I haven't found any use for the Tone curve yet. I used to use it in CS2 several years ago but I haven't found much use for it since then. I do try it occasionally but it is a last resort. It seems very easy (for me at least) to make an image look silly using a tone curve.

i added this only because exposure can be adjusted in this way but yes i can't control it either in a way it makes sense.. :-D

ive i have the time i try to ad some examples this evening.

--
Nick
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gardenersassistant/collections/
GardenersAssistant Photography Videos - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBgEwRDfiQMYTPORSzDxvw
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...-dslr-primes-a-journey-of-exploration.531050/

 

[Mikedigi]

I have put a pdf here in the tutorial folder. I decided to tackle one of the areas I have found most puzzling with SP7Pro. Hope you find it interesting/useful.

Well done Nick. I am sure that other targeted tutorials (from others too) will follow.

Mike

 

[gardenersassistant]

I have put a pdf here in the tutorial folder. I decided to tackle one of the areas I have found most puzzling with SP7Pro. Hope you find it interesting/useful.

 

[DutchMate]

Spike look at the example (encircled the wrong eyedropper!)





Before you add the colour-saturation adjustment layer doubleclick your backgroundlayer named 1 and rename it. Then the lock at the right of this layer disappears. When working with multiple layers the backgroundlayer has to be unlocked.

When you applied fe magenta from the box and after desaturating you click ok the box disappears. Then double click the left figure in the toplayer again: 2. Now the box reappears again and you can pick another colour fe green from the dropdownbox above the three sliders. (you only have to work with the middle slider for desaturation).

So you dont have to mess with multiple layers for different colourcastremoval.

However after this process and merging layers i sometimes close inspecting the image find other areas which i overlooked so i have to add another layer.

After all this sometimes i add a little extra saturation to the whole image or apply colourtone filter or splittone filter.

Cheers

 

[DutchMate]

I agree about sky replacement. Mostly you end up with either to bright foreground or to dark skies. And with trees they look like stickered on masking feathering the edges help sometimes but bothersome tedious process and mostly your still left with unsatisfactory artificial outcome.

cheers

 

[spike29]

knip...

I will test some i think your right, the HDR is more general lifting shadows.

Please let us know what your tests show. It would be good to get some confirmation (or not).

ive did some manual reading: sp5 Dodge worked like sp7 Dodge/colorburn ,when i used sp5pro i did normaly this : sp5 HDR was used for lifting shadow, did lower ev first and raise shadow with HDR to recover highlight (the bright parts where less touched(brought down). The Dodge slider was more lowering the brightparts wile the shadows where less touched /(lifted) . (shrinking dynamic range of the image so to speak).

And now in sp7 they split this two sliders in:

- HDR (low uplift and high brought down keep the middle the same.)

- Color burn: bright/high brought down, leave dark/shadow alone.

- Dodge: only lift up shadows. leave more or less the bright parts alone

What is not making sense: the manual has word for word the same explanation for "Dodge" and "Dodge HDR" and also for "Color burn" and "Color burn HDR".

And if HDR adjust bright ánd dark at the same time then i suppose that DodgeHDR is more leaning towards lifting shadows and do less with bright parts but shrink a bit the image DR and Colorburn HDR is more aming to lowering bright parts wile lift shadow a little.

knip....

Actually I've just changed mine to 100% and 0% to see how that works out. I've just tried it on a couple of examples and it seems to work well for my way of working.

interesting.

so they only show up really close to the edge of complete over/under-exposure. I don't find it helpful to have warnings further out).

And second:

Fine color controller has some presets: sky blue enhancement or green enhancement, sunset those are nice to do a quick correction or give a starting point.

Again, I'm not keen on presets. I prefer to use my eye while making adjustments to judge what I like the look of.

The Sky blue enhancement is working nicely imho.

He he. Our mileages differ.

do i run ahead or bin i being lapped?

at last: the Tone Curve adjustment:

(this one is a bit tricky: im not totaly (understatement) comfortable with this tool, but sometimes i get more out of this than the burn/dodge sliders by S-ing its line.

I haven't found any use for the Tone curve yet. I used to use it in CS2 several years ago but I haven't found much use for it since then. I do try it occasionally but it is a last resort. It seems very easy (for me at least) to make an image look silly using a tone curve.

i added this only because exposure can be adjusted in this way but yes i can't control it either in a way it makes sense.. :-D

Yes. I think I won't mention it. I'm trying to keep to the most useful stuff. Although naturally enough there are differences of opinion as to which stuff is actually (most) useful.

:-D

ive i have the time i try to ad some examples this evening.

