Fun With Sony Cameras

[thompsonkirk]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

I was so pleased to see seb's first series above, with gentle pastel tones!

IMO Anil's problem has mainly been over-processing, trying to achieve what's called pop instead of trying to attain a rich tonal range, which is IMO the widest-spread 'sin' that I see on the web - though it's just not acceptable for reputable gallery/museum exhibits, book publication, and the like. The present version has blocked-up highlights. Trying to achieve pop through contrast (or color saturation) too often has this result. Suggest making a Curve to open the shadows more, bring the midrange down a bit, and introduce gradation into highlights. (I think mediumcool and I have similar ideas about this.)

Wandering off topic In the direction of a couple of previous comments: I have trouble when folks discuss the aspects of technique that merge into style by invoking what is an 'amateur' or 'professional' standard. Quality in any field - photography, boatbuilding, ceramics, etc.- isn't a matter of untutored preference, nor of commercial acceptance. There's always a 'state of the art,' and work that's moderately interesting accepts it, while creative work pushes it a bit farther. Neither the web viewer nor the hired photographer has a privileged grip on this. It takes some knowledge of the history of photography and quite a bit of time spent looking at images in galleries or museums or on occasional trips to a library. There's a tradition of excellence, to be viewed and internalized but not just imitated.

Meandering farther, I believe it also helps to take art classes (not just workshops from folks with a gimmic to promote) and to join a critique group with others who are trying equally hard to express themselves.

Just another two cents, and apologies for wandering so far from the topic of images taken with Sony cameras. I tend appreciate it when folks say more than 'Like' and try to help one another with their work. So glad to see others doing this on this thread.

Kirk

 

[pegelli]

Re: Fun With Sony _____

The Royal Palace in Laken (Brussels), as seen from the greenhouses/botanic garden


A850 + Helios 35/2.8 (M42)

 

[mediumcool]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Great discussion so far around how we see, remember and then try to recreate our mood or vision in our pictures. I'm again reminded of how great this forum and the community is! Looking at my recent (and very meager) output of pictures, I see that I have been overdoing contrast (and saturation as a side-effect) and this conversation has been a good nudge for me

Following up on a previous comment, I tried to redo the mono version (I had previously posted it in the B&W thread). This is different in tone (so to so speak) and not as contrasty and amped up as the previous one. Still not happy yet as I'm not achieving the right tonal separation, but at least it's no longer hurting my eyes when I stare at it for a while

Also, Ian has generously agreed to take a crack at it if possible—I’m looking forward to seeing his mono version using my raw image. Thanks again, Ian, this is much appreciated!

Anil

I have to say that this is one tough original, at least when trying to do it justice without the glamour of colour information. Accordingly, I think that this is best as a colour picture, in part because the lighting is so flat (overcast?). I will post a colour and a mono version later.

New-found respect for Anil’s interpretations thus far!

 

[seb]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Maybe we can make a rule for this thread: If you are commenting off topic, you still have to show a picture.

In Anils shot, the biggest issue is the haze. With a lot of haze things with more distance looks less contrasty and blue-ish. But "blue-ish" is very simplified. The color shift on far away subjects depends on distance, lightsource and on the color and current brightness of the thing itself.

If we process the picture in a natural way, everything is fine. but if you add contrast with an RGB-curve (LR and PS do it this way) the "blue-ish" gets unrealistic colorshifts. And as we want to have the haze away, we push contrast there even harder and everything gets even worse.

In PS you can add contrast without the color shifts (use curves (with luminance)) or you add colorbalance (with curves (normal) where you change the R-G-B-channels seperately). You have to work with luminousity masks on these curves to seperate areas and/or colours..

Here an example of an own picture.
The first pic is the imported raw processed through C1 and exported to PSD. In C1, I set a LUMA-curve, compressed the dynamic range with the HDR rulers and reduced contrast in general. In the unprocessed RAW you will see a outburned white sky, a grey-blue wall as a hill and a too dark city. Maybe I will add a jpg of it this evening. At the moment, I don't have access to the RAW-file.

The second shows all processing without colour curves for the hill. As the hill isn't completely separated to the rest (because I'm using luminity masks) there is also some color shift on other areas. But it shows quite nicely the bad blue-ish cast the more far away anything is.

The last is the definitive picture. Beside contrast I added three different curves with different curves for each R-G-B-channel to the hill. Each to parts with different parts of brightness and light. At the end I added saturation to the hills.

The picture looks like a painting now, because I reduced any haze effects (or tried to at last). It's never ever realistic, but that wasn't my goal anway.

What I wanted to say with my wall of text: You can oversaturate pictures, but you may adjust colors and contrast depending on the distance.

And here's my picture (for not being off-topic):
A7RII + 55/1.8
(side note: heavily contrasted, oversaturated and unrealistic colors :ROTFL

​

 

[Vivek]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Maybe we can make a rule for this thread: If you are commenting off topic, you still have to show a picture.

+1

(side note: heavily contrasted, oversaturated and unrealistic colors :ROTFL

It (colors) is not unreal (may be impossible to see where you took it). Nature/reality is more creative than many of us
(See: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ormation-Portugal-looks-like-fist-Heaven.html)

The light (AKA "Dutch Light") was real. A snap (RX1R II) from yesterday.

Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr

 

[thompsonkirk]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Energetically bouncing light! Its a pleasure to see you were able to hang onto, or recapture, so much shadow/highlight detail. That makes it a really good example for the thread.

Kirk

 

[Pradeep]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

I was so pleased to see seb's first series above, with gentle pastel tones!

IMO Anil's problem has mainly been over-processing, trying to achieve what's called pop instead of trying to attain a rich tonal range, which is IMO the widest-spread 'sin' that I see on the web - though it's just not acceptable for reputable gallery/museum exhibits, book publication, and the like. The present version has blocked-up highlights. Trying to achieve pop through contrast (or color saturation) too often has this result. Suggest making a Curve to open the shadows more, bring the midrange down a bit, and introduce gradation into highlights. (I think mediumcool and I have similar ideas about this.)

Wandering off topic In the direction of a couple of previous comments: I have trouble when folks discuss the aspects of technique that merge into style by invoking what is an 'amateur' or 'professional' standard. Quality in any field - photography, boatbuilding, ceramics, etc.- isn't a matter of untutored preference, nor of commercial acceptance. There's always a 'state of the art,' and work that's moderately interesting accepts it, while creative work pushes it a bit farther. Neither the web viewer nor the hired photographer has a privileged grip on this. It takes some knowledge of the history of photography and quite a bit of time spent looking at images in galleries or museums or on occasional trips to a library. There's a tradition of excellence, to be viewed and internalized but not just imitated.

Meandering farther, I believe it also helps to take art classes (not just workshops from folks with a gimmic to promote) and to join a critique group with others who are trying equally hard to express themselves.

Just another two cents, and apologies for wandering so far from the topic of images taken with Sony cameras. I tend appreciate it when folks say more than 'Like' and try to help one another with their work. So glad to see others doing this on this thread.

Kirk

Very well written, Kirk. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

What is art? We could go on forever debating this. Entire books have been written on the topic without making the slightest difference in how people perceive it. I have wrestled with it myself. Have done the usual rounds of museums, galleries (always make it a point to visit a photo gallery wherever I can), bought coffee table books (have so many that an entire bookcase is filled with them). I've even taken a year of art class - you know the one where you learn to draw and paint still life and landscapes. I did that to understand how light affects things, in order to improve my own work. I highly recommend it by the way.

I've also done a lot of training in photoshop, was a beta tester for several versions of it a few years ago.

All of this has led me to believe, and I must disagree with you here, is that art is what appeals to you as an individual. Art evolves over time and is subject to cultural, social and religious influences that play a huge role in how artists and viewers alike see it. And this applies not just to visual but all forms of creation - be it music, literature, sculpture, even the performing arts. I go to the Guggenheim or MoMA, but for the life of me cannot appreciate most of the stuff there, give me the good old Met any day. And yet, people are crazy about Picasso and all those that choose to imitate him.

Back to photography......

I still maintain that even in the medium we love, it is an individual choice, often dictated by whether the work is done for a client or for one's own viewing pleasure. There are no rights and there are no wrongs, there is nothing that dictates high contrast, high saturation is bad and low-contrast, 'natural' is better or more pleasing aesthetically.

Many of the images in the list of the most expensive photographs in the world would, IMHO never make it to my own wall or on my list of what is 'art'. Yet, the world believes otherwise, who am I to argue with it?

Sometimes an image is provocative and interesting, without meeting the tonality criteria, check out Andy Lee's gallery. Very dark, emotive, with no detail in the shadows at all, but they work. For me the monochromatic theme really sets off the mood.

Lurie Belegurschi is quite the opposite, in color and highly saturated, yet he is one of the top rated photographers on 500px.

Fred Fertik's interpretation of everyday things is quite colorful too, and IMHO very impressive. Now, that's what I call art and would happily hang his stuff on my wall.

Patrick DiFruscia is another one whose work I admire.

This is not to say that soft, low-contrast, unsaturated images are not appealing. Given the right subject they too can be very powerful, I love the classic 'park bench and tree after a snowstorm' look. There are many many photographers who excel at these 'high-key' images and a lot of that is very impressive.

The point I am trying to make is that there are no rules, at least in my book. You shoot what you like and you process it how you want to. If I am not trying to impress a client or a potential customer then I get to do with my images what I want and that indeed is a privilege. If my own family and friends like my work, they ask for it and I give it away for them to hang on their walls. THAT, believe it or not makes my day more than anything else.

Oops. I didn't get the memo in time, so no photo with this reply. Will make amends soon.....

 

[Pradeep]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

+1



It (colors) is not unreal (may be impossible to see where you took it). Nature/reality is more creative than many of us
(See: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ormation-Portugal-looks-like-fist-Heaven.html)

The light (AKA "Dutch Light") was real. A snap (RX1R II) from yesterday.

Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr

Ah, Vivek, I really like this one.

One question, how do you get away with photos of people like this? I find it hard to do it, perhaps because I am a bit shy of pointing my camera at some stranger in the street. New Yorkers are less forgiving too, which is another issue.

