Oct 14, 2015 20:05 | #1 Would love feedback (I took pics of my friends I do not charge, just do it for fun)  Image hosted by forum (753656) © mamaof2 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Jessi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Oct 14, 2015 20:22 | #2 Its not too dark, but all of your grays are muddy. How did you do the conversion?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gqllc007 Senior Member 445 posts Likes: 133 Joined Jan 2015 More info | I agree muddy and flat
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 14, 2015 22:30 | #4 Did you, perhaps, simply convert your color picture to grey scale or completely desaturate? George
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 15, 2015 07:49 | #5 I used a B&W high contrast preset in LR Jessi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BlakeC "Dad was a meat cutter"  More info | Oct 15, 2015 07:51 | #6 too* Blake C
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 15, 2015 07:51 | #7 BlakeC wrote in post #17746293  too* ? Jessi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 15, 2015 16:24 | #8 I really like the overall moment. It looks authentic. I would also agree that the conversion looks flat. If anything, my eye gets drawn to the brightness of the water and away from the subjects. What does the color version look like? With the impending forum closure, please consider joining the unofficial adjunct to the POTN forum, The POTN Forum Facebook Group
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 15, 2015 17:47 | #9 Here is the color unedited  Image hosted by forum (753809) © mamaof2 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Jessi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Do you have the RAW? George
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Yes that is the raw pic... Jessi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Oct 16, 2015 06:29 | #12 mamaof2 wrote in post #17747609 Yes that is the raw pic... You mean that's the unedited pic. Raws don't display so thats not the raw image.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
LeftHandedBrisket Combating camera shame since 1977...  More info | Oct 16, 2015 06:52 | #13 in these situations (backlit) using a flash, even the tiny built in one, can make a huge improvement in your subject exposure. I doubt it would be to bright even with "normal" setting, but if it was you could use FEC (flash exposure compensation) to tone it down or pump it up. PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20
LOG IN TO REPLY |
windpig Chopped liver  More info | Oct 17, 2015 06:32 | #14 Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17747635 in these situations (backlit) using a flash, even the tiny built in one, can make a huge improvement in your subject exposure. I doubt it would be to bright even with "normal" setting, but if it was you could use FEC (flash exposure compensation) to tone it down or pump it up. This Would you like to buy a vowel?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
crbinson Senior Member 614 posts Likes: 90 Joined Jul 2012 Location: OKC More info | Oct 17, 2015 07:43 | #15 mamaof2 wrote in post #17746295 ? I believe the poster is taking a shot at the word "to" vs "too" in the thread title.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 1090 guests, 119 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
