Post Processing Advice

DSLee

Active Member
Hi all,

Can anyone point me in the right direction for some advice about post processing please?

I was out at the weekend taking random scenery shots and of the kids, and some have come out awful, my fault for not checking at the time, but alot of them are under exposed i would suggest and would like to find somewhere that might help me salvage something from them.

They are nothing exciting, but they are good examples to work with.

Cheers

Lee
 
Last edited:

shotokan101

Banned
Download the trail version of Lightroom 3 from Adobe and have a quick play with the Recovery/Black/Exposure sliders to start with and maybe try the auto-tone button....

Feel Free to post some links to sample shots for folk to try and show what might be possible - prefereably RAW files but Jpegs if that's what you have.

Jim
 

DSLee

Active Member
Any recommendations as to how best post a couple up, it would be interesting to see what could be done with them, if they are a little bland.

I took them in RAW but they are a little on the large size...
 

shotokan101

Banned
You could either upload the RAW to a site such as filefactory.com or just upload your jpegs to Flickr or Photobucket for testing.

Then post the links here.

Jim
 

DSLee

Active Member
Good tip Jim thanks for that! :)

I've uploaded three to the site, all pretty uninspiring, but i was only playing.. Scenery isn't my forte, and i'm trying to get into it, and its my lack of understanding with the camera thats messing them up. But without getting out of AUTO mode i will never learn eh!

So if anyone want's a try and pass some tips over it would be appreciated. Just don't laugh ;)

DSC_0021.NEF - download now for free. File sharing. Software file sharing. Free file hosting. File upload. FileFactory.com

DSC_0056.NEF - download now for free. File sharing. Software file sharing. Free file hosting. File upload. FileFactory.com

DSC_0057.NEF - download now for free. File sharing. Software file sharing. Free file hosting. File upload. FileFactory.com

Any assistance would be appreciated!

Cheers

Lee

P.S thanks for the Lightroom tip i'll try it tomorrow!
 

DSLee

Active Member
Are they Nikon, Canon or other ?

The good news is that if they are Raw you may well get something worthwhile out of them.

Nikon taken with a D40x, I am wanting to upgrade to a D90, but given my last efforts i might just give in haha!
 

shotokan101

Banned
Will have a look - downloading now :)

Jim
 

gpa

Banned
OK

You shot at F5.6 to isolate the fence post but at ISO 800 and 1/4000th sec. You must watch ISO with your camera especially as you had so much headroom on sutter speed.

I played around with the white balance, cropped, upped the contrast and sharpened. Very noise so run it through noiseware

910307753_RPDjo-L.jpg


This one shot at 1/1200th sec at F32:eek: and again ISO 800
I also think you have missed the focus
910318606_wQmvY-L.jpg



This one shot at F22
910326003_MCwGj-L.jpg



You really do not need to shoot anything more than F8, keep your shutter speed down and your ISO as low as you can get it. Also try other settings than the one you (auto focus closest subject). single point either single or contiuous will help.

cheers
 
Last edited:

shotokan101

Banned
Just some simple tweaking with Recovery/Contrast/Exposure - and used the GRAD Fiklter option to test in the first shot - hence top of post still dark but could be sorted by selective exposure compensation.....


DSC_0021-NEF-resized-tweaked-LR3.jpg



DSC_0056-NEF-tweaked-LR3-resized.jpg



DSC_0057-NEF-tweaked-LR3-resized.jpg



Sort of thing you were after ?

Jim

EDIT: - Jeez you're quick Grant :eek:
 
Last edited:

DSLee

Active Member
OK

You shot at F5.6 to isolate the fence post but at ISO 800 and 1/4000th sec. You must watch ISO with your camera especially as you had so much headroom on sutter speed.

I played around with the white balance, cropped, upped the contrast and sharpened. Very noise so run it through noiseware

910307753_RPDjo-L.jpg


This one shot at 1/1200th sec at F32:eek: and again ISO 800
I also think you have missed the focus
910318606_wQmvY-L.jpg

That's amazing what you have both done.
I was aware after of the ISO problem but not F32!
I noticed the noise when I was looking earlier......

Seems I have lots to learn taking them as well as pp them :)
 

shotokan101

Banned
...as have we all - and it's all part of the "Fun" :)

Jim
 

Jammyb

Well-known Member
Did you deliberately set the aperture that small (f22 and f32)?

