Disapointed!!! ...... UPDATE :)

bbg404

bbg404

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,302
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
Not sure if this is the correct section but I couldn't find the "rant" section!

Just had 2 lovely days in the lakes with the other half now like millions of others I love the place but this was the first time I'd traveled with my kit eben though I've been time and time again!! Anyway Been practicing at home and local to just understand some settings!! So went prepared we walked up to Orrest Head View Point then down on to Windermere shore then today we walked up to Tarn How's View Point then walked round the tarn always checked my photos on the screen and thought they looked ok was happy ...... Loaded them on to the laptop tonight and instantly felt not happy with the quality of pretty much any of the images I've came home with so I've switched the laptop off in a huff I'll revisit the file another day


...... To Be Continued!!!!!
 
So why are they different? If you shot RAW, the RAW files can often look uninspiring compared to the camera's preview, as the preview (whether you shoot in RAW or not is a JPEG that still has the camera processing applied).
 
As Chris said post a few up for critique...there are plenty of people here to help...I think everyone has those periods where we are not happy with anything we've shot, but you'll get past that, especially with the help and support that the forum is particularly good at giving :)
 
MWHCVT said:
As Chris said post a few up for critique...there are plenty of people here to help...I think everyone has those periods where we are not happy with anything we've shot, but you'll get past that, especially with the help and support that the forum is particularly good at giving :)
Click to expand...

+1 Couldn't agree more :thumbs:
 
I would strongly recommend to not use the screen for anything other than a VERY basic image review, and mainly use it to focus on the histogram to show you whether you got the exposure you wanted. Shoot with the final image in mind as much as possible.
If you are happy with that, and with the composition of the image through the viewfinder and on the screen then it all comes down to post processing really - those files (if shooting RAW - but Jpegs a little too) are there to be brought to life a bit by how you saw/interpret/remember the landscapes. Don't give up hope and let us know how you feel after a few days away from them. Incidentally, after I shoot, upload, backup and make a very quick rough selection the night when I get back from a wedding, I then have to leave them alone for a few days otherwise I end up hating every single shot just because I've worked too closely on them for a long stretch of time. Get some distance for a while and I'm sure things will look better :-)
 
Good point about the LCD. All I use mine for is checking to make sure nothings been chopped off, it isn't too dark and there's no blinkies (blown highlights)
 
If you shot in RAW then most images can be sorted exposure wise, or is there some other problem with them?

Les
 
Evening all I couldn't wait any longer to look over my pics from the lakes!!!

So I sat down with the laptop looked through them picked the best of the poor bunch and start stitching, stacking and tweaking in PS Elements and all I can say is ...... I'm impressed at what Post Processing can actually do for you and your photographic work!!
Don't get me wrong far from perfect but ..... A massive improvement on standard pics! All I've done is created a couple panos and a HDR (first ever - Test) and used the Quick fix option on a few pics!!

Just thought I'd update you and hopefully ill get them loaded on to my flickr tomorrow to share!!

Thanks again!!
 
bbg404 said:
Evening all I couldn't wait any longer to look over my pics from the lakes!!!

So I sat down with the laptop looked through them picked the best of the poor bunch and start stitching, stacking and tweaking in PS Elements and all I can say is ...... I'm impressed at what Post Processing can actually do for you and your photographic work!!
Don't get me wrong far from perfect but ..... A massive improvement on standard pics! All I've done is created a couple panos and a HDR (first ever - Test) and used the Quick fix option on a few pics!!

Just thought I'd update you and hopefully ill get them loaded on to my flickr tomorrow to share!!

Thanks again!!
Click to expand...

Look forward to see some of them tomorrow :thumbs:
 
Glad you went back for a second go. It's always worth leaving things a few days before reviewing, as a few have mentioned.

One caveat about the LCD - again, as others have said, the image you see is the camera's jpeg version of the image so it typically looks vibrant.

But the histogram also applies to the jpeg and not the raw. So I'd suggest only using the LCD for checking composition and focus and ignore all exposure info with the possible exception of deciding whether the highlight blinkies bother you or not.
 
chromatin64 said:
G

But the histogram also applies to the jpeg and not the raw. So I'd suggest only using the LCD for checking composition and focus and ignore all exposure info with the possible exception of deciding whether the highlight blinkies bother you or not.
Click to expand...

