Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

Raymond Lin said:
What do you mean? It looks like any other backlit photo where you up the exposure compensation by a stop or 2.
Click to expand...

Reducing highlights and pumping shadows, yup, seems normal enough, i don't see anything remarkable about it
 
Raymond Lin said:
What do you mean? It looks like any other backlit photo where you up the exposure compensation by a stop or 2.
Click to expand...
How come then the shadows from the glasses and ears and the highlights in ear and on said glasses. Phil said glassurface of building which may be true. Still its not quite an example of DR if shadows has been filled one way or the other.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
soeren said:
How come then the shadows from the glasses and ears and the highlights in ear and on said glasses. Phil said glassurface of building which may be true. Still its not quite an example of DR if shadows has been filled one way or the other.
Click to expand...

The sun is low enough, it clips on on top of that building, this looks normal enough. It reminds me when I shot a wedding portrait on my 5D2 with the sun through the trees behind them with no fill and no flash and people said I lied and I must've used a flash. My experience is that golden hour give you even light, even when shot towards it, especially when the sun is clipping, all you need is exposure compensate it a little.
 
Raymond Lin said:
The sun is low enough, it clips on on top of that building, this looks normal enough. It reminds me when I shot a wedding portrait on my 5D2 with the sun through the trees behind them with no fill and no flash and people said I lied and I must've used a flash. My experience is that golden hour give you even light, even when shot towards it, especially when the sun is clipping, all you need is exposure compensate it a little.
Click to expand...
Sorry Raymond, but there are quite distinct shadows showing a ‘light source’ camera left.

Now it’s almost certainly the sun reflected in a window, but it’s not a backlit image with the shadows lifted in post.

The only thing that creates shadows like that is a point light source, simple physics.
 
Phil V said:
Sorry Raymond, but there are quite distinct shadows showing a ‘light source’ camera left.

Now it’s almost certainly the sun reflected in a window, but it’s not a backlit image with the shadows lifted in post.

The only thing that creates shadows like that is a point light source, simple physics.
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing anything obvious in either of their glasses - what am I missing? Wouldn't a reflector or flash or constant light show up like a sore thumb?

this is what we're looking at right?

http://www.rossharvey.com/images/22806.jpg
 
Phil V said:
Sorry Raymond, but there are quite distinct shadows showing a ‘light source’ camera left.

Now it’s almost certainly the sun reflected in a window, but it’s not a backlit image with the shadows lifted in post.

The only thing that creates shadows like that is a point light source, simple physics.
Click to expand...

That's what people accused me of, literally said I was lying when there was no light source from the camera's direction when I took mine.

This question can be answered easily, just find out what that city is, the skyscraper in the background is easy to identify if you know the city and then find the street, Google Street view and have a look.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
That's what people accused me of, literally said I was lying when there was no light source from the camera's direction when I took mine.
Click to expand...
I’ve not seen your image,and I really don’t think it’s relevant, but I’ve spent 30 years lighting photos. And quite simply the shadows on their faces could not have been made just by the backlight. Light doesn’t bend until you get close to a black hole.
 
Phil V said:
I’ve not seen your image,and I really don’t think it’s relevant, but I’ve spent 30 years lighting photos. And quite simply the shadows on their faces could not have been made just by the backlight. Light doesn’t bend until you get close to a black hole.
Click to expand...

There are more light than just behind them, the floor, who knows, Ross could be wearing a white T-shirt, exposure compensate it 2 stop will bump it up. The sky is completely blown, the photo he took in the same area that is more balanced in exposure clearly shows a blue sky, with same sun clipping the same building. You are not bending light, you are adding more simply by upping the exposure compensation.
 
Phil V said:
You can’t see the shadows of the arms of the glasses?

Jeez!
Click to expand...

I can but, wouldn't they create darker shadows regardless? If you bumped shadows in post, even way up, if the glasses had deeper shadows, they're still going to show no? unless you clone them out! I would have thought it was cast by the very reflective windows behind them [as Ray just said]

Why the Jeez!? I'm being genuine here :D I like to learn y'know!
 
Last edited:
I think the photo was taken here, circled. The line is the edge of the building which would be behind the camera, and that looks like corner of a building which would be your reflector. There's your shadow explained.

Uo26C6x.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think Granddad went to bed but will be back in the morn to prove everyone wrong
 
woof woof said:
Have you lot seen this glowing review...

http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-z7-review
Click to expand...

"to be one of the only people in the world to shoot with the Z7 pre-release (and the first person in Europe to even see it in person)"

I can't stand this sort of willy waving, it serves no purpose for the review. The rest of it kinda reads like somebody who has never experienced an a7RIII, as the majority of early impressions from those who use/test multiple systems regularly are not as complimentary about AF.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
I think the photo was taken here, circled. The line is the edge of the building which would be behind the camera, and that looks like corner of a building which would be your reflector. There's your shadow explained.

Uo26C6x.jpg
Click to expand...
Uhhmm maybe though I can't quite get the angles to fit.
 
Raymond Lin said:
There are more light than just behind them, the floor, who knows, Ross could be wearing a white T-shirt, exposure compensate it 2 stop will bump it up. The sky is completely blown, the photo he took in the same area that is more balanced in exposure clearly shows a blue sky, with same sun clipping the same building. You are not bending light, you are adding more simply by upping the exposure compensation.
Click to expand...
Thanks
That is (almost) exactly what I’d posted.

Let’s be clear, no one suggested any purposeful dishonesty, the shadows clearly show a 2nd light source, I’m not suggesting Ross brought along flash or a reflector, but ‘something’ created those shadows.

