Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

I choose to believe you have no answers to my questions and so you're shoveling BS as fast as you can and saying nothing of substance whatsoever.

How about answer my questions instead.

Joe

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Expected only because an improperly formed question has no answer and no value other than rhetorical.
I have more interesting matters to tend to.
[unwatch]

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Here's another question for you:

I was out with my wife weeding the garden. It was getting late and the sun began to set. My wife said, "Hey get me a picture of the garden with the sunset." I said sure. When I emailed her the photo so she could share it she was very happy as it was just what she remembered seeing -- faithful to the scene.

First photo below is the camera JPEG. Second photo below is my image processed from the raw file and the one I gave to my wife. Here's your question: You've told me before I need to learn to shoot JPEGs. What adjustments would you make to your camera so the garden in the JPEG is better exposed (like in my version) and so that the sky and sunset are also better exposed (like in my version). You've said before your method is to expose for the subject and let the chips fall. So OK as per my wife's request the subject is the garden with the sunset.

Joe

(Download)


(Download)

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

The reason most pros used slide film was that it was the standard for color publication. B&W prints were used for B&W publication, but slide film was used for publication rather than color negs or prints, and its limited dynamic range just had to be dealt with. Pros who primarily sold prints, wedding photographers for example, used color neg film.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The only thing you have proven is what we already know - that you are totally ignorant of how to correctly capture and process a JPEG.

You blew the JPEG highlights and lost the shadow information because you don't know how to use Canon’s Auto Lighting Optimizer.

Your ignorance does not discredit JPEG SOOC images.

It only discredits you.

You blew the JPEG highlights but there is still enough shadow information.

(Download)

Abo

A light year is a measure of distance not time.

Abo

Crikey Selmsie, I reckon it's a pretty crappy image, the noise that nearly
obliterates the detail on part of the focus ring is far from glamorous imho.
If you reckon I've taken a step too far from reality with the image, check
this one out I've made with the same camera as a subject:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-605340-1.html

But I do get your point, you reckon the image would be more "honest" if
it was on a plain surface.

Thanks for the input, I've taken it on board.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

You missed the point -- you can't edit the JPEG on the computer. Guess you don't know what SOOC means. Canon's Auto Light Optimizer would have been worthless. Do I need to prove that to you?

Joe

Abo

It's a grey area, people naturally draw the line at different points,
some in this thread say the camera alters the image when it produces
a JPEG. So you had better go "infer" to them, "Most people understand what we are talking about when we say journalistic reporting" and that they "are trolling or playing the devil's advocate".
because if you just single me out on your issue here, it could possibly prove
it is you "trolling" etc.

At this point I will again quote you, so you can have a jolly good read of what you
wrote so you and everybody else can be clear on what we are discussing, and that
your post is indeed contradicting itself.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Haha. Nope I did not single you out, I just asked a question, to make sure you were not.
I'm definitely not trolling, but I can sometimes play the devil's advocate myself.

Abo

Abo

Yep, I too can have sympathy for the devil, bro.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

No, I didn't miss the point. You did.

You don't have a clue about Canon's Auto Lighting Optimizer or how to expose a JPEG correctly.

Anyone (other than you) can correctly expose and edit a JPEG.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

You missed the point. You can check with rehess if you like. The point is "Get it Right in Camera" and rehess has set the rule: NO EDITING OF THE SOOC JPEG. That means you have to be able to set the camera to create the JPEG and you have to accept what the camera is capable of doing.

I'm not the one making the rule here and you don't get to change the rule just because you don't read or are otherwise challenged.

I've very aware of Canon's Auto Light Optimizer because my Canon camera has that feature. Other than off it has three settings of Low, Standard, and High. Let's use it to recreate the camera JPEG. My Canon can do that of course.

Below are four images in order:

1. The original unedited camera JPEG for reference as I already displayed it.
2. Auto Light Optimizer set to High. Note that the sky is still too light and the garden is better but still way too dark. Well, we can recreate a JPEG and make an exposure correction.
3. In the third photo Auto Light Optimizer is still set to High and with the exposure pulled -.7 the sky is about the same brightness as my raw processed image the fourth photo. But the garden is still way too dark. Auto Light Optimizer in this case is a huge failure. The camera software can't produce the photo.
4. My version of the photo processed from the raw file. Get it Right in Camera does not and can not come anywhere close to producing a comparable image. That was the point that you didn't get.

Do you have the point now or are you still having trouble reading or are otherwise challenged?

Joe

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I'm talking you, not to him.

I get it completely. You posted a back-lit image that nobody would attempt to capture as a JPEG. You underexposed the shadows and overexposed the highlights. Faced with that scenario, two properly exposed JPEGs could easily have been combined using HDR.

But even with the lousy exposure you used (where you still blew the JPEG highlights) I was able to recover the shadow information from your third image.

It probably took me less time than it took you to edit the raw file. The grass in my version probably looks better because I didn't try to make it look like the sun was shining on it.

That's proof that anyone (but you) can edit a JPEG.

Based on our third image

(Download)