[shotokan101]

Hi,

I normally view my shots on a laptop LCD Screen which is uncalibrated.

I by chance viewed some of my Photobucket hosted images today on another PC and on this image in particular I noticed that the picture was markedly/drastically darker although to my eyes I had setup the CRT screen on the other PC to approximately the same "viewing expeerience" in Windos for general use.

Thought I'd post the pic here just to get some feedback on how dark (or otherwise) it iis perceived by others.

So if you view the picture here can you please post back how dark you perceive it to be on your setup ?

On a scale of 1 to 10 please wiith 10 being Very Dark and 1 being very Light would be great.

Thanks.

JIm

JIm

[johnaalex]

Doesn't look to bad to me, maybe 6.

[bodoman]

Its dark Jim, but not as we know it

Its all depends on what the colour of subject is supposed to be, if its dark brown then its not dark, but if its meant to be light brown, then it is dark.

I will sit on the fence and give it a 5

[bodoman]

oops double post

[OrbitalPete]

Calibrated monitor here. My guess is this is supposed to be a green jelly.

The way it appears is:
1. Highlights are blown and the blacks are lost, so you supposedly have a full range of tone in there (and a bit)
2. The main part of the jelly is a dark green/brown.

In terms of more informative feedback, if you look at the individual channels of the image in CMYK, the main part of the jelly is averaging between 60 and 80% black. Even the 'lobe' in the bottom of the frame is in the 60% range away from the highlights.

Assuming that the image is supposed to be correctly exposed, any monitor that displays that image as OK is set too bright, or at least with too little contrast (and quite possibly both). On a calibrated monitor it looks murky and dark on the whole. The very upper left portion of the image is probably the best exposed, to the left of the narrow blown highlight on the rim.

I've done a very quick and simple contrast/brightness/shadows/highlights adjust in PS just to set the image at what looks 'propery' exposed to me (brightness wise, I've ignored colour). Can't do anything about the highlights, but I've recovered a lot of the shadows. Obviously ignore the noise.

[shotokan101]

Thanks Guys - much appreciated - FWIW - most of the dark tones you see and any over/under exposure and out of focus stuff - is the result of me messing around with PP and also adding a dark Vignette effect which I think maybe partly responsible for some of the things that Pete describes.

FYI see below for a "relatively" untouched original image :-

Jim

EDIT: BTW it's not a "jelly" - although now you've mentioned it I can see the resemblance LOL - it's a decorative detail from one of the vertical "legs" on our marble/faux-marble fireplace

[OrbitalPete]

The untouched version is better exposed but is very washed out colour-wise. The white balance appears to be off quite significantly.

[shotokan101]

Originally Posted by OrbitalPete

The untouched version is better exposed but is very washed out colour-wise. The white balance appears to be off quite significantly.

Sorry guys - the "untouched" posted above wasn't - I found and resized the "real original" straight from camera card :-

As you will see there's not much tonal range anyway...

Jim

[ravi]

This is the image with a little contrast adjustment on Photoshop. Seems not too bad to me - of course, I don't know what the original object looked like!!

[OrbitalPete]

Well, yeah. That original is much more nicely exposed.

Just realised it's not a jelly as well

[shotokan101]

Originally Posted by OrbitalPete

Well, yeah. That original is much more nicely exposed.

Just realised it's not a jelly as well

LOL - that's because my hands were shaking like a jelly Pete - and of course the original intention was to photograph it in an unusual way.

...did I ever mention my favourite quiz question in "Ask The Family" ?

BTW - I gave the "processed" version a title of "I See an Angel".......

Jim

[Porky4]

Hi Jim,

I think that your "real original" looks like a "faux marble" to me and appears to be correctly exposed. I think ravi's version with contrast adjustment is too dark. Mind you considering the earlier versions that you posted, the plot has now been well and truly lost!

BTW:

Originally Posted by shotokan101

LOL - that's because my hands were shinking like a jelly

"shinkng"

Paul.

[shotokan101]

Originally Posted by Porky4

Hi Jim,

I think that your "real original" looks like a "faux marble" to me and appears to be correctly exposed. I think ravi's version with contrast adjustment is too dark. Mind you considering the earlier versions that you posted, the plot has now been well and truly lost!

BTW:


"shinkng"

Paul.

LOL Paul - thanks for the input - I meant "shaking"

...and I agree - the plot has indeed been pretty much lost - but I've enjoyed the discussion so far

Jim