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

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 10 Sep 2013 (Tuesday) 12:21
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Camera Vs Processing Help

 
2000Z28M6
Member
48 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 10, 2013 12:21 |  #1

Hi Everyone!

How do I get contrast like these photos below?

http://www.speedhunter​s.com …a-when-it-rains-it-pours/ (external link)

Would you agree its all in the gear FF camera and expensive lenses vs. photo processing knowledge?

This is a sample of my photos from this weekend. Obviously I don't have a FF camera with $1500 lenses.

https://picasaweb.goog​le.com …7i0Zft4gE&feat=​directlink (external link)


What can I do from the PP side to get similar results?? Please help.


Canon EOS XT Tokina 16-50mm 2.8, Canon 55-250mm 5.6
Canon EOS T2 Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
drewl
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2005
     
Sep 10, 2013 12:29 |  #2

shoot dark, shoot raw
use lightroom

nicer lenses would help with the image quality and depth of field, but you can still add contrast in post, as well as other stuff.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2000Z28M6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
48 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 10, 2013 12:33 |  #3

typically AX events are held from 11am - 4pm harsh lighting all the time and I tend to overexpose by 1/3 to help with all the hard shadows but it does hurt the contrast.

I use LR and shoot raw but I cant seem to get that nice contrast as in the examples...i know i may never have it without all the nicer gear, but I would like to get closer with processing.


Canon EOS XT Tokina 16-50mm 2.8, Canon 55-250mm 5.6
Canon EOS T2 Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nittaya
Member
122 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: dubai
     
Sep 10, 2013 13:17 as a reply to  @ 2000Z28M6's post |  #4

for sport event where you have high speed cars running ,gear might matter. but for landscapes
and stationary object it really doen't matter much. you can use even
cheap camera and get high quality result. as long as you shoot raw ,correct exposer
and not let highlights blow .

The reference of shots thttp://www.speedhunte​rs.com/2013/09/...ains​-it-pours/ that you are giving
are scene where dynamic range not that wide and you are comparing it with your shots which
are of high dynamic range that is not right way to compare.

post a raw file or raw file converted to compressed jepg straight away without
any sharpening are processing of a scene with dynamic range of scene compareable to the scene
shot in thttp://www.speedhunte​rs.com/2013/09/...ains​-it-pours/
we will have a try on it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2000Z28M6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
48 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 10, 2013 13:23 |  #5

I can upload later today, I'm at work until 4pm. Thanks for offering to give it a shot!!!


Canon EOS XT Tokina 16-50mm 2.8, Canon 55-250mm 5.6
Canon EOS T2 Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RandMan
Senior Member
Avatar
403 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Boston, MA
     
Sep 10, 2013 21:17 |  #6

Raw or jpg, post processing or not, there's only so far that computer software can get you. You can tremendously improve an image with post processing, and I for one do a very heavy amount of editing to raw files. However, a really really nice lens does unmistakable things to a photograph that you cannot reproduce otherwise. I found this out firsthand when I took my first test shot with my first 50 prime (after using plastic kit lenses). The camera makes a big difference as well, but not nearly as much as awesome glass.


Canon eos7D | Canon 50mm 1.4 | Canon 17-55mm 2.8 | Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 | Yongnuo 565ex | Yongnuo yn-468 II | Canon ef28-135mm 3.5/5.6 | Canon ef-s 55-250mm 4.0/5.6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drewl
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2005
     
Sep 10, 2013 22:42 as a reply to  @ RandMan's post |  #7

that being said, Larry does do a lot in post. can't achieve his look just with the gear and settings.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2000Z28M6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
48 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 11, 2013 10:56 |  #8

Well I've went ahead and played with the contrast slider in LR along with adding more vignettes and taking back the exposure down a hair...

Its a little better...but still not what I'm looking for....

https://picasaweb.goog​le.com …7i0Zft4gE&feat=​directlink (external link)

I've had this APC-S body for just over 5 years. I think I may have out grown it. Same goes for the 55-250mm.

But I just cant justify making the move over to FF without my hobby bringing IN any money. Tough place.... :(


Canon EOS XT Tokina 16-50mm 2.8, Canon 55-250mm 5.6
Canon EOS T2 Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nittaya
Member
122 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: dubai
     
Sep 11, 2013 11:49 as a reply to  @ 2000Z28M6's post |  #9

in lightroom you can make global and little bit of local adjustments. in photoshop working
in layers ,masking you have much much more options. but it takes time to get good grip
to use photoshop. sooner or later you have to learn working with photoshop.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Sep 11, 2013 12:30 |  #10

Obviously the camera and lens needs to capture the basic building blocks of the image, but the real work is done in post processing. I use DPP and Photoshop and have used both for a long time so feel comfortable with both.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2000Z28M6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
48 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 12, 2013 09:36 |  #11

Richard..awesome work on your portfolio. I'm jealous of the gear :P


Canon EOS XT Tokina 16-50mm 2.8, Canon 55-250mm 5.6
Canon EOS T2 Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Sep 12, 2013 13:13 |  #12

Thanks for looking, I appreciate it.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sancho1983
Goldmember
Avatar
1,214 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 277
Joined Jan 2009
     
Sep 12, 2013 14:39 |  #13

The photos in that link look underexposed to me :)


Instagram (external link)
www.bgsweddings.co.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,860 posts
Gallery: 96 photos
Likes: 1045
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Sep 12, 2013 19:34 |  #14

sancho1983 wrote in post #16291440 (external link)
The photos in that link look underexposed to me :)

Me too.

The OP has some photos taken in similar light to the link and could make those look similar. The ones in bright sunlight will not look the same as the ones in the link with any PP.

As for PP, one thing I would try is a local contrast enhancement. I think this is partly what you are seeing in the photos in that link and I suspect is what you are referring to. Try an unsharp mask with a much larger radius than you'd normally use, but a much smaller 'amount' or strength. I use this a lot in my PP and think it help a lot with increasing the 'pop' in an image.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 35 f2 IS, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2000Z28M6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
48 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 12, 2013 19:43 |  #15

The photos in that link look underexposed to me

I took down my exposure down a bit and it helped a little.

But duly noted next time I shoot...like i said before I typically overexpose 1/3 to help with the harsh shadows.


Canon EOS XT Tokina 16-50mm 2.8, Canon 55-250mm 5.6
Canon EOS T2 Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.0

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

2,139 views & 0 likes for this thread
Camera Vs Processing Help
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is paneerIegend
1203 guests, 298 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.