Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Motorsports
Thread started 14 Aug 2007 (Tuesday) 23:05
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

question about motorsport photography

 
TCorzett
Senior Member
TCorzett's Avatar
351 posts
Joined May 2006
Livermore, California
Aug 16, 2007 23:51 |  #16

John Thawley wrote in post #3737297external link
Just a clarification.... Todd is sharpening first. With all due respect, that is out of sequence. Sharpening is typically the last step. Do all your other tweaks first. I know many photographers that actually do sharpening AFTER they size an image.

I've found that for my web work this process works great. Again, it all has to do with your tastes and the final use of the images. I will also do additional sharpening after final resizing to fit the final use. I like to do a tad of sharpening at the beginning (much like the in camera sharpening might do).

I've never really done side-by-side comparisons of sharpening before vs. after, so can't say if one way is better than the other in a double-blinded way. In theory I'm sure it makes a difference, but I doubt that I could show someone two prints and have them able to determine which one was sharpened first vs. last... again, I've never done the tests to prove it though (I did do a test the other day for a one-step vs. multi-step interpolation... and the multi-step won hands down... but not a the viewing distance for the 2'x3' print, which was identical in my eyes).

-Todd...


-----
Unit One Studios
http://www.unitonestud​ios.comexternal link
-----

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
John ­ Thawley
Senior Member
John Thawley's Avatar
741 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Aug 17, 2007 00:20 |  #17

Todd:

To be fair, I think the most important thing here is getting people accurate information. Certainly, you can use unsharpen mask on the image "first"... I see no problem with that one way or the other.

However, unsharpen mask is a process of adding contrast to the edges in an image giving the appearance of sharper. This used to be done in the "wet" darkroom using two negatives.. one slightly blurred... stack on top of one another. Now... Photoshop doesn't find the edges in your image. Instead, it locates pixels that differ in value from surrounding pixels by the threshold you specify. It then increases the contrast of neighboring pixels by the amount you specify. So, for neighboring pixels the lighter pixels get lighter and the darker pixels get darker. Hence, the reason you should sharpen AFTER your other adjustments.

This is especially critical with noise reduction. If you have a noisy image and you apply Unsharpen Mask before the noise filter, you will simply end up sharpening (read increasing) the grain/noise.

Finally, the effects of the Unsharp Mask filter are more pronounced on‑screen than in high-resolution output. If your final destination is print, experiment to determine what settings work best for your image.

It is best to sharpen an image multiple times in small amounts. Sharpen the first time to correct blur caused by capturing your image (scanning it or taking it with your digital camera). AFTER you’ve color corrected and sized your image, sharpen it again (or a copy of it) to add the appropriate amount of sharpening for your output medium.

I've paraphrased from Adobe's online documents... but believe me, this isn't a matter of "taste"... there is a proper method and it will produce the best results.

JT


• Canon, Leica, Mac & Imagination •
| 2008 Year In Reviewexternal link |
Personal Siteexternal linkhttp://www.wheelsonwal​ls.comexternal link Automotive Photographers Networkexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Ospi
Goldmember
Ospi's Avatar
1,023 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Brisbane, Australia
Aug 19, 2007 08:46 |  #18

Great posts and advice guys. Iv been doing more or less the same process, though since i shoot in RAW i fix my levels, saturation, shadows etc in that before putting it in photoshop for resizing and sharpening. Though i need to work on my initial photos lolol.

Anyway awesome advice, ill certainly be back and forth from this thread.


Canon EOS 70D
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Contemporary

LOG IN TO REPLY
Baldone
Member
Baldone's Avatar
173 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Maidstone,U.K.
Sep 26, 2007 14:31 as a reply to Ospi's post |  #19

could anyone give me a tutorial on posting 8 shots instead of just 2 in laymans terms email or pm i don't mind which thanks :)


1D III/ EF100-400mm L Canon / EF 300MM L Canon/ 50D/ EF-S 18-55mm/ EF 75-300mm

LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Moderator
PhotosGuy's Avatar
74,874 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Joined Feb 2004
Middle of Michigan
Sep 26, 2007 20:11 |  #20

tutorial on posting 8 shots

Post a link to an image
http://photography-on-the.net ...hp?p=3914336&postco​unt=11


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1280 pixels on any side.

LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
I'm having size issues, does this get worse with age?
S.Horton's Avatar
18,014 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Royersford, PA
Sep 26, 2007 20:20 |  #21

andrewc wrote in post #3730892external link
What would help me enormously is some insight of what the pro's do in their post processing. I appreciate that this may be a bit of a delicate subject as part of the PP routine is part of what gives a particualar 'tog his or her own personal style.

So, assuming you've got a sharp, pleasing picture in camera, thats half the battle won, but a brief description of what you do afterwards to give it that 'pizazz', wow factor or punch would be a useful insight.

I asked this question so many times in many posts -- always quizzical about how people process color, sharpness, etc. So, I know exactly how you feel!

Short answer: There is no standard process.