Is that for the Tone curve, or on other things? I wouldn't have thought it worth spending time on the Tone curve, but perhaps you'll prove me wrong on that.

--
Nick
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gardenersassistant/collections/
GardenersAssistant Photography Videos - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBgEwRDfiQMYTPORSzDxvw
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...-dslr-primes-a-journey-of-exploration.531050/

hmm, tempting...... But no, first master other things first. Aberration, fine color adjustment (blue sky?), clarity/ defogging/ dehazeing. Sharpening/denoising balance.

(Which preset does what? for now normal Sharpening is my favourit over natural sharpening.)

 

[gardenersassistant]

ive did some manual reading: sp5 Dodge worked like sp7 Dodge/colorburn ,when i used sp5pro i did normaly this : sp5 HDR was used for lifting shadow, did lower ev first and raise shadow with HDR to recover highlight (the bright parts where less touched(brought down). The Dodge slider was more lowering the brightparts wile the shadows where less touched /(lifted) . (shrinking dynamic range of the image so to speak).

And now in sp7 they split this two sliders in:

- HDR (low uplift and high brought down keep the middle the same.)

- Color burn: bright/high brought down, leave dark/shadow alone.

- Dodge: only lift up shadows. leave more or less the bright parts alone

What is not making sense: the manual has word for word the same explanation for "Dodge" and "Dodge HDR" and also for "Color burn" and "Color burn HDR".

Yes, that is very unhelpful.

And if HDR adjust bright ánd dark at the same time then i suppose that DodgeHDR is more leaning towards lifting shadows and do less with bright parts but shrink a bit the image DR

and Colorburn HDR is more aming to lowering bright parts wile lift shadow a little.

Not sure. I get the impression that all three HDR options have a much large effect in terms of brightness than the equivalent non-HDR options. However, I think the colour recovery has more impact with non-HDR ColorBurn (and perhaps none with ColorBurn HDR).

I have been noticing halos sometimes with the HDR options. Not narrow halos like you get with over-sharpening, but very broad ones that are quite diffuse. Not obvious, but looking bad once you notice them.

knip....

Actually I've just changed mine to 100% and 0% to see how that works out. I've just tried it on a couple of examples and it seems to work well for my way of working.

interesting.

so they only show up really close to the edge of complete over/under-exposure. I don't find it helpful to have warnings further out).

And second:

Fine color controller has some presets: sky blue enhancement or green enhancement, sunset those are nice to do a quick correction or give a starting point.

Again, I'm not keen on presets. I prefer to use my eye while making adjustments to judge what I like the look of.

The Sky blue enhancement is working nicely imho.

He he. Our mileages differ.

do i run ahead or bin i being lapped?

Neither. We are on different tracks I think.

hmm, tempting...... But no, first master other things first. Aberration, fine color adjustment (blue sky?), clarity/ defogging/ dehazeing. Sharpening/denoising balance.
(Which preset does what? for now normal Sharpening is my favourit over natural sharpening.)

I'm using Natural. You need to use it at much lower levels than Normal.

I don't know if I mentioned this before, and I think I'll do a post about it quite soon, but I've been doing more comparisons today and I'm consistently getting results I prefer using DXO followed by SP7 compared to DXO followed by Lightroom, and that is for insects etc with the FZ200 and with flowers with the 70D. It's mainly to do with colours and also the raising of dim backgrounds, but Natural sharpening is (with insects etc) giving me better resolution than Lightroom sharpening. So I think I may be switching from DXO + Lightroom to DXO + SP7 for editing (I'll still use Lightroom for selecting images to work on from my big shooting sets.)

 

[Mikedigi]

. . . . . So I think I may be switching from DXO + Lightroom to DXO + SP7 for editing (I'll still use Lightroom for selecting images to work on from my big shooting sets.)

I have now bought Helicon Filter 5.6.1 and have started bumbling about in it.

I am already asking questions on the HeliconSoft Forum as "mike160304", so that will take some pressure off you . . . . .

It's a quiet place, compared with the DPR Forums. Sometimes I am the only one online to it.

I need to take a home sabbatical to learn the Pixel remote release, the Raynox DCR-150 with 52-43mm stepdown including onboard flash, RAW, Helicon Filter and hence more about the FZ200.

I shall have to apply to Upper Management if I can find the right moment. Upper Management is underwhelmed at present by the 2 weeks or so it has taken me to design and build my Mk 8 [why should Sony have all the fun?] bamboo/cardboard roll/wood/epoxy Bee Hotel, designed specifically for Leafcutter Bees.

