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!

The New and Improved Fun with Nikon Images!

Corlan F.

Subscriber Member
All things considered, Corlan, this is some pretty impressive work (this and the post above). And, if the DR, bokeh, etc., is "killed", by the jpeg, it must have been stunning indeed, as this image looks amazing.
Corlan: +1, what Lloyd said. Looks like a nice shop. Why are they remodeling? Did you shoot any panos to get a larger impression? On the other hand, the "details" may provide the best images, and don't draw any comparison between the old and new.

Cheers, Matt
Corian: The ones above are gloriously old world. This one makes me want
to open the bottle. It is that good. The shot :D I am a soft drinks person.

Lovely to look at and I am sure to taste.

Regards.
Lloyd, Matt, Rayyan: thanks.

Lloyd you're probably right, it's just that after contemplating the smooth transitions on a large file then looking at the cramped up jpeg version gives you a sense of losing a lot in terms of peformance. Just picky, i guess.

Matt: remodeling on a whim after so many years. The owner decided to have a private hallway and some stock area so the new shop even (significantly) smaller than before -though more modern and cosy. The total shop is now down to around 900 sq. ft. I did some panning but available time was an issue and i'm not too happy with them. The client was satisfied (i even got a couple of decent bottles extra) with the other ones, including those above (printed from 10" to 24"), so... :)


Rayyan: you're fine -one can't entertain all vices (or is it sins?) at the same time. Well maybe i do, so we need reasonnable people like you to keep things balanced. :D :deadhorse:
Soft drinks you said? No problem, if coffee fits in that category i have some stuff coming ;)
 

shtarka1

Active member
All things considered, Corlan, this is some pretty impressive work (this and the post above). And, if the DR, bokeh, etc., is "killed", by the jpeg, it must have been stunning indeed, as this image looks amazing.
Have to agree with Lloyd.......Amazing Image & A Job Well Done On Short Notice!
 

Lloyd

Active member
Grandpa, Julie had a dream where she saw that I was the President; said Hamza.

Where were you born? I asked.

Texas, just like my dad; said Hamza with obvious and rightful pride.

Look he said pointing the 2 stickons on his monitor. One was a Single Star, on the right a bigger one with many Stars and Stripes.

Do you have a detailed birth certificate, I asked. Hamza ignored me. I have
traveled the world. I have crossed the States, many times, North/South, East/West.

I know there is no place on earth where Julie and Hamza can realize their
dreams..except here..in the States. America is bigger than their dreams, much bigger. I could hear it say..' Julie, just a President? I expect you
and Hamza to ask something bigger of me '. Only in the States. I know.


Boy, I said..You want to go with me on a small holiday? Yippee!!

Where? The best people, the best food, the best music, the best country.

Better than Texas? You decide I said.

Than I remembered another child. Mela. In a country far far away. She too
has dreams...


I picked up the phone to make a reservation. Hamza and me. New Orleans, Jackson, Nashville, Memphis and back. I knew what to do, where to go and
where to stay. Clark, eat your heart out. I am a comin and I don't give a damn either.
Once again, surprising and yet not, your images and words leave me speechless. Corlan said it correctly, here poetry meets it's visual counterpart. You invoke your love of contrast, and it has a power that is simply overwhelming. :salute:
 

m_driscoll

New member
When poetry meets its visual counterpart. With a perspective.
Beautiful, Rayyan.
Bravo! Amen.:)
Once again, surprising and yet not, your images and words leave me speechless. Corlan said it correctly, here poetry meets it's visual counterpart. You invoke your love of contrast, and it has a power that is simply overwhelming. :salute:
rayyan: I'm on the wrong coast; so, I'm always a little late to comment. Just as well, Corlan's, Steve's and Lloyd's more then suffice in response to your eloquence, photos, and insight. Hamza can be President; just make sure his birth certificate's stored safely. Mela's dreams are our collective responsibility. :salute:

Cheers, Matt

http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com
 

rayyan

Well-known member
When poetry meets its visual counterpart. With a perspective.
Beautiful, Rayyan.
Bravo! Amen.:)
Once again, surprising and yet not, your images and words leave me speechless. Corlan said it correctly, here poetry meets it's visual counterpart. You invoke your love of contrast, and it has a power that is simply overwhelming. :salute:
rayyan: I'm on the wrong coast; so, I'm always a little late to comment. Just as well, Corlan's, Steve's and Lloyd's more then suffice in response to your eloquence, photos, and insight. Hamza can be President; just make sure his birth certificate's stored safely. Mela's dreams are our collective responsibility. :salute:

Cheers, Matt

http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com
From Julie, Mela, Hamza and me...:salute::salute::salute::salute:
 

Corlan F.

Subscriber Member
Trying to make room on a hard disk, found the last set of photos taken this winter with the D700, just before the D3X arrived.

Here's the last set, without much processing (C1 mainly) except for the obvious.

A window, behind the stairs:




a door handle:




and what's in the backyard:



This last image is a btw a very good ewample of whay i was referring to by "jpeg killing the bokeh". Here's a 100% crop to illustrate what my objection was:




and, last but not least... a dream camera.



(this last one @1600 ISO - 1/30s - handheld with the ZF 50/2 @f2)



Browsing through this "final" series of D700 files again, couldn't help thinking that it's a pretty d**n good piece of equipment.
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Trying to make room on a hard disk, found the last set of photos taken this winter with the D700, just before the D3X arrived.

Here's the last set, without much processing (C1 mainly) except for the obvious.

A window, behind the stairs:




a door handle:




and what's in the backyard:



This last image is a btw a very good ewample of whay i was referring to by "jpeg killing the bokeh". Here's a 100% crop to illustrate what my objection was:




and, last but not least... a dream camera.



(this last one @1600 ISO - 1/30s - handheld with the ZF 50/2 @f2)



Browsing through this "final" series of D700 files again, couldn't help thinking that it's a pretty d**n good piece of equipment.
Corian: Gorgeous find on your HD. I love bw. But in the ' backyard ' I see
a masterpiece. Bokeh or not it is superb.

As to the Contax...I am sure in your hands it must have produced lovely
results.

Regards.
 

shtarka1

Active member
Corlan....Killer Set! Partial To The B&W Of Course ;) But You Are Rockin It Brotha! Is That Gorgeous,Super Clean Contax A New Purchase? It Should Come With A Triple X Warning! So Hot!:)
 

Corlan F.

Subscriber Member
Corian: Gorgeous find on your HD. I love bw. But in the ' backyard ' I see a masterpiece. Bokeh or not it is superb.

As to the Contax...I am sure in your hands it must have produced lovely
results.

Regards.
Corlan....Killer Set! Partial To The B&W Of Course ;) But You Are Rockin It Brotha! Is That Gorgeous,Super Clean Contax A New Purchase? It Should Come With A Triple X Warning! So Hot!:)

Thanks Rayyan, thanks Steve.

Glad you liked the B&W, i know it's not much but everytime i look at it there's a little something happening, really don't know why.

The Contax is a long story. In a few words i had to let it go because i couldn't really justify having it while waiting for an opportunity on a DB that wasn't showing fast enough (and i specifically wanted an Aptus). The new pricing for digital backs was not already taken into account by the second hand sellers (most wanted 7 to 12K for older gear when the new II-5 was merely around 7K here... only Phase backs were available for relatively cheap, but...). Then a super opportunity showed up, meaning basically for me to swap the D700 and a few idle non-photography stuff for the D3X, so... it was a smooth and reasonnable choice. The C645 is a great camera blessed with fantastic lenses from Zeiss -i'll get back there whenever humanly possible. Knowing that i'll still want to keep a D3X or a D700 or one of the new equivalent to come, on the side. So little available funds, so many great (and expensive) gear out there... :( :eek:
 

Lloyd

Active member
Corian: Gorgeous find on your HD. I love bw. But in the ' backyard ' I see
a masterpiece. Bokeh or not it is superb.