Btw it’s not a white t shirt, the photographer is below and the light source is above.
 
ukaskew said:
"to be one of the only people in the world to shoot with the Z7 pre-release (and the first person in Europe to even see it in person)"

I can't stand this sort of willy waving, it serves no purpose for the review. The rest of it kinda reads like somebody who has never experienced an a7RIII, as the majority of early impressions from those who use/test multiple systems regularly are not as complimentary about AF.
Click to expand...

He starts the article with...

"I've recently become an ambassador for Nikon (fistpump)"

That pretty much tells you how the rest of the article will be before even reading it :p

I remember Jason Lanier raving about first gen A7 bodies. It's the same.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I can but, wouldn't they create darker shadows regardless? If you bumped shadows in post, even way up, if the glasses had deeper shadows, they're still going to show no? unless you clone them out! I would have thought it was cast by the very reflective windows behind them [as Ray just said]

Why the Jeez!? I'm being genuine here :D I like to learn y'know!
Click to expand...
If this is a genuine question...
The strength of a shadow is the ratio between sources, usually outside the difference between the light source and fill.
A typical example being on a bright sunny day (blue sky) the sun is a point light source so it creates hard shadows, when there’s cloud cover, the whole sky becomes a soft light source, so no shadows, there’s many variables in between. When shooting ‘ordinary’ people we ‘generally’ want softer light, so we avoid bright sunny days, dive into open shade etc.
this particular image is a complex scene, backlit so the couple are in a shadow, but then the 2nd ‘light source’* is filling that shadow, a ‘brighter’ source would create deeper shadows, a bigger source creates softer shadows. Because the whole of the shadow area may have been lifted in post, it’s impossible to guess the actual strength of that light source.

Back in the mists of time, when I was trained in lighting, the key message was to learn how to read light, because if we can read lighting, we can reverse engineer it. Copying other images is more about light than composition, you may already know some of that.

And for info ‘Grandad’s iPad died as he started writing the reply to Raymond, so he went to bed, but he’s not a grandad till next month ;)

*A light source could be a reflector, flash, continuous light etc
 
Raymond Lin said:
I think the photo was taken here, circled. The line is the edge of the building which would be behind the camera, and that looks like corner of a building which would be your reflector. There's your shadow explained.

Uo26C6x.jpg
Click to expand...
So, you agree with me now, having had a proper think. ;)
 
Some of Ross' shots feature the same people across a number of shots. While I'm not calling him dishonest and some of the shots are superb, it's probably a bit misleading to call his z7 shoot 'Street photography.'
 
snerkler said:
Nikon ambassador saying he’s not a Nikon puppet and will give an honest review yet is the only person to praise AF and say the camera is a revelation??? Who’s he trying to kid? Reading by the responses a lot have bought it hook line and sinker :facepalm:
Click to expand...

Honestly though DPR'a judgement seems based mostly on "it doesn't handle just like a Nikon DSLR" rather than judging it against Sony.
 
Moreorless said:
Honestly though DPR'a judgement seems based mostly on "it doesn't handle just like a Nikon DSLR" rather than judging it against Sony.
Click to expand...
I think every non-biased review (ie not rossharvey's) shows that the Z's are not at the races no matter what you're comparing it to in that price range.
 
decigallen said:
Some of Ross' shots feature the same people across a number of shots. While I'm not calling him dishonest and some of the shots are superb, it's probably a bit misleading to call his z7 shoot 'Street photography.'
Click to expand...

The guy with the hat springs to mind.
 
ukaskew said:
"to be one of the only people in the world to shoot with the Z7 pre-release (and the first person in Europe to even see it in person)"

I can't stand this sort of willy waving, it serves no purpose for the review. The rest of it kinda reads like somebody who has never experienced an a7RIII, as the majority of early impressions from those who use/test multiple systems regularly are not as complimentary about AF.
Click to expand...

I did wonder :D He does seem rather enthusiastic. Maybe he's just high on life :D
 
Last edited:
I'm glad that partners don't come here, you're all Very naughty boys :D
 
Phil V said:
If this is a genuine question...
The strength of a shadow is the ratio between sources, usually outside the difference between the light source and fill.
A typical example being on a bright sunny day (blue sky) the sun is a point light source so it creates hard shadows, when there’s cloud cover, the whole sky becomes a soft light source, so no shadows, there’s many variables in between. When shooting ‘ordinary’ people we ‘generally’ want softer light, so we avoid bright sunny days, dive into open shade etc.
this particular image is a complex scene, backlit so the couple are in a shadow, but then the 2nd ‘light source’* is filling that shadow, a ‘brighter’ source would create deeper shadows, a bigger source creates softer shadows. Because the whole of the shadow area may have been lifted in post, it’s impossible to guess the actual strength of that light source.

Back in the mists of time, when I was trained in lighting, the key message was to learn how to read light, because if we can read lighting, we can reverse engineer it. Copying other images is more about light than composition, you may already know some of that.

And for info ‘Grandad’s iPad died as he started writing the reply to Raymond, so he went to bed, but he’s not a grandad till next month ;)

*A light source could be a reflector, flash, continuous light etc
Click to expand...


Yes, it was, thanks. My wee brain is trying to digest the info

Congrat's on that, I must be psychic! :D
 
nandbytes said:
My missus does look when I am typing sometimes but she doesn't care lol
Click to expand...

My laptop is left on pretty much all day, usually sat at the kitchen table so I can have me mugs o' tay while browsing. Even when I'm out it'll stay on as it takes ages to power up, this old dinosaur one at least, my main one is gone for repairs. I'll have a few usual tabs open, this place being one. The odd time my missus [and she's aware I refer to her as such online, she just tuts :D ] walks by, sees the cool blue tones of the forum and just goes "Pff, gear talk again? you're not buying a new camera ..." then walks on :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top