 Posted 5/23/2007 7:12:03 PM
|
|
|
|
Okay people. I want this to be the week I figure all this out so I can concentrate on just taking pics and don't have to worry about any of this technical stuff. I like a good challenge but this is ridiculous. I got some workflow tips from my friend today. BEFORE I do what he suggests, I am attaching the following photo. I am going to re-edit and attach the same one AFTER doing what he said and see what you're comments are on both.
Once again, I do appreciate all the help you all have been so far. If it wasn't for people like you, I would've probably thrown my camera in the trash by now!
|
|
|
Posted 5/23/2007 10:53:05 PM
|
|
|
|
New Version:
/me fold his hands in prayer.
|
|
|
Posted 5/24/2007 4:05:08 AM
|
|
|
|
| Hey there En, Okay this is what I see between both pics... Ummm, not much of a difference ...Actually in the second pic, the rose color is a little lighter...having lightened it though it has taken a little detail away from the petals... I do no see any sharpening differences or anything else.. Okay so don't freak out .... ..if it is not what you wanted to hear.... I am not sure what changes you made but that is what I see...
I may not always be wRIGHTbut I am never wrong Profile -  Top 24 - 
|
|
|
Posted 5/24/2007 9:02:40 AM
|
|
|
|
Well, that helps. Actually that is what I see as well. I am not sure what brightness you are seeing them both at. In other words, you may be seeing two images that are darker/lighter than the two I am seeing. But, since the second one is lighter and not much difference otherwise, that is still helpful. I used PC gamma on the first to edit and Mac gamma on the second. I tried to make them look as close as possible to one another and exported both using Save For Web. I think I have come to the conclusion that I just need to take better pictures and not worry about everyone giving me great votes. As I think we have all learned from this, even from yesterday alone, four different monitors will produce 4 different results. I actually set up a second monitor on my system last night. Without calibrating it, I can tell by just looking at it that there is way more blue and it's darker than my main monitor.
I talk to my friend yesterday and he gave me the following workflow suggestions (Which may help others who use photoshop):
I was talking to him about a particular shot I took that is getting low scores, etc. on here. I actually sent him the file and he did a little editing. He added contrast and saturation and did some spot editing. I was aware of the "flaws" in the photo (not the image but the subject). I told him his image looked a little better but less like what I saw in reality. He basically said, "F... reality! This is art and an interpretation. Plus you will never be able to accurately reproduce on a camera what you see." I am paraphrasing but that's the nutshell version.
He then explained to me that programs like Bridge and Lightroom do a horrible job of reproducing color and I shouldn't use them. He said I should use my Canon software for converting RAW files (He uses Nikon and their software).
His basic point throughout the conversation was not to let my computer think for me (manage color). Always work in Adobe RGB, keep a master .PSD file, use Save For Web for images going to web or email and that will auto convert them to sRGB and 72 dpi. A side note here: I forgot to ask him what I do about the color/saturation loss when exporting that way. The above images don't look as nice as they did before export.
When printing, I should use the icc profile of the paper AND buy better paper. This was helpful as I didn't even know paper had it's own icc profile. I have a bunch of HP photo paper but it's cheap paper. I can't get a profile for it. I have to find the closest match for my printer, which does a decent job but there is a slight difference in green tones. He recommended Ilford Smooth Pearl Paper as a "cheap", good paper. It's not cheap to me $40 - $50 per 100 sheets. I use the HP for now mainly while I am learning because its half that price. Fair enough. When I get good enough to sell prints/make a portfolio, I will get the Ilford.
I am actually going to call him right now and ask a few more questions. He told me how I should set up photoshop to manage or "not manage" color. I was driving at the time so now I forget. I will post that later.
I realized something else. I don't know if this applies to LCD monitors but I will check. There is a dot pitch factor that could effect the appearance of sharpness of images on CRT monitors. I need to know if I have a good one cause that could kill sharpness for editing.
Bing, bang, boom! Gotta go...
|
|
|
Posted 5/24/2007 9:21:17 AM
|
|
|
|
Okay good no meltdowns for En today  ..Listen thanks a bunch for posting all of your findings and going through this here in the forum,,I am sure there has been lots you have posted that helps someone in some way.. I have been struggling with the sharp/oof factor as well.. on my pc..perfection (in my eyes lol) and then on upload..OOF... So that is all we can do...and I don't think it is feasible for everyone to just start out in digital expecting 8-10.. or those new to photography.... You should probably always concentrate on a good photograph , then worry about the editing. . Hope you have a stressfree day,,and as everyone has always said,,shoot shoot shoot and shoot some more.. Someone here said, to which others agreed, ....You are lucky to get 1 out of 100 photos..or something to that effect... Boy aint that the truth !!  ....
I may not always be wRIGHTbut I am never wrong Profile - Top 24 -
|
|
|
Posted 5/24/2007 9:25:40 AM
|
|
|
|
| Thanks and by the way, I subscribed to some daily email tips about "better photography". Most of the tips I already knew and most probably do as well. I have to leave now but I can maybe post some of them later.
|
|
|
|