I should get the Mk 8 screwed on the SE-facing fence today - the Mason Bees stopped nest-building a week ago, filling all my available vacated apartments, and the new Leafcutter Bees are starting to chew their way out, so the Mk 8 needs to be in position.

Unfortunately Upper Management will then be even more underwhelmed by the Leafcutter Bees cutting neat circles out of her rose leaves.

Mike

 

[Mikedigi]

I have tentatively started an ongoing thread for users of Helicon Filter, asking whether it is a good idea, and if so, where should it be.

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

Mike

 

[gardenersassistant]

. . . . . So I think I may be switching from DXO + Lightroom to DXO + SP7 for editing (I'll still use Lightroom for selecting images to work on from my big shooting sets.)

I have now bought Helicon Filter 5.6.1 and have started bumbling about in it.

I am already asking questions on the HeliconSoft Forum as "mike160304", so that will take some pressure off you . . . . .

It's a quiet place, compared with the DPR Forums. Sometimes I am the only one online to it.

That's a pity.

I need to take a home sabbatical to learn the Pixel remote release, the Raynox DCR-150 with 52-43mm stepdown including onboard flash, RAW, Helicon Filter and hence more about the FZ200.

I shall have to apply to Upper Management if I can find the right moment. Upper Management is underwhelmed at present by the 2 weeks or so it has taken me to design and build my Mk 8 [why should Sony have all the fun?] bamboo/cardboard roll/wood/epoxy Bee Hotel, designed specifically for Leafcutter Bees.

I should get the Mk 8 screwed on the SE-facing fence today - the Mason Bees stopped nest-building a week ago, filling all my available vacated apartments, and the new Leafcutter Bees are starting to chew their way out, so the Mk 8 needs to be in position.

Unfortunately Upper Management will then be even more underwhelmed by the Leafcutter Bees cutting neat circles out of her rose leaves.

LOL!

Mike

 

[gardenersassistant]

For some months now I have regarded my post processing toolkit and workflow as being pretty much settled for the subjects that I spend most time on and know best - invertebrates and flowers.

• For invertebrates, using Lightroom to do a first cut initial selection of "possibles", then a "one size fits all" DXO Optics Pro preset applied to those possibles to produce TIFF files, followed by a Lightroom preset applied to the TIFF files, and then using Lightroom to do second cut selection and image-specific adjustments to the selected images, and final selection and creation of JPEG files for viewing.
• For flowers, Lightroom for all aspects of the workflow, because DXO Optics Pro too often produced results with flowers that seemed over the top to me in terms of colours and microcontrast. (The flower images are mainly Canon 70D raw files, the invertebrate images are mainly FZ200 raw files. I don't know how much it was the camera/raw format and how much DXO and the parameters I was using with it that caused the problem.)

Recently, as I have come to understand Silkypix better, I have been doing some comparisons with Lightroom for invertebrates and flowers. Somewhat to my surprise it seemed to me that I was getting better results (as in more pleasing to my eye) using DXO Optics Pro and Silkypix than using the approach described above. There were three major differences that I noticed:

• Especially with flowers, I preferred the colour rendition. My wife has been saying for some time that my flower images are nice but overcooked in terms of colours. I think Silkypix, even after using DXO Optics Pro, is giving me gentler, more realistic colours.
• Although I have found Silkypix's handling of highlights and shadows rather difficult to come to terms with, something seems to have "clicked" and now I can get results that I can't with Lightroom. In particular, Silkypix can recover colours in highlights that I can't in Lightroom. It can't recover colours from fully blown areas (as I think PhotoNinja may be able to with some "intelligent guesswork"), but it has proved very effective with bleached areas on petals and apparently (but actually not completely) blown areas on highly reflective insects.
• With some invertebrates I seem to be able to get more/better/sharper fine detail using Silkypix sharpening compared to Lightroom sharpening. (This is in both cases after the application of DXO Optics Pro Lens softness correction and Microcontrast enhancement.)

In these comparisons I used the same "one size fits all" DXO Optics Pro preset as before, but applied it to flowers as well as invertebrates. In Silkypix I did only image-specific adjustments - I did not use an equivalent of the Lightroom preset.

I decided to see if these results would hold up with a more realistic test, dealing with a complete day's output, which was 600 raw files for the day I chose. There were a small number of 70D flower images, with most of the images being of invertebrates.

I decided to try to just use DXO Optics Pro and Silkypix and not use Lightroom at all. This was a challenge because I find Lightroom excellent for the task of selecting images, for both the first and second cut selections. However, using Lightroom for the selections would have complicated the process considerably, so I decided to do the first cut selection in DXO Optics Pro and then apply the DXO preset to produce TIFF files. I then did the second cut selection while working on the TIFF files in Silkypix.

