Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Major Fubar

Real Life Photography/Photo Editing II - NO IMAGES >100kb

Recommended Posts

my suggestion about black animals (cats, dogs)

better use point light exposure than whole

system will then light more center (dark animal details)

otherwise will be hard to see details of dark colour animal (even if background will be too bright)

dark on bright and bright on dark - always cause you have something not visible

can you put this black cat on red sofa ? or dark blue ? (also would be nice color game, black and red, black and blue) and you will see that camera will better spot exposure (light it more)

puting it to white/gray will cause animal not enough bright to see where are details

or like I said above - use RAW format, work on it in RAW editor (or your camera shot JPG only?)

in RAW many things can be fixed :)

Focus is a little soft, but I know how hard it can be to get good pictures of cats, let alone kittens.

depends also of equipment, fast focus ultrasonic lens never miss

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i hope those who have RAW format, do in RAW and than work on it :)

also good thing is level lines on screen (or focusing screen) to keep level

+1

100kb is too much work for me so I use thumbnails. The pics are all 16-23MB when they're in RAW format. In .jpg it's up to 15MB but most are about 7-10MB...

Cats are soooo nice :)

img_2356v20mm2.jpg

Random pigeon:

img_2439jmxt.jpg

Salt-mine:

img_60933mlw.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+1

100kb is too much work for me so I use thumbnails. The pics are all 16-23MB when they're in RAW format. In .jpg it's up to 15MB but most are about 7-10MB...

but you edit RAW and when effect is good than export to any size of JPG

making and editing RAW is basic thing that allows fix wrong white balance, change shadows/lights etc.

in RAW many things can be fixed oposite to JPG (when you can lose quality reworking picture)

RAW is for changin it (white balance, colours balance, exposition, shadows/darks/lights)

i think that most of photographers should be familiar with RAW format before they do JPG final or miniature

example:

before:

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/8910/img1395q.jpg

after:

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_DYyiMzuzgtY/TLdLUpqXGbI/AAAAAAAAAT4/tHExyA7CWsE/s640/IMG_1395.jpg

it is few steps easy job when file is in RAW

in RAW it is easy to correct perspective (when you not have TS-A lens) etc.

RAW is only format i use

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I think you missunderstood me. I always edit photos in RAW format. Then I convert them with highest quality wich results in rather large files. I changed a few pics to 100kb but then I thought damn it. It results in a huge loss of quality and I can save time by just posting thumbnails...

We have the same camera btw ;) I got the camera and some of his old lenses from my uncle for a bargain so it's not too bad. Still, I sometimes wich I had better lenses. Christmas is coming so who knows :bigsmile:

She's the queen of the house :D

img_2364v2rmcp.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

than maybe try set sharpness to max when you make miniature ?

i see that noise raises when sharpness is set to max, but for miniature all noise should disappear on 1000 pixels

or another advice maybe export and than set sharpness on miniature as JPG ?

or maybe you use wrong conversion method options of JPG so it losses quality ?

i always put sharpness mid-level if it is large size image (printing A3) because of noise level (on high ISO of course)

but for miniature don't afraid to max sharpness

do you use DPP or Lightroom or other RAW soft ?

as for internet i think that it is possible to get good picture 1000 pixels and 250 kbytes size

and lenses are important - i know, very important, shame they cost so high (those sharp and fast focusing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crop it some more. If you feel you need the space in front of the bird (which compositionally is a good thing), choose to clone away the blurred branches. The current crop is really unfortunate as it crops along the middle of the branch, stealing focus from the subject. I can't make it function as a frame either.

Posting images in full size isn't really needed, and those kinds of resolutions doesn't serve a purpose unless you're going for some high quality print. 1024-1280 (tends to fit in a browser) should really be the maximum size people have to download, with a high quality jpg output going at 300-500kb per image.

As for sharpening, the image should be moderately pre-sharpened just to counter the softening caused by the sensor filter itself. Then you apply any color tricks and whatever you want to apply. Finally you apply heavier sharpening to the output image (not the source image) depending on where you want it to go. You sharpen differently for print resolutions than you do for web resolutions.

@])rStrangelove:

Don't take this the wrong way, but sometimes it helps getting your ass outside :p Seems you had some pretty nice lighting going on here that you wasted your opportunity with by hiding inside :) Sorry, but a nice potential destroyed by being covered by branches deserves a comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2forum.jpg

3forum.jpg

Both shots taken with a Rolleiflex SL66 and Planar 80mm HFT lens @ f/4 the film: Kodak Portra 400 VC. BRUTAL compression on the last one though, brutal...

The 100kb limit is indeed a bit archaic... Who is on 56k these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've never had so much snow in december.

We had always snow in the last three Winters but never in december (only for one or two days maybe):

img_6347lrfu5q.jpg

Funny clown on a german Weihnachtsmarkt (Christmas Market):

img_6249lr4uke.jpg

EF 50mm f1.8 II @ f1.8

I must say I'm very happy with the quality of high ISO shots on my camera.

When I was in a salt-mine on december 9th I used ISO 2000-3200 and still got acceptable quality.

