| Author |
Message |
www.sergioleitao.com
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 17:07
Reply
Hi there everyone...
In this times that i'm work overloaded, i decided last saturday to put everything behind the backs and go out shooting my favourite scenery with my new camera, and in the end i was quite happy with it. I took some shoots and as usual i post processed them before upload.
And what i wanted to know is if you think theyr overprocessed somehow, or what i should do instead.
Here's the photos and its originals:
 
 
 
 
None of the images are HDR and they were all shoot with a ND grad and a polarizer, and post processed in Lightroom and PS CS3.
Let me know what you think, if possible with examples.
Thanks you all and have a nice photoweek
Sergio Leitao
|
Ruud~
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 17:17
Reply
These are very good pictures!
For the first one, I prefer the original, for all the others I prefer the processed versions.
The first one looks very mystical and dreamy in the original colours. You lost that in the processing.
The rock hard colours of the the other processed images make them very interesting, though!
|
Coffeejunkie
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 18:06
Reply
agree with Ruud, the first one would be good a little postwork but not as much, all the others are simply wunderful and perfect!  (in my eyes at least!)
|
Cait
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 18:24
Reply
Hi Sergio, may I compliment you on your photographs, as a new member on site. I hope I can gain advice and tips from other members, yourself included....Truly I am a basic learner of photography, yet I am keen to learn, so I can improve my travel photographs.
cheers Cait
|
fotogravenswaay
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 18:54
Reply
agree about the first one.......the processed photo is a bit overkill.
The rest of the pictures , the originals & processed ones, are good ones.
And youre new camera is a topper.......
One thing I noticed is that haven't cropped any of your pictures ( I think ).......thats taking good pictures!!
|
Jan Hemels
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 19:47
Reply
As M. Knegt already pointed out in another topic about HDR it is a matter of taste. I find the processed ones surreal at first glance. I must acknowledge however that a lot of people seem to prefer them to the more natural originals. I have to live with that reality.
It makes me wonder what can be done with my own pics but I probably will never find out.
In contests of leading other Photosites this kind of processing is accepted contrary to the use of HDR.
Lots of Success Sergio!
|
Martin de Rijk
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 20:27
Reply
Sergio, as you know, I like your processing very much. I'm glad to see the originals this time to compare them both. I must say seeing them both makes me like the processed ones even more. The originals are often a bit flat most of the time due to weather circumstances. you know how to transform these images into interesting even colorful pictures. I agree with Jan it's sometimes almost surreal, but I like that. Still I have to agree with others conceirning #1, it's a bit overdone here (a Mars landscape ), but all others are top imhp.
|
|
Jan Hemels
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 21:08 - Edited by: Jan Hemels
Reply
Sorry wrong topic
|
M. Knegt
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 21:43
Reply
I think they are great! Good that you state that they are not HDR because I realy thought they were.
Maybee some people think it's cheating, but I don't. Just knowing your way with programs like cs3 is realy not the most important thing. It al starts with taking good photo's with good compo's and or good perspectives. And all these are good before post process.
|
Vidar S
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 22:05
Reply
The first two: I prefer the second with it's lovely soft color. Beautiful picture!
The next two: I prefer the first picture with the very nice detail, but there is one thing with the picture I don't like. At the top of the rock there is a blue light surrounding the rocks that do not match with the clouds. For me, it's a little too much editing. It is still a beautiful image, but a little "over coocked"
The next two: Okay...! They are both very beautiful! Choosing between these is not easy, but I think prefer the second version. It looks more natural, and keeps the fog/haze grey as I'm used to see it.
Tne next two: I prefer the second version. I think the light is more balanced and it gives a little more focus on the two people standing in the distance.
Last two: Both is beautiful, but the first picture is excellent with it's colors!
All of the pictures looks great, but some is even better than the other. Blue light or not.
Very nice work!
|
3.1416
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Aug 08 23:02
Reply
I prefer all the processed pictures.
Only I think in your first example the reds are a little bit overexposed, great work.
sergio
|
Paulo Calafate
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 08 01:15 - Edited by: Paulo Calafate
Reply
Tenho os meus dois computadores "envirusados" e anquilosados, de tal maneira que estou a usar um pré-histórico portátil, comprado ao desbarato na ciganada, cujo monitor é do mais reles que possas imaginar. E como gasto o dinheiro todo em material fotográfico, ainda não pude fazer o upgrade para um novo. Assim, não dá para tirar grandes conclusões acerca das diferenças entre as duas versões que apresentas, além das óbvias, como a maior saturação de cor, contraste e gama dinâmica visíveis nas que editaste. O detalhe fino, com essa Canon EOS 1D MMark III, é fantástico e o resultado, para mim, já roça o profissional nas versões processadas. É claro que a máquina não é tudo. A correcta leitura da luz, a escolha do ângulo, enquadramento, hora do dia e abertura focal são independentes da câmara que se utiliza e nesses aspectos estás como peixe dentro de água. Acho que melhor não se poderia fazer. Os meus sinceros parabéns.