Medium-sized answer: Process selected depends upon what software you're using to process photos and the subject of the photo, plus the desired outcome.

I'm sure it took me more time, outright, to learn enough PP to get by than it did to get the light into the camera properly.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.comexternal link 
Want your title changed?Dream On!external link

:cool:

LOG IN TO REPLY
jasestu
Goldmember
jasestu's Avatar
1,033 posts
Joined Nov 2006
Melbourne, Australia
Oct 20, 2007 23:40 |  #22

I've come across what I think is some damn good rally photography here - http://www.blackbullet​.com/nelsonrally/page_​01.htm (external link)

I'm trying to work out what I need to do to get to that level. If you've got time I'd appreciate a comparison between the above and some of my rally work (examples here: http://www.colourandli​ght.co.nz ...es/tmmc21oct07/inde​x.html (external link))

The Nelson Rally ones on the blackbullet site are really crisp, is it a function of post processing, or better lighting to start with?

Take a look at some of those Nelson Rally ones about 3/4 down the page, vs one of mine for comparison (below), where do I improve?

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Jason
www.colourandlight.co.​nzexternal link | flickrexternal link
Canon EOS 7D | Fuji X100
EF 70-200mm IS f/2.8 L | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS | EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro | Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=419575

LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Thawley
Senior Member
John Thawley's Avatar
741 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Oct 20, 2007 23:49 |  #23

I don't shoot rally.... but I can tell you that your shot is over-exposed.

From a content standpoint, your shot is not very interesting. It's a car a bit sideways. Can't see wheels spinning.. a little dust a little crossed up... that's it. At the end of the day, it's all about content. The other site you point to are providing good perspective with unique angles to the action. I didn't notice any unusual post-processing... just good timing and a good eye for being where the action is. You'll also notice, their shots are looking up... or looking down... some wide angle stuff... all very "in your face" and interesting.

John


• Canon, Leica, Mac & Imagination •
| 2008 Year In Reviewexternal link |
Personal Siteexternal linkhttp://www.wheelsonwal​ls.comexternal link Automotive Photographers Networkexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Over ­ Actor
Senior Member
Over Actor's Avatar
350 posts
Joined Jun 2007
FT. Bragg, NC
Oct 21, 2007 00:46 as a reply to John Thawley's post |  #24

I've also been trying to get some feed back on making my Photos "pop" I'm usually racing at the tracks but when Im not I get my camera out and shoot a few.

Ive been told alot of my angle's and photos looks good. But I know my PP is off. My photos come out over exposed alot so i have to make up for it. Which makes for some over saturation.
But to tell you the truth. the first image you posted john as a comparison. Helped the most.

Being able to take the unedited photo make adjustments to look like your finished photo helped me learn photoshop( newb).
So I guess practice makes perfect. and I def. need to learn photoshop.

Here one that I did at an auto-x the other day. Any tips?
20d with a 24-85 ef lens

IMAGE: http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb65/flat4nc/Sanfordauto-x56.jpg

My Picture machines.. Canon 20d, ef 24-85mm, "Nifty Fifty" Olympus E-500, e-500, zuiko 14-45, 14-55( Kick Butt), 50-200.

LOG IN TO REPLY
JD1476
Member
111 posts
Joined Oct 2005
NJ
Mar 19, 2008 12:46 as a reply to post 3737297 |  #25

I've been having trouble with printing out what I shoot . I don't know if its the printer settings , the paper, or my resolution. I use Canon Digital Photo Professional to adjust most of my pictures. Then when it come time to print At first I was using 500 dpi which I thought was ok ( thinking higher dpi the bester the output ). Then I started reading some posts on the net & dropped it to 300 dpi & still looks a little off & isn't getting the look I want. I'm using an HP 3 in 1 photo printer & every day photo paper glossy. What can I do to make the prints look more natural, (I shoot with a Canon XT & 30D camera)?

Thanks,

JD


Gear; Bodies: Canon 7D, 5D, 40D, 30D; Lenses: 70-200 F/2.8L IS, 70-300mm 4-5.6 IS, 28-200mm USM, 17-55 USM F2.8 IS, 85mm F1.8 USM & 50mm F/1.4

LOG IN TO REPLY
andrewc
Goldmember
andrewc's Avatar
1,403 posts
Joined Aug 2005
Norwich, UK
Mar 24, 2008 04:47 |  #26

is your monitor calibrated?
is your printer calibrated?


Norwich Photo Motorsport Photographyexternal link • Facebook Entry • Canon EOS 7D / 50D / 40D / 24-105L / Sigma 100-300 f4 / 50mm f1.8 / Tamron 28-300 / 2x Canon 580EX2 flash / Interfit and Lastolite studio gear / Manfrotto supports / Lowepro Stealth Reporter AW650 and Computrekker

LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Thawley
Senior Member
John Thawley's Avatar
741 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Mar 24, 2008 05:09 |  #27

JD1476 wrote in post #5148170external link
I've been having trouble with printing out what I shoot . I don't know if its the printer settings , the paper, or my resolution. I use Canon Digital Photo Professional to adjust most of my pictures. Then when it come time to print At first I was using 500 dpi which I thought was ok ( thinking higher dpi the bester the output ). Then I started reading some posts on the net & dropped it to 300 dpi & still looks a little off & isn't getting the look I want. I'm using an HP 3 in 1 photo printer & every day photo paper glossy. What can I do to make the prints look more natural, (I shoot with a Canon XT & 30D camera)?

Thanks,

JD

I doubt "calibrating" is your problem at this stage. Calibrating is typically an issue when you get to color critical levels. Sounds like you're still trying to find the ballpark.

Understand this, printing can tend to be a bit of a black art until you find a winning combination of settings and paper.

There are some set-up steps you should run through via your printers manual. Make sure you follow those... cleaning, head alignment etc. And, by all means, use their ink.. not refills or off brands.

Also, buy the paper they recommend.

Now, DON'T edit a photo. Take one out of the camera and print it.

What I'm trying to do here is get you to begin with baseline / default settings. You need to know that your starting right according to "the book."

Inkjet printers should do fine at 144 ppi.

If you follow all the BASIC set up and settings, you should get a decent result.

From there, start making your changes, but only change ONE THING at a time. Monitor what that change does. DO NOT change two or three things at once. You won't know which change as been effective or screwed things up.

You need to create your process. Start basic... adjust.. find a set of settings you like and work from there. You can't be all over the place with your printer settings. You'll never get it right.

If you decide to try another brand of paper... be prepared for a change... and a possible change in your settings to get what you like.

I don't know about editing in Canon's software, but if you continue to use it, see if there is a "printer profile" (which is a color profile) for your printer. Also, check in your print settings if there is a "Paper profile" for the type of paper you're using.

This will all take a bit of work... but, as I said, it's something you'll do once and find your baseline. If you plan on doing a lot of printing, it will be well worth your while (and hairline) to get it right.

Honestly, I don't do it anymore. I find labs do a much better job... even Costco or Walmart can pretty much nail it at a far less cost (after you calculate your time, paper, ink and throw-aways) than doing it at home.

All the best,

JT


• Canon, Leica, Mac & Imagination •
| 2008 Year In Reviewexternal link |
Personal Siteexternal linkhttp://www.wheelsonwal​ls.comexternal link Automotive Photographers Networkexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
andrewc
Goldmember
andrewc's Avatar
1,403 posts
Joined Aug 2005
Norwich, UK
Mar 24, 2008 15:48 |  #28

I thought my prints were off what I was seeing on screen as the monitor required calibrating. Since getting a Pantone Huey, my prints have been what I'd expected - I'd been making the mistake of optimising for my screen which was off colour...

I only use my home printer for quick things, I use a local lab or online services for most stuff.


Norwich Photo Motorsport Photographyexternal link • Facebook Entry • Canon EOS 7D / 50D / 40D / 24-105L / Sigma 100-300 f4 / 50mm f1.8 / Tamron 28-300 / 2x Canon 580EX2 flash / Interfit and Lastolite studio gear / Manfrotto supports / Lowepro Stealth Reporter AW650 and Computrekker

LOG IN TO REPLY
JD1476
Member
111 posts
Joined Oct 2005
NJ
Mar 24, 2008 21:45 as a reply to andrewc's post |  #29

Another thing I notice is that when I export to PS sometimes the pictures look darker. I've ordered prints of slightly touched up pictures & they seem fine.

I've thought about buying a monitor calibrating device, but a bit hesitant due to reviews of a few of them. I feel they are some what of a gimmick & the same results can be had without it.

I'm starting to use RAW more often, but like the amount of pictures I can get with JPG large format.......

I'm currently using 4 gig Extreme III Sandisk cards.
At home I use a Dell ultra Sharp 19" monitor with digital DVI connection for viewing & editing & a 640 MB EVGA video card.


Gear; Bodies: Canon 7D, 5D, 40D, 30D; Lenses: 70-200 F/2.8L IS, 70-300mm 4-5.6 IS, 28-200mm USM, 17-55 USM F2.8 IS, 85mm F1.8 USM & 50mm F/1.4

LOG IN TO REPLY
andrewc
Goldmember
andrewc's Avatar
1,403 posts
Joined Aug 2005
Norwich, UK
Mar 25, 2008 12:14 as a reply to JD1476's post |  #30

Maybe worth asking around to see if you could borrow a monitor calibrator. My one made quite a difference. The default was very blue compared to the calibrated colours.


Norwich Photo Motorsport Photographyexternal link • Facebook Entry • Canon EOS 7D / 50D / 40D / 24-105L / Sigma 100-300 f4 / 50mm f1.8 / Tamron 28-300 / 2x Canon 580EX2 flash / Interfit and Lastolite studio gear / Manfrotto supports / Lowepro Stealth Reporter AW650 and Computrekker

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

17,201 views & 3 likes for this thread
question about motorsport photography
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Motorsports


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00376 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is Bruno Rosa
846 guests, 386 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017