I even avoid it for that. I use the viewfinder. My screen is set to not display an image when I shoot. Only when shooting people, or fast action do I use it to check for blinks, or missed timing etc. All other times I use it as if it were a film camera. Just my preferred working style.

Never try and judge an image by merely looking at it on your preview screen. It will end in tears.
 
Last edited:
chromatin64 said:
But the histogram also applies to the jpeg and not the raw. So I'd suggest only using the LCD for checking composition and focus and ignore all exposure info with the possible exception of deciding whether the highlight blinkies bother you or not.
Click to expand...
That's a bit misleading - of course the histogram relates to the RAW file. A RAW file doesn't have infinite latitude - it should be exposed correctly and the histogram allows you to reference that and assess it.
 
droj said:
That's a bit misleading - of course the histogram relates to the RAW file. A RAW file doesn't have infinite latitude - it should be exposed correctly and the histogram allows you to reference that and assess it.
Click to expand...
Absolutely! Think how you want the shot to turn out and expose accordingly. I don't think I'm the only one who'd say that the cameras histogram proves a very valuable tool indeed!
 
droj said:
That's a bit misleading - of course the histogram relates to the RAW file. A RAW file doesn't have infinite latitude - it should be exposed correctly and the histogram allows you to reference that and assess it.
Click to expand...

Yes but not all cameras will display the histogram for the Raw file, they will display it for the JPEG image which will have had it's histogram altered. You can practically ignore a Fuji S5 histogram because it'll be a good couple of stops overexposed according to it, but will be perfectly within range in Raw.

My new A7R is the opposite however, all the data shown in the preview is there, there is nothing extra to be found in Raw at all.

You'll also find if you're opening rawfiles in Adobe software, they will probably come out a completely different colour to the camera JPEG because of the way Adobe interprets the files.
 
droj said:
That's a bit misleading - of course the histogram relates to the RAW file. A RAW file doesn't have infinite latitude - it should be exposed correctly and the histogram allows you to reference that and assess it.
Click to expand...
I think across the entire Canon range, the histogram in playback refers to the jpg image that the camera has processed.
 
Nope, not misleading at all. A camera-generated histogram can appear sub-optimal in spite of a perfectly exposed raw file, as graphilly, Alan and Pookeyhead have added above.

In-camera production of jpegs means that the camera applies the manufacturer's own special sauce of curves and colour adjustments, and typically manipulates ISO behind the scenes when they try to "increase dynamic range". The histogram you see on the LCD screen is the end result of the special sauce manipulations and not that of the raw file, even if it is the starting point.

I'm happy to judge focus and framing on the LCD but I don't make any decisions on exposure based on what I see on the LCD, assuming I haven't massively over- or under-exposed by mistake.
 
droj said:
That's a bit misleading - of course the histogram relates to the RAW file. A RAW file doesn't have infinite latitude - it should be exposed correctly and the histogram allows you to reference that and assess it.
Click to expand...

In as much as it is a guide to exposure, yes. It is not however, an accurate recording of the RAW file, as the histogram is generated from a JPEG preview. If you have any in camera processing for JPEGs, then your histogram is reflecting those changes, despite shooting in RAW.

The histogram is a guide. You use it in a fairly limited range of circumstances when you need to be certain you're not clipping highlights or shadows.


I think we're going off topic a little though... I think we can all agree however, that assessing images by looking at them on the preview screen can be very misleading.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I even avoid it for that. I use the viewfinder. My screen is set to not display an image when I shoot. Only when shooting people, or fast action do I use it to check for blinks, or missed timing etc. All other times I use it as if it were a film camera. Just my preferred working style.

Never try and judge an image by merely looking at it on your preview screen. It will end in tears.
Click to expand...

Same here,i use my camera same as I would a film camera,I very rarely pixel peep can't remember the last time I did.
What I do think is important is to learn your camera inside out,what it's capable of and what it's not the same as you did with film :)
 
A blown highlight is a blown highlight - in RAW as in jpg. A good camera's histogram should be a fair guide to that. Mine is!!
 
Sometimes it's good to look again at pictures you took weeks months or years ago, you often see an interesting crop or maybe want to try some new processing trick.
The potential is not always evident when you are just back home and maybe a bit tired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top