 

[pegelli]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Maybe we can make a rule for this thread: If you are commenting off topic, you still have to show a picture.

What if you haven't got an A7 series camera? If that's no problem it's also +1 for me

 

[Pradeep]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

OK, making amends

Here is one I took a while ago, on a most memorable trip to what I would consider the best museum of its kind in the world.

The photo is of the recreation of Christiaan Barnard's OR, with the wax models representing the famous surgeon, the patient and his assistants performing the first heart transplant in the world in 1968. The set up is authentic to a 'T', including the splash of blood on the assistant's cap from a punctured artery. For those in the medical field, it is great to see the blackboard as in a real OR, along with all the other paraphernalia.

I got goose bumps just being there. Absolutely, highly recommended.

Anyway, here's a photo to meet the requirements of this thread.....

 

[jim251]

Re: Fun With Sony _____

.

A6300, FE55mm, f/8

 

[Anil Kalagatla]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

I have to say that this is one tough original, at least when trying to do it justice without the glamour of colour information. Accordingly, I think that this is best as a colour picture, in part because the lighting is so flat (overcast?). I will post a colour and a mono version later.

New-found respect for Anil’s interpretations thus far!

Thanks Ian, I'm looking forward to your versions. I guess I did indeed pick a somewhat hard subject (definitely exceeding my skills at this moment). The sky was indeed overcast in the foreground, though the hills were sunlit (leading to the mixed lighting and the resulting blue foreground cast).

In Anils shot, the biggest issue is the haze. With a lot of haze things with more distance looks less contrasty and blue-ish. But "blue-ish" is very simplified. The color shift on far away subjects depends on distance, lightsource and on the color and current brightness of the thing itself.

Yeah, that's definitely one issue (among others) - I did address it somewhat in post with a graduated filter with dehaze (I didnt dare push it too much as it started looking even more unnatural). At least this matches what my eye was seeing (the strange disparity between overcast highly saturated foreground and somewhat hazy background hills).

IMO Anil's problem has mainly been over-processing, trying to achieve what's called pop instead of trying to attain a rich tonal range, which is IMO the widest-spread 'sin' that I see on the web - though it's just not acceptable for reputable gallery/museum exhibits, book publication, and the like. The present version has blocked-up highlights. Trying to achieve pop through contrast (or color saturation) too often has this result. Suggest making a Curve to open the shadows more, bring the midrange down a bit, and introduce gradation into highlights. (I think mediumcool and I have similar ideas about this.)

Agreed - strangely enough I have not been a big fan of over processing in photographs of others, but somehow I seem to be doing it more recently (this thread will hopefully fix that affliction!).

To offset my wall of text, here're a couple of pictures. The first one is on-topic, a recent picture with A7Rii and Leica 50mm APO. The second one is an older mono picture (not on an A7, so probably off-topic).

20160522-untitled-001
Kayaks Waiting

 

[thompsonkirk]

Re: Fun With Sony _____

First-class minimalism

Kirk

 

[seb]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

I keep it short, thanks for the answers. Great community you are.

@Vivek: One of your best (in my opinion). Light, sharpness, composition, woman matches perfectly.

 

[thompsonkirk]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Thank you, Pradeep, for the compliment. And very little difference of opinion here. I only want to balance your idea that art is what appeals subjectively to the individual (or the opposite pole, that it can be defined 'objectively' by expert critics) against something else, a viewpoint deriving from Wittgenstein: Art isn't something existing subjectively or objectively, but is a busy kind of game that plays out through discourse or conversation. It's happening whenever someone exhibits something that advances/shifts/questions/disrupts the dialog.

I'm sure we're only inches apart about about this, and now it must be time to go out for Fun with The Sony A7 Series Cameras (All of Them).

Kirk

Edit: Just remembered I'm supposed to post an image to contribute to this thread. Here's a gentleman of the old school holding a private conversation on the subject of 'What Is Art?" The other 'voice' in his dialogue is some new work ca. 1970 by Eva Hesse. In the language of Artspeak, he's said to be interrogating it. :lecture:



Either Nikkormat or first Leica, around 1970. The glowing outline around the figure isn't from Photoshop – it's from a then-fashionable style of development with little agitation in diluted Rodinal.

 

[Vivek]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Ah, Vivek, I really like this one.

One question, how do you get away with photos of people like this? I find it hard to do it, perhaps because I am a bit shy of pointing my camera at some stranger in the street. New Yorkers are less forgiving too, which is another issue.

Thank you, Pradeep!

People just come and crash into my frames.

Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr

I have not been to NY but I thought it is a haven for street photography?

 

[Barry Haines]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

ENLARGEMENT​

 

[thompsonkirk]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

"People just come and crash into my frames" --Vivek

It looks like sometimes you hold your camera low, or Rolleiflex style, and look through the articulated screen?

Doisneau thought that was the most 'respectful' way to shoot.

Kirk

 

[Lucille]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

 

[thompsonkirk]

Re: Fun with the Sony A7 Series Cameras( all of them)

Nice portrait with impressive sharpness and clarity, but not your best bokeh - so I wonder which lens?

Kirk