Já agora, os originais foram tirados em RAW ou JPEG? É que já tenho lido que o JPEG destas câmaras pro, são de altíssima qualidade e evitam o uso do RAW. Neste último formato, as imagens ficam a precisar de correcção dos níveis, das cores e contraste. Como elas têm várias opções avançadas em JPEG (para retrato, paisagem, nocturnos, etc) e se o motivo a fotografar não tiver grandes diferenças de luz, acho que até há vantagens em usar este formato. E mesmo nesses casos de altos contrastes, um uso adequado do ajuste Shadows/Highlight vai buscar detalhe às zonas mais escuras e consegue-se obter resultados espectaculares. Eu, por exemplo, agora com a minha nova Pentax K20D, de 14Mp e sensor CMOS, raramente disparo em RAW. Só mesmo quando quero fazer umas brincadeiras a simular HDR. Agora só não percebo como sendo tu um grande entusiasta da paisagem, não te viraste para a Canon EOS 5D que é abençoada por toda a malta que se dedica a esse género fotográfico. Além disso o sensor é de 12 Mp, e, outro pormenor importante, é que é muito mais barata. A 1D Mark III parece-me ser mais indicada para fotografia de desporto e reportagem em que realmente as 10 imagens por segundo que ela consegue tirar e o baixo ruído a sensibilidades altas fazem a diferença. Daí o facto de ela ter "só" 10Mp. E como dentro em breve vai sair a substituta da 5D, que dizem ir fazer o deleite dos fãs do "landscape", o preço dela ainda vai descer mais. Para terminar, que lentes usas? Agora com um corpo de topo estás "condenado" a comprar material correspondente. Senão é como pôr uns pneus dum BMW (que já não são maus) num carro de Fórmula 1... escorregas nas curvas
Um abraço
|
Corneel Timmermans
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 08 13:35
Reply
Hi,
Good to see the "original"and the photoshopped ones, gives a good idea how much enhancement is done in the digidoka...
But it has been said before, it all starts with the original photo.
Nice of you to show this to us.
Greetz..
Corneel
PS the first and second photo I find too much "processing" for my taste ... the others are well done!
|
|
www.sergioleitao.com
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 08 13:37
Reply
Hi, thanks to you all for your nice comments that always help me a lot to get out of my couch and go out shooting.
I always get very pleased when people like the images that i try to create.
After reading all the posts i decided to reprocess the first photo, and in a day or two i'll post it here in the forum.
@fotogravenswaay, it is kind of a problem that i have, it is difficult to me to look at a picture and crop it, i sometimes do but in the back of my brain there's a voice telling me that the photo is not complete, it has something missing... So i always try to make the shot including only what i want... with my previous camera this was a bit more dificult because in the viewfinder we could only see 95% of the recorded image, and many times i discover later in post processing, some little things that i didnt want them there, but usually i would clone it out instead of cropping.
@Paulo Calafate, ola Paulo, obrigado pelos elogios , eu disparo sempre em raw, e ajusto-os no lightroom para depois exportar em tiff 16bits para o CS3, e ainda não experimentei os JPGs desta maquina, mas da proxima vou disparar em RAW e JPG em simultaneo para ver como saiem os JPGs.
Escolhi esta maquina porque nao aguentava esperar pela 5D nova, e queria uma que me durasse uns anitos valentes, depois esta so fica atras da 5d por nao ser full frame, mas tem um factor de conversao de 1.3x que não e mau de todo, e depois tem uma coisa fabulosa, que se chama live view, depois de testar esta função nesta fotos, nunca mais vou poder viver sem sem esta função. Poder simular a exposição num lcd da maquina, acompanhado do foco manual ampliado 5x ou 10x e do histograma ao vivo e a cores é uma coisa do outro mundo.
Lentes: 24-70mm f2.8L - 70-200 f4 L - 100mm macro e esta semana chega a 17-40mm f4 L
Vendi a sigma 10-20mm no ebay, nesta maquina em conjunto com os filtro simplesmente não serve, apesar de ser uma lente boa, não ha maneira dos cantos nao aparecerem negros mesmo a 20mm.
Regards
Sergio Leitao
|
Online now: Guests - 1 Members - 0