If so I can kind of see what you were going for with the 2nd shot at f22, big depth of field, front to back focus, but unfortunately there's no point of interest in the foreground or the background.

Once you go over f16 you start to see softening from diffraction and at F32 you get major diffraction, coupled with the ISO800 the results aren't pretty.

you've also got some dust on your sensor I think as the same marks appear on the images 2 and 3 at the smaller apertures.
 

Darthchaffinch

Well-known Member
this type of thread is really useful for us newbies btw!! More of this!!

(never knew about the diffraction over F16 for example!)

Leeiom: I have a D60 and try to never go above iso 400 for keeping pics clear and sharp
 
Last edited:

shotokan101

Banned
this type of thread is really useful for us newbies btw!! More of this!!

(never knew about the diffraction over F16 for example!)

You can actually use it "for effect" on lightsources at night for example with longer expoures.....

Jim
 

DSLee

Active Member
Did you deliberately set the aperture that small (f22 and f32)?

If so I can kind of see what you were going for with the 2nd shot at f22, big depth of field, front to back focus, but unfortunately there's no point of interest in the foreground or the background.

Once you go over f16 you start to see softening from diffraction and at F32 you get major diffraction, coupled with the ISO800 the results aren't pretty.

you've also got some dust on your sensor I think as the same marks appear on the images 2 and 3 at the smaller apertures.

Agreed eith everything, I did say the shots were uninspiring. I wasn't getting any kick from the shots unfortunately and that was compounded when I saw the mess I put them in.

I did notice the marks on the photos I'm paranoid about cleaning them incase I make it worse.
 

DSLee

Active Member
this type of thread is really useful for us newbies btw!! More of this!!

(never knew about the diffraction over F16 for example!)

Leeiom: I have a D60 and try to never go above iso 400 for keeping pics clear and sharp

Me either but then again there isn't a lot I do know. Haha

Thanks for the ISO tip, the weird thing is I was referring to a d40x field guide and I'm positive it told me to set the ISO to 200, which I thought I did.............
Obviously I didn't :)
 

Jammyb

Well-known Member
this type of thread is really useful for us newbies btw!! More of this!!

(never knew about the diffraction over F16 for example!)

Pretty much all lenses get a bit sharper stopped down slightly, then as you stop right down they get softer again as diffraction takes over.

As a rough guide on a 18-55mm type kit lens:
At 18mm your widest is f3.5, it will be sharper a 5.6-11 then drop off after this.
At 55mm your widest is f5.6, again it will be sharper at f8-11.

However getting the shot you want with the depth of field you want is more important than worrying about any of that.

So using F22 at ISO100 to get a really long shutter time for moving water type effects for example.

Or using F3.5 because you're shooting hand held in low light and you're trying to get a reasonable shutter speed to avoid blur, or shallow depth of field effects.

But on a sunny day were you're not going for any particular effect like the last shot with the gate I'd go for something like ISO100/200 F8 for the best image quality.
 

DSLee

Active Member
thanks everyone for all the hints and tips.

I've got a school summer fete to go to this weekend, so will no doubt be digging the camera out again, and will make sure i have a look through this lot again as a reminder.

I don't believe i am all crap at taking photo's. Here's a few from last year.

See what you think, one of them must be nice :)

1
DSC_0213.jpg

2
DSC_0052.jpg

3
DSC_0043remix.jpg

4
2.jpg

5
1.jpg
 

shotokan101

Banned
NIce set - especially like the last two and the first one's perspective

Jim
 

shotokan101

Banned
See..... i can take "some" decent shots haha..:D

LOO - I didn't say that they couldn't be greatly improved by some decent PP :devil::devil::devil:

Jim
 

DSLee

Active Member
LOO - I didn't say that they couldn't be greatly improved by some decent PP :devil::devil::devil:

Jim

Aha! Can I please refer you to my inital post in that case :laugh:

I am fully aware there are some very clever people around these here parts, hence my question to the experts.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Star Wars Andor, Woman King, more Star Trek 4K, Rings of Power & the latest TV, movies & 4K releases
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Movies Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
AV Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
REL Acoustics announces new Serie HT subwoofer trio
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Marantz set to launch new Cinema Series of AV receivers
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
iFi Audio launches NEO Stream music streamer with DAC
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom