FocusCanada Forums

thanks for the constructive cristism. That picture looks awsome Anthony.

I have the same problem as Aka how ever Im stil learning my camera and that could be the issues it self.

I love my photoshop thats for sure.

What kind of process do you use with post prcoesing? Do you just adjust the RAW file and thats it.

Since Im new to the whole RAW thing im not always sure what I should be adjusting or not. I always just go by what I think in my head looks cool.

I'll tend to use photographers that are able to shoot in seperate CMYK settings. It's like taking 4 shots and making it into one. You can adjust each shot to make sure each erea is the best it can be.

Its' essentially shooting in 4-channel mode. Then if there is any retouching required, you're only adjusting the areas that are absolutely nessesary.

It works wonders in studio. Not sure if it works the same way for sharp shooters like you guys.

The main goal from what I can remember from hanging with these guys is this...Make sure you capture as much information as you can in camera. Thatway when you retouch...it looks like you didn't.

I'll bring you AKA on a shoot sometime so you can see how they do it. Jay you can come too if you can fly here yourself. :P

ANTHONYD,Aug 23 2006, 06:41 PM Wrote:I'll tend to use photographers that are able to shoot in seperate CMYK settings. It's like taking 4 shots and making it into one. You can adjust each shot to make sure each erea is the best it can be.

Its' essentially shooting in 4-channel mode. Then if there is any retouching required, you're only adjusting the areas that are absolutely nessesary.

It works wonders in studio. Not sure if it works the same way for sharp shooters like you guys.

The main goal from what I can remember from hanging with these guys is this...Make sure you capture as much information as you can in camera. Thatway when you retouch...it looks like you didn't.

I'll bring you AKA on a shoot sometime so you can see how they do it. Jay you can come too if you can fly here yourself. :P
[right][snapback]203777[/snapback][/right]

one day I will get out of this god forsaken saskatchewan

ANTHONYD,Aug 23 2006, 06:47 PM Wrote:This is the guy I use these days.

INCREDIBLE.

ALL in camera including the water.

Look in here for inspiration.

PETER SHAFERICK
[right][snapback]203752[/snapback][/right]

Those are some awesome (and messy to clean up after) shots! Though I really wonder how he did some of them with just the camera. This one in particular.


I'm just not sure how you could get water to do that without shooting a hundred million times or perhaps it being a total fluke. Or perhaps it's just my imagination.

ANTHONYD,Aug 23 2006, 08:41 PM Wrote:I'll tend to use photographers that are able to shoot in seperate CMYK settings. It's like taking 4 shots and making it into one. You can adjust each shot to make sure each erea is the best it can

Its' essentially shooting in 4-channel mode. Then if there is any retouching required, you're only adjusting the areas that are absolutely nessesary.

It works wonders in studio. Not sure if it works the same way for sharp shooters like you guys.

The main goal from what I can remember from hanging with these guys is this...Make sure you capture as much information as you can in camera. Thatway when you retouch...it looks like you didn't.

I'll bring you AKA on a shoot sometime so you can see how they do it. Jay you can come too if you can fly here yourself. tongue.gif

I believe the sensor in my camera is RGB, and the colour mode is sRGB. I can't shoot CMYK. Anyway, isn't tweaking the picture that much in the camera the same as photoshopping it later? how is it different in the end result? say with identical cameras, one opts to photoshop and the other opts to do it all in camera. What makes the 'all in camera' picture superior? I would personally say the 'all in camera' photographer is superior yes, no doubt, but the end result? Though maybe that's not the arguement.

I agree, the main goal is to capture as much information as you can. I get told that quite a bit, and it's the complete truth. I often go for a darker picture instead of a washed out sky, so that I can get both, then use curves and what not to adjust for it. However this also often brings lots of noise out of the shadows, so I have to be very careful, otherwise I end up with crap. I also found out that there's still quite a lot of information left in what looks like a washed out picture, if I darken the white sky, I often find that there was colour there afterall. This is partially an effect of my monitor not being properly calibrated (just took it out of the box plugged it in, and adjusted the brightness, that's it). But I also think it's often just an effect with ones eyes (Something like this).