Neither DXO Optics Pro nor Silkypix are as good as Lightroom for (the way I like to do) the selection process. However, it was workable, and it avoided some of the complications that are involved in using DXO and Lightroom (the way I use them together).

Even though I didn't use a preset in Silkypix, I did use the ability (which I also use in Lightroom) to process one image from a series of similar images and then copy selected parameters from the processing to the other images in the series. As with Lightroom, this worked well and was a great time-saver.

I ended up with 120 processed images in the final cut. There are 1300 pixel high versions of them in this album at Flickr. Some have shortcomings which I noticed only after posting them at Flickr (this is not unusual with whatever software and workflow I use), but by and large I was very pleased with the results. They seems to have gone down rather well on the Close-up and Macro forum at TalkPhotography.co.uk, which is where I do most of my image posting - this incidentally is with people who are mainly using APS-C and full frame with macro lenses rather than a small sensor bridge camera and close-up lenses like I use most of the time (for invertebrates).

It is obviously early days yet, but it seems entirely possible that Silkypix may replace Lightroom as my most used editor (along with DXO Optics Pro).

There is of course the issue of local adjustments. These are non-existent in DXO Optics Pro and limited (in function and usability) in Silkypix compared to, for example, Lightroom and Elements. I don't use a huge amount of local adjustment; for example apart from two examples of very minor cloning, I didn't do any local adjustments on the 120 processed images in the latest test run - and not because I couldn't or it would have been difficult, but because I didn't need to. This is not exceptional. What I envisage doing when I do need to do local processing that Silkypix can't handle is to output a TIFF file and finalise it in whatever software seems most appropriate.

 

[Mikedigi]

Amazing collection of bug photos. The stuff of nightmares, too.

Mike

 

[gardenersassistant]

Amazing collection of bug photos. The stuff of nightmares, too.

Thanks Mike. More like stuff of dreams for me. Alien, other-worldly. Fascinating.

Mike

 

[Mikedigi]

Amazing collection of bug photos. The stuff of nightmares, too.

Thanks Mike. More like stuff of dreams for me. Alien, other-worldly. Fascinating.

I agree. But the first thing that comes to mind when I see bug macro is the film "Alien". If it were not for all the nastiness in the real bug world, I would have found this film less believable. That was, of course, the idea. Brilliant.

Mike

 

[gardenersassistant]

Mike (Mikedigi) has purchased Helicon Filter and also now has a Raynox 150 (again) for use on his FZ200. Mike saw some images of insects and spiders I captured with the Raynox 150 on the FZ200 and posted in an album at Flickr. I used DXO Optics Pro and Silkypix to process the images. Mike wanted to know what it would be like to process images like these in Helicon Filter.

I chose 6 of the images from the album at Flickr and had a go at processing them in Helicon Filter. I captured my attempts in this video on YouTube. There are full size versions on the images as processed in this album at Flickr.

Here are versions in the 1300 pixel high format that I usually prepare for viewing on screen. The processing was quick and the results are a bit rough in places, so these should not be taken to be the best that Helicon Filter can produce, especially in the hands of someone who knows more about how to use it than I do and spends a bit more time to do the processing more carefully.

--
Nick

gardenersassistant's collections on Flickr

The safest and most inclusive global community of photography enthusiasts. The best place for inspiration, connection, and sharing!

www.flickr.com

GardenersAssistant Photography Videos - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBgEwRDfiQMYTPORSzDxvw

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/bridge-mft-achromats-dslr-primes-a-journey-of-exploration.531050/

 

[Mikedigi]

. . . . . . I chose 6 of the images from the album at Flickr and had a go at processing them in Helicon Filter. I captured my attempts in this video on YouTube. There are full size versions on the images as processed in this album at Flickr. . . . .

Thanks Nick, very good - I look forward to watching the video.

You processed RAW files from scratch, I think, not from OOC JPEGs.

Mike

 

[gardenersassistant]

. . . . . . I chose 6 of the images from the album at Flickr and had a go at processing them in Helicon Filter. I captured my attempts in this video on YouTube. There are full size versions on the images as processed in this album at Flickr. . . . .

Thanks Nick, very good - I look forward to watching the video.

You processed RAW files from scratch, I think, not from OOC JPEGs.

That's right.

I've turned off raw+JPEG now for all my cameras except the TZ60 so I didn't have OOC JPEGs for these. So I have no idea if my versions were better or worse than the OOC JPEGs. It might be a good idea to shoot raw+JPEG so you have the option of starting with either.

Mike