Example (ISO 2000):

img_6098lrmud9.jpg

Edited by Derbysieger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i had money for full frame EOS... man, ISO 6400 is clear there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop, stop, stop! :D

FIRST I want the EF 16-35mm f/2.8 II L USM, the EF 100mm f/2.8 L Makro IS USM and maybe a tele L-lens. When I'm the proud owner of these I will consider a full frame body^^ But they're all so expensive that this will take a long time (except I win the lottery or something)...

Seriously, full frame is great but really too expensive for a poor student like me. When there are no expensive outgoings in the next month and my grandma is as generous as every second year I'll consider the EF 100mm f/2.8 L Makro IS USM in january or february.

It'll be be my first L-lens xD

And btw we have white christmas for the first time in my life. YEAH!! I always wanted white christmas. Climate is going nuts this winter and I'm happy :218:

Edited by Derbysieger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 100kb limit is indeed a bit archaic... Who is on 56k these days?

me :rolleyes:

Beautiful pics btw, the first one is trully beautiful and you too Derbysieger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thx.

I'm sorry for you. Is DSL not available or what is the Problem? I mean DSL is really cheap these days.

Merry Christmas @all

Photoshooting in snow:

img_6411lroz6a.jpg

Here you can really see the compression caused by the 100kb limit. @200kb it looks so much better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably she needed to be wormed up :D :D :D can i join ? :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thx.

I'm sorry for you. Is DSL not available or what is the Problem? I mean DSL is really cheap these days.

Problem is I live in an old building in a touristic area of the country. I'm using the "public" network of my building. I'm not really having a 56Ko bandwidth but it often looks like I'm. Sometimes the speed is not even in Kilo-octet but in octet :eek:

And sometimes it's ok, last few days I had between 100Ko/s and 500 Ko/s, which is enough for a comfortable internet browsing.

It depends how many tourits are in my building, that's why I hate holidays, I work more and can't access internet, damn you lazy tourists, can't you live a single day without facebook ???

:p

A few pics :

IMG_1089.jpg

My dog

IMG_1222-1.jpg

Brussels under the snow

IMG_1231.jpg

again

Edited by Macadam Cow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ok. that sucks indeed^^

When I'm on holidays internet is the last thing I need btw... The only thing I have always with me is a portable harddrive for my photos^^

Some from Black Forest, Germany where I went skiing

Near Hinterzarten:

img_6997dmvm.jpg

Feldberg:

img_7150pmgd.jpg

Evening on Feldberg

img_71924meu.jpg

img_7222lrjoae.jpg

-12°C in the morning:

img_74033m2c.jpg

All (except the last one) taken with the 50mm f/1.8 II.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice! Loved it up there when I was still studying in Freiburg - those pics bring back memories! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's the queen of the house :D

She looks a bit like my cat, Atticus. Perhaps she has some Turkish Angora in her?

5211168639_daa885d70b.jpg

Taken with Panny GF1 and the 20mm prime that comes with it. I can't shoot over ISO800 with the m2/3 sensor, but I have steady hands (once I've had a couple of drinks, anyway). I can live without full-frame digi, as long as someone somewhere is still making film that will go in my M6. I wouldn't use digital at all if RAW files didn't exist. Without being able to capture the larger amount of exposure information they offer, digital just doesn't offer enough exposure latitude to be usable - frankly, the jpegs the camera automatically produces are more exposure-fussy than slide-film ever was. I would never export to Jpeg, if I had the option. I once tried to produce an image of some perfectly straight-lines in Jpeg format and was horrified at how much the compression algorithm corrupts your image. I always use Nikon's Raw presharpener to give a little more 'oomph' to my shots, although it's rare for me to set it higher than 25%.

aristocats_still.jpg

Duchess is a Turkish Angora, too.

Sadly, however amorous Atticus is feeling, the family jewels were taken from him some time ago :butbut:.

Speaking of animals moving too fast to have their picture taken:

4693983129_101d4001dd.jpg

I had to take this at ISO800 on Canon 400D with Sigma wideangle, even though it was a bright sunny day. It's of Millie, a border-terrier puppy, who had boundless energy. She was trying to attack the camera strap in this shot. Best to go for 'machinegun mode' or automatic, if your camera has it, for this type of shot.

Have you been visiting Krakow again, Vilas? - Don't tell me you're lucky enough to live there?

Edited by Richey79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no Idea about the cat. It's my cousin's.

How fast is the lens you used? I mean 1/2000s - 1/3200s should be more than enough to capture fast moving objects. I never used ISO higher than 320 in bright sunshine.

Ice formations, Ravenna Ravine, Black Forest, Germany:

img_7509bmpy.jpg

img_74885mis.jpg

Taking a foto at 1/13s, kneeling on ice doesn't result in sharp pictures I fear (also Ravenna Ravine):

img_7521lmqo.jpg

Two days later all ice was gone at the Todtnau Waterfalls 1/6s handheld, arms rested on a rock:

img_76905mb5.jpg

Something from december 2010. Icequeen lying in the snow^^ :

img_6643lrmz6a.jpg

Edited by Derbysieger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×