[LRflex] Re: Black Level Comparisons and the Semi-Pro Blues
- From: Bob Palmieri <rpalmier@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 01:05:54 -0500
David et al -
The featured Redwing photo is really speaking; 'specially to me
seeing as how I spent a spell of concentrated effort a few weeks ago
trying to get a cool snap of that very specimen with more limited
success.
Regarding the black slider business, I gotta tellya, you happen to
have hit on an area of high frustration for me these days...
First of all, I got seriously burned a few weeks back shooting with a
borrowed 90mm Tele-Elmarit ("fat" version) on an M. Diffuse
backlight from a window behind the subjects caused enough flare to
be a real problem, basically bringing the shadow areas on the negs up
around Zone V or so. 'Course, I didn't see it coming, what with my
use of one of those silly rangefinder cameras (the only axe I have
which was quiet enough to shoot during a string quartet performance.)
The black slider in Photoshop was a real help. However, I was
reminded that whenever you need to goose the contrast by any means
(that I use, anyhow) you also emphasize the film grain.
Also, I've been having other problems related to the semi-pro
digigear I use (in the form of film scanners and my 20D.) When
dealing with picky editors & high-end output providers, a close look
at the shadow areas of my scans reveals some less-than-appealing
nastiness hiding out there. And in the case of files from the 20D
there's a lot more color noise & banding than I feel is acceptable.
even at ISO 200 in files with pretty ideal histograms. Once again,
the black slider is sometimes the brutal but effective solution
(slightly more finesse is possible with careful tweakage at the low
end of the transfer curve.)
I think it's time for me to look into capture and scanning gear that
better represents what was presented to them. 'Meantime, I guess
it's also time to get serious about researching noise-reduction
software in order to save a number of my present shots.
Bob Palmieri
On Jun 9, 2007, at 9:46 PM, William Abbott wrote:
> David,
>
> When I was a kid in Florida we had huge flocks of redwing black birds
> all over everywhere so I became accustomed to them and their
> habitats, mostly marshy areas if I remember correctly, and habits. I
> completely understand your timing problems.
>
> All the best,
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Jun 9, 2007, at 3:20 PM, David Young wrote:
>
> At 09/06/2007, you wrote:
>> David,
>>
>> I have a very untidy mind, and what jumped into it when I saw the two
>> shots of the female Red Winged Blackbird was:
>>
>> "Holy cow, if Mother Nature had wanted the lower half of that bird to
>> be darker, she would have made it darker over the eons. There must be
>> some evolutionary benefit to the plain vanilla, non-Black Level
>> Slider look. Better camouflage?"
>>
>> Quite a nice looking little bird though; they always seem to perch on
>> swaying things down here so one in a firm stance is hard to find. She
>> looks to be on a none too steady cat tail.
>>
>> Re the SilkyPix Black Level slider: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 has a
>> functionally similar (if not identical) "Blacks" slider control.
>
>
> Hi Bill!
>
> Glad to know that Lightroom has copied the "Blacks" slider. Even
> without seeing it, I'd be pretty sure it does the same thing, as
> there are only so many ways you can alter a photo. I just prefer the
> slider, to using the "curves" control in PS ... though SP has one of
> those, too, if you wish to use it.
>
> Sorry my use of the BL control made the bird seem unnatural to
> you. In fact, what I was attempting was to bring the image of the
> bird back to what I saw. Really flat lighting (heavy overcast) makes
> a huge difference between what we see and what we photograph.
>
> I find that many shots need a little help; and too many people do it
> with the contrast control, thus blowing their hightlights.
>
> As for the perch .. it was, indeed, precarious. In the end, I shot,
> over an hour, perhaps 30 frames of several females - and only about 3
> or 4 were truly, tack sharp. The breeze made all the difference,
> for you'd focus, and by the time my brain said "fire", and I
> did, the breeze had moved the bird a fraction of an inch. Not a
> lot, but enough to make the shot look a tiny bit soft.
>
> I was pleased that the shot I liked the most (the "Featured Photo" at
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/) was one of the few which was razor
> sharp!
>
> Thanks for taking the time to look. :-)
>
> Cheers!
>
> ---
>
> David Young,
> Logan Lake, CANADA
>
> Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/
> Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt
> Stock Photography at: http://tinyurl.com/2amll4
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
