DLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3913 times:
Don't give up hope for these shots yet. Add a little bit of contrast to the second shot by using a brightness/contrast layer and get it to where it looks a bit less "misty" and send it in. This shot looks like it has some real good potential.
Sulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 31
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3878 times:
Not sure what the point of the post is, but it can be an interesting exercise, and one of the fun things about DSLR processing. Different photographers will usually get different results from their workflow.
The exception is when the conditions are so favourable that the camera achieves an ideal capture, and all that's left to do is crop and sharpen.
Personally, these sunny but slightly muggy days have really tested my post-processing ability, but it certainly makes it rewarding when you succesfully recreate what you saw through the viewfinder.
Edit: To answer the question, as Royal said, I think it's down to the levels. Different white & black points have been chosen, or simply a different interpretation with the curve tool.
[Edited 2005-03-31 21:15:08]
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
Apuneger From Belgium, joined Sep 2000, 3032 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3817 times:
Personally I like the first one more. The second photo is just way too bright in the dark areas and I think it takes away a lot of the 'depth' in the composition, certainly when comparing to the other one.
Maybe some might think that the first one is a bit too dark, but for me it has the best contrast of the two photos, by far. No offence to the photographer of the second photo of course.
JRowson From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 364 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3799 times:
Good evening all,
The 1st photo was taken by myself in the days when i was using a 300D. To me the photo looks right, or I wouldn't have uploaded it. A number of different variables come into play though to cause the differences. Firstly Danny uses a different camera to me (10D I think?). Secondly, beacause the 300D has a tendency to blow out highlights, I was most likely under-exposing by 1/3, despite it being misty. I don't use auto levels to process. I would have used photoshop's level adjustment using the histogram. Monitor setup could cause the differences to.
I perceive my image to be right, as it looks right to me. I can't see how there is a definative answer to what is right. If it wasn't right it wouldn't be on Anet .
Thanks for plugging the shot anyway, it's much appreciated .
James Rowson. Canonite and lover of all things L. JAR Photography.
Oly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6944 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (10 years 16 hours ago) and read 3710 times:
OK, having left this to stew for a few hours, my question was really about how much a photo could have been adjusted or how much it can be adjusted (levels/contrast/brightness, etc, etc). What the eye sees and what the camera records are different and everyone has a different idea of what looks right. Do people try and reproduce the conditions (weather/light) on the day when postprocessing or try and get the plane looking its best?
Maybe I should have said that the photos were already in the DB, but I presumed that the layout would give this away.
Incidentally, it was interesting looking at the AP-BGL photos and just about all of them were at MAN with occasional others at LHR, JFK, Toronto and IAH.