The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Terry
New member
Norm - have fun with it!
Lars
Active member
Yes that would have been nice. Obviously X10 is in another price bracket, a good guess is that the hybrid VF was cut to reduce cost.
I think Fujifilm is testing different market niches to see what will work commercially. I wouldn't be surprised if an X100 with a zoom lens is added eventually. But first up next year is the rumored interchangeable-lens X series camera.
Terry
New member
I think the data part would have worked fine. However, the focus box and parallax correction that drove/drives people crazy on the X100 would have been exacerbated with the zoom lens and then the same zoom built into the viewfinder.
It will be interested to see how they modify the hybrid for the interchangeable lens version. Will it be static like M8/M9 or change based on the lens.
It will be interested to see how they modify the hybrid for the interchangeable lens version. Will it be static like M8/M9 or change based on the lens.
Jim Radcliffe
Member
I went out yesterday afternoon for a little shooting time with the X10 using the EXR mode.. visited my old favorites, the trains in Grapevine, TX.
jonoslack
Active member
As you say - a proper 'zooming' optical rangefinder is likely to be a real challenge - I can see the advantage of having a static optical viewfinder and an EVF.
Jim - lovely shots -
Jim Radcliffe
Member
Yesterday was the only time I have played with EXR so I really don't have much to say about it other than it looks promising. I was pleased with the way the photos came out.. wanted to shoot more but the rain started and I had to cut the outing short. Will play more as time permits.
Jono and Terry, thanks.
Terry, looking forward to shots from your upcoming trip... envy... I'm once again stuck in Dallas.
Mark Gowin
Member
I am very impressed with the photos I am seeing from the X10. Jim, I particularly like your processing in your last set of photos. Care to share? I understand if you don't want to divulge your secret sauce.
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Likewise Jim I would love to hear a quick over view of your work flow particularly ..how you process for display on the web. Those images and your website look amazing .
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Fantastic work, Jim.
With the quality you guys get out of this camera, it's rather tempting to consider an X10 for all day-to-day photography, anything except action and telephoto work.
With the quality you guys get out of this camera, it's rather tempting to consider an X10 for all day-to-day photography, anything except action and telephoto work.
Jim Radcliffe
Member
Mark and Roger,
Thanks for the kind words. As for the post-processing, it's really quite simple.
I use Photoshop CS5 only:
1 re-size to 1000 px in width (I always re-size first)
2 layer adjustment - levels
3 layer adjustment - contrast (sometimes omitted and use curves instead)
4 layer adjustment - curves (for fine tuning)
5 layer adjustment - hue & saturation (tweak color, enhance some, subdue others)
6 layer adjustment - photo filter (I do not use this all the time)
7 dodge and burn (if needed)
8 Sharpen (if needed)
9 Export for web at 72 dpi and upload to my server.
Understand that none of these steps (2 thru 8) are always implemented. Each photo gets treated manually and not every step is always needed.. I do not use actions.
For B&W conversions I simply use the B&W adjustment layer and tweak using the sliders for tonality and a curves adjustment layer for contrast and also tonality.
Hope that answers your question... no magic here.. just treating each photo based on what I feel are the best steps to get the most from the file.
Thanks for the kind words. As for the post-processing, it's really quite simple.
I use Photoshop CS5 only:
1 re-size to 1000 px in width (I always re-size first)
2 layer adjustment - levels
3 layer adjustment - contrast (sometimes omitted and use curves instead)
4 layer adjustment - curves (for fine tuning)
5 layer adjustment - hue & saturation (tweak color, enhance some, subdue others)
6 layer adjustment - photo filter (I do not use this all the time)
7 dodge and burn (if needed)
8 Sharpen (if needed)
9 Export for web at 72 dpi and upload to my server.
Understand that none of these steps (2 thru 8) are always implemented. Each photo gets treated manually and not every step is always needed.. I do not use actions.
For B&W conversions I simply use the B&W adjustment layer and tweak using the sliders for tonality and a curves adjustment layer for contrast and also tonality.
Hope that answers your question... no magic here.. just treating each photo based on what I feel are the best steps to get the most from the file.
I like your photo's Jim but do you mean you redo the photograph every time for every size you need? I know many would just make a 'master' full resolution TIFF image with all their adjustments (except sharpening), and then re-size, change to JPEG, and sharpen for the appropriate use, web, print etc.
Steve
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Jim
Thanks for the insights . As Uwe and Steve have pointed out your work flow seems focused(maybe optimized ) for output to the screen at a small size . It clearly works well ..you have the images to show .
The downside is that if you also print ......you would be required to reprocess from the original . Thus it depends on how much you print as to whether this is much of an issue.
But when I see such great work from such small files ...I wonder if I have my priorities right .
Thanks for the insights . As Uwe and Steve have pointed out your work flow seems focused(maybe optimized ) for output to the screen at a small size . It clearly works well ..you have the images to show .
The downside is that if you also print ......you would be required to reprocess from the original . Thus it depends on how much you print as to whether this is much of an issue.
But when I see such great work from such small files ...I wonder if I have my priorities right .
Brian Mosley
New member
Beautiful work Jim, did you choose to lose the shadow detail in your processing? I'd like to see a bit more into those shadows, I think.
Thanks for sharing, the colour is very nice indeed.
Brian
Thanks for sharing, the colour is very nice indeed.
Brian
Jim Radcliffe
Member
I should have clarified that this is my workflow for the web. For prints I resize based on what size print I will produce. I have found that the same steps work for prints but sometimes, depending on the type of print being made, I must modify the layer adjustments on the images. It depends on the paper that will be used. Some print darker, some lighter.
So, yes, sometimes I end up redoing the work but understand that none of what I listed above takes much time at all and I do enjoy post work so it's not really an issue or bothersome.
I tried working on full size images and then resizing for the web but they appeared to me to loose something when I downsized them. Maybe it's all in my head.
I no longer print on an inkjet at home. My results never pleased me and the cost of ink and paper can be a real pain in the wallet.. so, when I want prints I send them to a local lab that has a variety of different paper I can use.
Truth is that I do not have enough room in my home for many prints. I need a bigger house!
So, yes, sometimes I end up redoing the work but understand that none of what I listed above takes much time at all and I do enjoy post work so it's not really an issue or bothersome.
I tried working on full size images and then resizing for the web but they appeared to me to loose something when I downsized them. Maybe it's all in my head.
I no longer print on an inkjet at home. My results never pleased me and the cost of ink and paper can be a real pain in the wallet.. so, when I want prints I send them to a local lab that has a variety of different paper I can use.
Truth is that I do not have enough room in my home for many prints. I need a bigger house!
Last edited:
Hi Jim,
The Fuji X10 looks great...as do all cameras in your posts! :>) I have a X100 and am trying to decide if it is worth the effort.
I was out to the Grapevine RR and wondered if you have walked to the railbridge just a little down the line?
http://robertemoorephoto.com/p254659952#h23fc67
I ignored it for years but it is worth a look.
If you are up to an outing this weekend PM me...I would love to catch up on what you have been doing.
Bob
The Fuji X10 looks great...as do all cameras in your posts! :>) I have a X100 and am trying to decide if it is worth the effort.
I was out to the Grapevine RR and wondered if you have walked to the railbridge just a little down the line?
http://robertemoorephoto.com/p254659952#h23fc67
I ignored it for years but it is worth a look.
If you are up to an outing this weekend PM me...I would love to catch up on what you have been doing.
Bob
jonoslack
Active member
Hi Arjuna
don't care about the camera - this is a lovely shot - excellent!