As to the Contax...I am sure in your hands it must have produced lovely
results.

Regards.
+1 from here. Excellent work all around. (BTW, do you sharpen those jpegs for web viewing? If so, perhaps that is what's killing the bokeh?)
 

Corlan F.

Subscriber Member
+1 from here. Excellent work all around. (BTW, do you sharpen those jpegs for web viewing? If so, perhaps that is what's killing the bokeh?)
Thanks Lloyd :)
And no, i actually don't sharpen the jpegs (except on specific occasion where it makes sense).
IMO there's a dual cause behind what's showed on the last page. First off, of course is the size reduction, where 1/ obviously you cramp up more info using much less pixels 2/ PS doesn't do the best job (and the same for uprezing) not having the best algorythm for the task out there. Then, on the jpeg side of things, the format is simply destructive and the compression mode even at max output values (less possible compression) has to destroy a lot of information using an average clustering method. Not good, especially for transitions (hence, "busy bokeh" for example). We all know that, and even though it's a huge commodity on the web for exchanging information and despite what the industry's trying to sell us, in most cases there's a trade-off in quality involved.

In the printing business we're more and more often confronted to people swearing that you don't see the difference between using a TIFF or its jpeg counterpart on a full spread magazine page. Well, untill you prove them wrong. Of course again the visible difference is more or less critical depending on the type and structure of the photo/layout involved, but on full page products ads we always insist on them (publisher, agency...) using the TIF. Particularly on close up products pieces featuring a lot of subtle light (levels) and tone transitions, the gap in quality is huge, even on a magazine -full- page. Been there, done that, many times.

Well, all this doesn't matter much here where we share photos mostly for fun, though it sometimes feels right to use caution when using such files to make quality statements, esp. re bokeh with busy backgrounds.

But we all know that... it's just sometimes a bit frustrating to see a nice file deteriorate and being helpless. :mad: :)
 

Lloyd

Active member
Thanks Lloyd :)
And no, i actually don't sharpen the jpegs (except on specific occasion where it makes sense).
IMO there's a dual cause behind what's showed on the last page. First off, of course is the size reduction, where 1/ obviously you cramp up more info using much less pixels 2/ PS doesn't do the best job (and the same for uprezing) not having the best algorythm for the task out there. Then, on the jpeg side of things, the format is simply destructive and the compression mode even at max output values (less possible compression) has to destroy a lot of information using an average clustering method. Not good, especially for transitions (hence, "busy bokeh" for example). We all know that, and even though it's a huge commodity on the web for exchanging information and despite what the industry's trying to sell us, in most cases there's a trade-off in quality involved.

In the printing business we're more and more often confronted to people swearing that you don't see the difference between using a TIFF or its jpeg counterpart on a full spread magazine page. Well, untill you prove them wrong. Of course again the visible difference is more or less critical depending on the type and structure of the photo/layout involved, but on full page products ads we always insist on them (publisher, agency...) using the TIF. Particularly on close up products pieces featuring a lot of subtle light (levels) and tone transitions, the gap in quality is huge, even on a magazine -full- page. Been there, done that, many times.

Well, all this doesn't matter much here where we share photos mostly for fun, though it sometimes feels right to use caution when using such files to make quality statements, esp. re bokeh with busy backgrounds.

But we all know that... it's just sometimes a bit frustrating to see a nice file deteriorate and being helpless. :mad: :)
Hi Corlan. That's a good explanation, and I've certainly seen the same. Just today I posted an image of my sister-in-law and her granddaughter over in the digital Leica thread, which looks good there, but the large print I made of it is significantly more impressive.

My question about sharpening really came about from something I've started doing when posting images with a lot of bokeh in them. If I generate the web-sized image in PS, I run my web-sharpening action on a duplicate layer, and the put a "reveal" (black) layer mask over it, and paint in the areas I want sharp, leaving the rest unsharpened. That leave a more pleasing bokeh (still short of the full-res image, but better). I don't do that when generating the web-sized image from Lightroom, as I haven't yet figured out how do it without going in to PS. That was the basis for my question.
 

Corlan F.

Subscriber Member
Hi Corlan. That's a good explanation, and I've certainly seen the same. Just today I posted an image of my sister-in-law and her granddaughter over in the digital Leica thread, which looks good there, but the large print I made of it is significantly more impressive.

My question about sharpening really came about from something I've started doing when posting images with a lot of bokeh in them. If I generate the web-sized image in PS, I run my web-sharpening action on a duplicate layer, and the put a "reveal" (black) layer mask over it, and paint in the areas I want sharp, leaving the rest unsharpened. That leave a more pleasing bokeh (still short of the full-res image, but better). I don't do that when generating the web-sized image from Lightroom, as I haven't yet figured out how do it without going in to PS. That was the basis for my question.
I'm with you, the selective mask is quite a useful asset for sharpening in certain cases (off hand i'm thinking "flower" and macro in general).

Talking about LR, following your advice (an apparent good results) i remember saying a couple of weeks ago that i'd give the new beta version a try. Downloaded it at the time, installed it... found it a bit complex at first sight and then kinda forgot about it. :eek: Need to put my mind into it, soon. Do you know which is the ACR version # equivalent to LR3 Beta RAW engine? I might start with the RAW conversion alone for the preliminary tests (as mentionned before C1 is not as good with the D3X than with the D700 and D3... and NX2 performs well but is definitely not the best programmed piece of SW (note: strong understatement :deadhorse:). Don't know if that was included in the latest CS4 update released for PS (11.0.2 // ACR 5.4) that we recently installed... .

If you have the info handy... thanks! :)


edit: btw, just had a look at your images on the M thread. Again, what a beautiful family you have. Or is it the photographer? :confused: Well, a good part of both, for sure. :toocool:
 

Lloyd

Active member
I'm with you, the selective mask is quite a useful asset for sharpening in certain cases (off hand i'm thinking "flower" and macro in general).

Talking about LR, following your advice (an apparent good results) i remember saying a couple of weeks ago that i'd give the new beta version a try. Downloaded it at the time, installed it... found it a bit complex at first sight and then kinda forgot about it. :eek: Need to put my mind into it, soon. Do you know which is the ACR version # equivalent to LR3 Beta RAW engine? I might start with the RAW conversion alone for the preliminary tests (as mentionned before C1 is not as good with the D3X than with the D700 and D3... and NX2 performs well but is definitely not the best programmed piece of SW (note: strong understatement :deadhorse:). Don't know if that was included in the latest CS4 update released for PS (11.0.2 // ACR 5.4) that we recently installed... .

If you have the info handy... thanks! :)


edit: btw, just had a look at your images on the M thread. Again, what a beautiful family you have. Or is it the photograph? Well, a good part of both, for sure.
Thanks for that last, Corlan. I'm blessed far beyond what I deserve, for sure.

I believe the ACR equivalent is 5.7. As for the LR3 Beta 2, I find I quite like it. A little fiddly still, but I'm very much looking forward to the full release version. Those images on the Leica thread were all processed in LR3 Beta 2.
 

Corlan F.

Subscriber Member
Thanks for that last, Corlan. I'm blessed far beyond what I deserve, for sure.

I believe the ACR equivalent is 5.7. As for the LR3 Beta 2, I find I quite like it. A little fiddly still, but I'm very much looking forward to the full release version. Those images on the Leica thread were all processed in LR3 Beta 2.
Ok thanks Lloyd. Not the same beast then (i had suspicions, that's why i asked... couldn't honestly see a difference).
So i guess i either have to find a way to update ACR in PS (not sure it's available for now)... or simply pluck up my courage and look into the LR3 B seriously. :eek:
 
Top