Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: C1 7 & IQ160: How much clarity & structure for landscape photography?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area, California
    Posts
    384
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    C1 7 & IQ160: How much clarity & structure for landscape photography?

    I know this adjustment will depend on image to image.

    However, from your experience, is there any starting point for Clarity & Structure slider for landscape photography?

    There is another thread where this setup being discussed for D800.

    Thanks,

    Subrata

  2. #2
    Senior Member malmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: C1 7 & IQ160: How much clarity & structure for landscape photography?

    I don't have an answer but your question has prompted me to go and play with these options. In the past I have basically left them at zero.


    Mal
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: C1 7 & IQ160: How much clarity & structure for landscape photography?

    It depends upon the usage of your image. If you're going to post it online, sure crank it up until you see halos, then wind it back a little. However if you want to make a large fine-art print, it then depends upon what you want your image to be! I do shoot an IQ160, but I think this applies to all cameras

    For example:


    Is a very high contrast image with most of the foreground in shadow to hang onto details in the sky. The clarity slider, set to punch, was cranked right up and gives a wild look, which is entirely the intention. When looking at the print the usual comment is, "is that a painting"?

    This one:

    Required a tremendous amount of playing to get the layers in the image correct and to avoid nasty halos, especially along the boundary between sky and far mountain. Obviously some of the image I was attempting that high clarity look and in the foreground it was much reduced. Note there are apparent halos along the left land vs sky, which is jpeg compression artefact.

    I recall on that last image that the sand went quite orange and whilst had some interesting warmth in foreground vs cool behind type of punch, I really felt it was wrong, distracted from the main subject and wanted to emphasise the sun-bleached sand and intense sunshine. I can't recall now how I solved the problem, perhaps instead of punch used neutral!

    So the consultants answer is, it depends.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Member fmueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: C1 7 & IQ160: How much clarity & structure for landscape photography?

    I'm a fairly new owner of a P40+ on a tech cam and a Hasselblad 503. I believe it's the same sensor as the IQ160 but with less real estate.

    I tried adding a little clarity to an early capture and found it made the resulting image look over processed on both the monitor and in a 13x19 print. I've since left it clarity at zero or even a couple points negative.

    This could simply be my aesthetic, for better or worse. I'm not a fan of the current tendency to over process pictures and find a lightly processed P40+ capture to have a very unique signature of its own that easily separates it from my smaller format cams. That is usually a good thing.

    YMMV.

    Fred

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •