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!

Show your before and after images

MichaelToye

New member
Old post, but I still like seeing how our brains work from capture to 'developed'. Here's 3 from me. btw, the originals are as shot with exposure, highlights and blacks adjusted slightly for a 'good' exposure. No contrast, sharpening in adobe camera raw.




Zero Chance Of Rain by michael_toye, on Flickr




The Walls Have Eyes [Explored] by michael_toye, on Flickr

And here's a rare manipulation from me. I wanted the frame to be clean and, despite waiting for those people to leave, this was the best I could get




Step 4 For Phone Calls [Explored] by michael_toye, on Flickr
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Thanks for bringing back this thread.
It illustrates poignantly the ambivalence I feel about my own images when comparing an original with its processed image.
For me it's always a struggle between maintaining a more natural flatter look versus one with greater contrast and clarity.
That's especially true for landscape shots through thirty miles of air.
 

Paul.N

New member
I love this thread.

I'm new to the MM and am posting the original shot, followed by two versions..

The original:


My first attempt at processing:



My final version of processing:

Hutchins Redux

I had the last version printed at Digital Silver Imaging using traditional b&w chemicals/paper and blew the photo up to 30x40. It is the largest print I've ever made. I love it. The detail holds, but up close it almost looks over sharpened but has a grain like appearance.
 

chrism

Well-known member
Rather embarrassed to show this as I started with a boring photo and tarted it up into something presentable:

Original


Processed:


A shameful fraud has been perpetrated!

Chris :eek:
 

teeraash

New member
May be it's because I'm using a Mac Book Pro Retina to view this thread, I do prefer many "before" images than the after. They look more natural and less digital.
 

turtle

New member
Hi Paul N,

I have processed your file for a bit of fun and posted it here (I hope you don;t mind), but also so I could see if the top left is clipped (and it is). With the MM its critical to check the histogram and check there is no clipping as you cant get it back. In the case of this shot, if you had used negative exposure compensation it would have retained the top left sky and you could then have boosted the general exposure with no penalty really. I usually leave my MM at -2/3 compensation when shooting scenes like this and you are usually safe. quick check of the RAW histogram and you can adjust from there (as landscapes tend not to run away).

This version processed in LR, with a fairly gentle split tone.Will look a bit rough as v small jpg to work with.
 

turtle

New member
PS how do you post images in the body of the post, not as attachments? If you can help, please PM me so as not to derail this thread - thanks!
 

Paul.N

New member
Hi Paul N,

I have processed your file for a bit of fun and posted it here (I hope you don;t mind), but also so I could see if the top left is clipped (and it is). With the MM its critical to check the histogram and check there is no clipping as you cant get it back. In the case of this shot, if you had used negative exposure compensation it would have retained the top left sky and you could then have boosted the general exposure with no penalty really. I usually leave my MM at -2/3 compensation when shooting scenes like this and you are usually safe. quick check of the RAW histogram and you can adjust from there (as landscapes tend not to run away).

This version processed in LR, with a fairly gentle split tone.Will look a bit rough as v small jpg to work with.
Thanks! I like what you've done with it. I knew that the pic was blown out, but wanted to see how noticeable it would be on a large scale print. It isn't too bad. I definitely wouldn't sell a print like that, but for home use, I love looking at it :)

I'm still in the learning phase with this camera - I absolutely love it, but have been a bit burned by blown out highlights as of late. My recent experiments with studio lighting were interesting. I ended up with some portraits that I liked, but nailing the exposure on a subject (child) that kept getting closer and closer to the strobes was almost a lesson in futility.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
One of the main reasons I like shooting with the S2...it gets you 90% or more of the way there as long as you shoot it correctly. It's like shooting with slide film again, only with more flexibility and resolution.



 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Two more. Generally the only thing I need to do is add a bit of contrast for certain images (if the light is flat), or sometimes increase the shadow detail when there is a heavy light imbalance. I take a bit of saturation out of certain images, but it is quite subtle. But in general the best thing about the S2 (and m9 as well) is how little I need to process it to get what I want!







 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
And to be fair, here is one that needed a bit more work. I still try to keep the processing down as much as possible though. Too much and it no longer looks natural to me. Basically, I feel like you have to work with the light. If the light is not working for you, then you're out of luck. That's the luxury not having any deadlines or commitments, however. This one was for an editorial job that I had two days to do, and I had do a number of different locations and styles. I just had to get something salvageable, regardless of timing and lighting, so I had to process a bit more.



 
J

JohnW

Guest
I hope to make a contribution later. But I'm surprised at how much contrast you BW processors seem to favor. All those luscious middle grays are the charm of BW for me.

John
 

JohnBrew

Active member
From a recent trip to Italy. "Roma Segrete". M8.2, 50 Lux ASPH, f11, 1/30. -2/3 EV.

Original DNG file, no corrections. Downsized for web. Second image processed with ACR.
 

GMB

Active member
Ok. Here is my contribution. I went to several steps to get to the final result and I would be lying if I said I had exactly that in mind when I took the shot. The print looks beautiful though. M8, 50 Lux or cron.



 
Top