Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
stupid question time
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
Jan 2, 2013 21:23:58   #
bunuweld Loc: Arizona
 
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)

Reply
Jan 2, 2013 21:25:45   #
CanonFire Loc: Phoenixville, PA
 
planepics wrote:
Some of the attempts to save my pics were pretty good, and some, um.....not so much. I tried to play with P7, but I can't figure it out. I tried brightness/contrast, but I couldn't get it to look good and I don't understand curves. I did this with Picasa by adding fill light. It's still dark, but any more and it put in a whole bunch of noise. If I try a pic like this again, I will wither pull the shades, expose for the room, or wait until dark!


You did a fair job, but as you can see, you can't push a photo like this too far without getting a lot of noise. Even with the small amount of fill light you used, it still has a fair amount of noise.

The attempt I did with Lightroom still shows a good bit of noise, even though I didn't push the exposure too far. There is a bit more detail visible, but some of the shadowing became black blotches in places, along with some noise.

The best thing to with this kind of light is to take multiple exposures and merge them into an hdr image, or add some light in the room.



Reply
Jan 2, 2013 21:36:24   #
bunuweld Loc: Arizona
 
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)


I don't know how my previous reply didn't get in there, but here it is. It was not my intention to improve "the picture. Just emphasize what others had done: That there is a lot of information visually hidden in the underexposed area.
I laughed at your ..... "trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully....". I think for your trying to be tactful would be like a porcupine trying to grow silky hair, but I appreciate your remarks and they have given me a good hearty laughs in the past and look forward to future ones

Reply
 
 
Jan 2, 2013 21:49:21   #
CanonFire Loc: Phoenixville, PA
 
bunuweld wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)


I don't know how my previous reply didn't get in there, but here it is. It was not my intention to improve "the picture. Just emphasize what others had done: That there is a lot of information visually hidden in the underexposed area.
I laughed at your ..... "trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully....". I think for your trying to be tactful would be like a porcupine trying to grow silky hair, but I appreciate your remarks and they have given me a good hearty laughs in the past and look forward to future ones
quote=CanonFire quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'... (show quote)


It's pretty obvious there was no way to address this tactfully, and I did have "tongue in cheek" a bit when I wrote that. Sometimes it "tickles" me when I see the flood of "here's mine" as various people take a shot at "fixing" a problem image and not make any difference at all or end up making it worse. I often wonder if they really think they made an improvement when they really didn't, and if they do see the change wasn't good then why do they bother to post it.

You are right, there is information hidden in the underexposed areas, but there isn't any way to expose it all without destroying other parts of the image. The only thing you can do is make subtle adjustments, and try to compensate for some of the noise and other flaws that are going to appear.

Reply
Jan 2, 2013 21:50:17   #
Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA
 
It is called "making an effort" if you can do better or even equal to anyone please show us your stuff.
And yes blowing up most photos will show where more work or even less work could improve the shot.

bunuweld wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)
quote=CanonFire quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'... (show quote)

Reply
Jan 2, 2013 22:08:20   #
CanonFire Loc: Phoenixville, PA
 
Harvey wrote:
It is called "making an effort" if you can do better or even equal to anyone please show us your stuff.
And yes blowing up most photos will show where more work or even less work could improve the shot.

bunuweld wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)
quote=CanonFire quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'... (show quote)
It is called "making an effort" if you c... (show quote)


Well, actually I did Harvey, a few posts back, and I'd say my effort was better than more than a few. I appreciate that you tried to "make an effort", but your "quick pp" fell short. If you were trying to show how post work was able to "salvage" the shot, it wasn't all that successful, and neither were quite a few others.

Bret and picpiper actually did improve the image because they made subtle changes, working within the limits of the original image.

Reply
Jan 2, 2013 22:14:07   #
CBL19six9 Loc: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
 
Hey I don't know anything but, considering what can be with the existing photo - I'd turn fire up the onboard flash, crank it down some, shoot raw and then hit it in a post processing

Reply
 
 
Jan 2, 2013 22:21:27   #
Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA
 
Thanks - I'll look back at what you posted - again I state I am no expert at this and have whole lot to learn about many aspects of PP.
CanonFire wrote:
Harvey wrote:
It is called "making an effort" if you can do better or even equal to anyone please show us your stuff.
And yes blowing up most photos will show where more work or even less work could improve the shot.

bunuweld wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)
quote=CanonFire quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'... (show quote)
It is called "making an effort" if you c... (show quote)


Well, actually I did Harvey, a few posts back, and I'd say my effort was better than more than a few. I appreciate that you tried to "make an effort", but your "quick pp" fell short. If you were trying to show how post work was able to "salvage" the shot, it wasn't all that successful, and neither were quite a few others.

Bret and picpiper actually did improve the image because they made subtle changes, working within the limits of the original image.
quote=Harvey It is called "making an effort&... (show quote)

Reply
Jan 2, 2013 22:58:52   #
itguy1994
 
All were shot on auto -Nikon D60 using the popup flash and a Christmas card. (could not find an index card). Same lights in the room, I purposely shot at a mirror. Look at the print on the wall.







Reply
Jan 2, 2013 23:08:05   #
Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA
 
#2 looks like you found the sweet spot. If that was to be a serious keeper photo I think you would be happy with it.
Great work with a pop up flash - what did you remember that brought you to use the card for a deflector.?

Reply
Jan 2, 2013 23:08:36   #
Hal81 Loc: Bucks County, Pa.
 
planepics wrote:
How does one go about setting up the exposure of a shot when there is such a huge difference in light values? See example.


planepics there are no stupid questions. thats the way we all learn. You got some really good advice. I once had turned my SB600 flash off and forgot. I took a shot of this ladys dog on her stairway. I was using bounce flash. Seen it didnt go off and reshot the photo. When I got home and looked at that photo the dog was just a black spot. I tried to lighten it up and to my surprize it ended up the better of the two. The lady loved it. I was there shooting an open house. You never know what you can save if you try. It would have been a lost shoot if it were on film.

Reply
 
 
Jan 3, 2013 00:01:23   #
Jack47 Loc: Ontario
 
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)


My "panties" are not in a bunch (I just checked) any more than your brain is on a proper plane. If you don't ask the question, don't put down the answer. Any old ass can understand that. BTW can you improve on any of the results? Didn't think so!!!

Reply
Jan 3, 2013 01:20:46   #
13oct1931 Loc: Lebanon, Indiana
 
Bobbym: Great save !!!!
ALYN

Reply
Jan 3, 2013 02:58:40   #
DaveHam Loc: Reading UK
 
Take one exposure for the light area, take a second for the dark and combine the two. Use a tripod so that both shots are of the same areas of the image. Select the correctly exposed areas of each image to combine.
There are a number of software packages that can do this.

Reply
Jan 3, 2013 05:42:16   #
CanonFire Loc: Phoenixville, PA
 
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
Jack47 wrote:
CanonFire wrote:
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to figure out how to ask this tactfully...but I'll just come right out and ask.

Do any of you that pp'd planepics photo really think you improved it? I mean looking at the small shots posted, many look passable, but when you look at the downloads, they are full of noise, color noise, artifacts, etc. With those kind of issues none of them are really improvements.

I'm not trying to be rude, and I realize planepics was just making a test shot, but it seems a futile exercise to attempt to make a repair to a photo so underexposed and post, for the most part, what seems like mostly failed attempts.
I'm sitting here scratching my head, trying to fig... (show quote)


Not trying to be rude either but who are you to question if there were any improvements...you did not ask the question.
quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here scratching my he... (show quote)


Well Jack, no need to get your panties in a bunch. It doesn't matter if I asked "the question". I'm someone who didn't see much improvement in most the attempts, and I'm curious to find out if anyone really looked at the end result of their attempts and saw the same things I saw, like lots of noise, some artifacting, etc. Most of the attempts did lighten the photo at the expense of tone and detail, and I don't see that as an improvement.
quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'm sitting here sc... (show quote)


My "panties" are not in a bunch (I just checked) any more than your brain is on a proper plane. If you don't ask the question, don't put down the answer. Any old ass can understand that. BTW can you improve on any of the results? Didn't think so!!!
quote=CanonFire quote=Jack47 quote=CanonFire I'... (show quote)


I didn't realize you were the "comment police" with the authority to restrict who can respond to posts!

I didn't "put down" the answer, I pointed out that some of the "answers" were wrong. Yes I did improve on many of the results, so you thought wrong. You're in denial if you think many of those attempts were improvements.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.