As for the last line, I would absolutely love that!


Edit: Also, I rarely adjust the colour in my pictures, saturation perhaps, but colour is very rare for me to adjust.

I don't have photoshop so I can't adjust my pictures they way you guys do, but I guess it shows in the pics that I take with 35mm camera!

But AKA and Jason, you both do take some excellent pictures!!! Here are some that I did the day after the BBQ at the Zoo... Keep in mind I only had 17 pictures on my last roll of film at the Zoo! ***didn't want to purchase any there....cost way too much***












Here is a shy Polar Bear!

Great shots! Not a fan of film, but you seem to be keeping it alive quite well.

euro_zx5,Aug 24 2006, 07:34 AM Wrote:Great shots! Not a fan of film, but you seem to be keeping it alive quite well.
[right][snapback]203805[/snapback][/right]

well as much as I love taking film and waiting for that perfect time to click the button, I really want a DSLR. I just love the fact that I would be able to switch from black and white to colour with a couple clicks of the button. Where now I have to shoot 24 shots then decided to either stay on B/W or go to colour! But again there are tons more options! My brothers wife got the Nikon D200 a couple months ago, and my brother is looking into getting another one next summer when he goes overseas! **Wedding photography business** ( I will work part time for her ) So I might pick that up from him when he gets back!!!!

But who knows!!! I like my film for now!

And thanks!

Film has a certain charm that digital doesn't have.

ANTHONYD,Aug 24 2006, 10:54 AM Wrote:Film has a certain charm that digital doesn't have.
[right][snapback]203860[/snapback][/right]

I agree.

I respect those who shoot film. They have to make decisions about their pictures before they even leave the house. Which film they want to bring, colour, black & white, which brand, which ISO etc... Digital photography feels like cheating to me. I can change my ISO with just the rotation of two knobs, I can switch to b&w by going into the menu. I can adjust the saturation/contrast/brightness/hue of my pictures and view the results in near realtime. I'm happy that digital photography has happened though, it's made it much easier for me to get into photography, but I think it's taken away a lot of the skill required. Those who have the skill are perhaps appreciated less now than they used to be. Because anyone can buy a DSLR and start taking half decent pictures, and then photoshop them into beautiful masterpieces. I dunno, I just feel that those who use film are always going to be superior to me no matter how good I am with a digital camera.

Took this on the way home from being fired today. (lol I had the job 3 1/4 days)

^^Toronto downtown?

Yup! can't remember which streets.. I was mostly walking down bay towards union station (Front street?) but at that point I could have been on another street as I wandered around.

Nice!

I'm still trying to figure out if the D50 will shoot in B/W mode at all. I really abhor using software for ANYTHING with my pictures, unless it's for a very specific purpose (logos, etc).

I don't touch up my photos at all... like Aka says, I consider it "cheating".

NOS2Go4Me,Aug 24 2006, 07:43 PM Wrote:Nice!

I'm still trying to figure out if the D50 will shoot in B/W mode at all. I really abhor using software for ANYTHING with my pictures, unless it's for a very specific purpose (logos, etc).

I don't touch up my photos at all... like Aka says, I consider it "cheating".
[right][snapback]204005[/snapback][/right]

I think it's ok to "touch up" photos, it's done all the time. Even with film photography the developing can be lightened and darkend or add more green etc. to enhance a picture.
But wehn you start adding people and putting effects that just aren't real or there to begin with, then when does it become photochopping cut and paste and the art of photography end?
I still love my wife's work with film. Even after the convienience and ease of learning some tricks with the digital. But film just has that "umph" that I think digital lacks, unless you start photochopping.
My wife had the opprotunity years ago to work with Freeman Patterson. The stuff this man does with film is incredible. And what she did and still does with film blows digital right out of the water.
You can look him up here.

http://www.freemanpatterson.com/

NOS2Go4Me,Aug 24 2006, 07:43 PM Wrote:Nice!

I'm still trying to figure out if the D50 will shoot in B/W mode at all. I really abhor using software for ANYTHING with my pictures, unless it's for a very specific purpose (logos, etc).

I don't touch up my photos at all... like Aka says, I consider it "cheating".
[right][snapback]204005[/snapback][/right]

As far as I can tell, my camera offers no black and white mode. I change it later in software. May be cheating that way, but I can't find the option in my camera either.

It depends on how you concider touching up a photo. All of my photos need touching up, all of them, that's a side effect of shooting in RAW. The camera just takes the RAW data from the sensor. Yes I set the ISO/aperture/shutter/etc... but each and every picture still needs some touching up, mostly contrast and sharpness. Beyond that I try and stay to what one could do if they were processing film. Anymore than that is when it becomes cheating in my mind. So I try not to use airbrushing, photoshop filters etc... anything you probably couldn't do in a darkroom, I try and stay away from. That isn't to say I don't go crazy from time to time.

A shot through the fence at Kipling station. I used a noise reduction filter (even though there was no noise) and it gave it a soft look, similar to Jay's pictures.


This picture I don't even remember what I did, but there was a lot of photoshopping done. All the blue used to be black, the yellow used to be that school bus colour, and the white is a fence.


This one is from around the airport (where you're not supposed to be ;) ), again obviously heavily photoshopped. Unless you believe that I was on Mars or something.


Anyway my point is, I cheat too. It's fun to mess around in photoshop. But I try not to go too far, these are all examples of me going too far, I still think they're cool, and it doesn't matter what you think, but I still went too far. It's often with pictures that didn't turn out the way I wanted that I start trying to photoshop them into 'good' pictures. But that's never going to work, if it's not a good picture to start photoshop isn't going to save you. And that's something I try and remember when I'm shooting and when I'm post-processing/touching up/editing.

I'm not saying anyone here does it for the sake of props, but I can't stand touched-up shots that need to be touched up for the sake of "making the shot". Unless you're in Anthony's business, advertising, where really anything goes that suits the customer's needs.

Am I making sense? :huh:

Those shots you posted are cool, but you're trying to achieve a desired effect outside of the realm of what can realistically be done with a camera, period. It's different than photoshopping on 3 different filters and then passing it off as a masterpiece. Again, I'm seriously not pointing fingers against people here... just stuff I've seen elsewhere online in the past.

Here's an ultra-simple idea I had to pimp the site:



One filter, some text added, but I felt the effect was dramatic enough to be eye-catching.

Hey AKA have you ever tried HDR photos? I been reading a few site on it and it look spretty cool? Anthony have you worked with HDR?

Anyway I thought I would post the origionals up to.

I just picked up an external flash for my camera since I always take picture at night and its sometimes not the easiest.

Only thing done to these is resize and color profile set to Adobe RGB1998

I like the picture of the buildings!!!

I just put another 4 rolls of film in for developing today! Should have then by Monday! I need to learn how to do my own film!!!! Might save me some money!!! hehehe !!!

It's quite a difference between these two shots. I thought you'd shot the picture at night with a light above/behind. But it was in the middle of the day (according to the EXIF). That's some mighty post-processing! Not saying either picture is bad, just saying they're quite a lot different.

I haven't tried any HDR yet, I've read a little bit on it, but haven't read enough to do it correctly. I believe you're supposed to shoot a stop down, normal, and a stop above. And then in a version of photoshop I don't have, combine the 3 (or more) pictures into one, and have a greater range of contrast or something. Creates some really neat looking pictures though.

Quote:Those shots you posted are cool, but you're trying to achieve a desired effect outside of the realm of what can realistically be done with a camera, period. It's different than photoshopping on 3 different filters and then passing it off as a masterpiece.

They were just examples of pictures where I originally went to adjust a little here, a little there, and then a little more there, and a little more here etc.. and went too far. The original desired effect was far more subtle, but I kept changing little bits until the picture was almost completely different. Basically just showing that I too get overzealous with photoshop.

ya my exif data is all out of wack. I resetted my camera setting and all the times and such are off.

Quote:DateTime : 2006:08:21 01:45:42

Taken from the origional off the cam. Thats 1:45AM
Thats the only time I go out and take photos as to why you never really see to many day time photos from me.


Any way the origional lighting was all from the top