This bug you?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Tony Cooper, Feb 6, 2014.

  1. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Tony Cooper, Feb 6, 2014
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony Cooper

    Sandman Guest

    I find this pretty odd...

    Tony Cooper
    Re: 50x and 60x zoom cameras
    01/16/2014 <>

    "No need for anything more in post unless someone wants to give it that
    hideous postcard HDR look."

    Tony Cooper
    Re: Apple is purchasing Twitter analytics firm
    12/10/2013 <>

    "I've commented (usually somewhat negatively if they HDR)
    on the photographs of others who have linked to their images."
     
    Sandman, Feb 6, 2014
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tony Cooper

    philo  Guest

    philo , Feb 6, 2014
    #3
  4. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    It's not an HDR image. Just some tweaks in post using Photoshop.

    Every image presents a choice in post. In this case, the scene was
    interesting to me in subject matter, but a straight rendition seemed
    rather blah.

    My objection to the HDR look - which I agree this one has - is that
    HDR is too often used to make what could be a good photograph treated
    straight-up into one with the "hideous postcard look".
     
    Tony Cooper, Feb 6, 2014
    #4
  5. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest


    The thought that came to me when I photographed the hardware store was
    "What kind of people live in this town?" if bed bug killer is a
    necessity. I have the same thought about that store selling wigs.

    My reaction is wrong, of course. Both bed bugs and head lice are
    insidious little hitchhikers. It's not the fault of the person who
    gets them.
     
    Tony Cooper, Feb 6, 2014
    #5
  6. Tony Cooper

    philo  Guest



    Very true.

    Probably the only good thing about living where we get harsh winters is
    that all the nice insects have to start over again each year.
     
    philo , Feb 6, 2014
    #6
  7. Per Tony Cooper:
    And it looks like a *real* hardware store. Last one around here shut
    down a couple years ago.
     
    (PeteCresswell), Feb 6, 2014
    #7
  8. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    My objection to inappropriately over cooked HDR is the over saturated
    and glowing "Kinkade" look, rather than what you call the "hideous
    postcard look". I feel that you get more of a "postcard look" from
    attempts to use Kodachrome or vivid Velvia simulations in post.

    This particular image has a look & feel of one which has had a fair
    amount of tonal contrast, or even tone mapping used in post, giving it
    a hardish, grunge look. That said, it has an interesting appeal, and I
    like it.
     
    Savageduck, Feb 6, 2014
    #8
  9. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Well, the difference between the "Kinkade look" and the "hideous
    postcard look" are just the choice of terms to describe something that
    not appealing to us.

    I'm older than you are, Duck, and from an era where a particular style
    of postcard was on every rack in every tourist destination. Garish
    images of mountains and beaches were the usual subject. That
    association has stayed with me. Kinkade came much later.

    Not that I wouldn't try the "postcard look"; just not the "hideous
    postcard look". Not all postcards had the same look. I'll try to
    come up with something that replicates the other postcard look, but
    not soon. I'm currently immersed in trying to master the Adobe
    Premiere Pro movie editing program to process some footage the
    grandchildren are making.
    Like I said, it's just a rather ordinary image tarted up to make it a
    little more interesting. Not all may agree that it's more interesting
    this way, but I like to experiment.
     
    Tony Cooper, Feb 6, 2014
    #9
  10. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    Well I became an official "old fart" this month and MediCare A&B and a
    Medicare Supplement kicked in on the 1st. The good thing is CALPers
    reimburses my Part B premium, and covers my PPO supplement.
    I know of which you speak.
    Well it is more interesting, and experimenting is all part of the fun.
    Since you actually have PS/CS6 and NIK HDR Efex Pro2, why not
    experiment with some HDR? You might be pleasantly surprised, it would
    just be an experiment after all.
     
    Savageduck, Feb 6, 2014
    #10
  11. Tony Cooper

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Eric Stevens, Feb 6, 2014
    #11
  12. Tony Cooper

    PeterN Guest

    PeterN, Feb 7, 2014
    #12
  13. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    See...I think the sign makes it. That's what got me to stop. It's not
    going on my wall, though.
     
    Tony Cooper, Feb 7, 2014
    #13
  14. Tony Cooper

    PeterN Guest

    PeterN, Feb 7, 2014
    #14
  15. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 07:12:23 -0800, Savageduck
    :
    : >On 2014-02-06 14:19:27 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >
    : >>
    : >>> In article <>, Tony Cooper
    : >>>
    : >>>> A hardware store in Zephyr Hills FL on a rainy day.
    : >>>>
    : >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-FMxV3Wt/0/X2/2014-01-31-09-X2.jpg
    : >>>
    : >>> I find this pretty odd...
    : >>>
    : >>> Tony Cooper
    : >>> Re: 50x and 60x zoom cameras
    : >>> 01/16/2014 <>
    : >>>
    : >>> "No need for anything more in post unless someone wants to give it that
    : >>> hideous postcard HDR look."
    : >>>
    : >>> Tony Cooper
    : >>> Re: Apple is purchasing Twitter analytics firm
    : >>> 12/10/2013 <>
    : >>>
    : >>> "I've commented (usually somewhat negatively if they HDR)
    : >>> on the photographs of others who have linked to their images."
    : >>>
    : >> It's not an HDR image. Just some tweaks in post using Photoshop.
    : >>
    : >> Every image presents a choice in post. In this case, the scene was
    : >> interesting to me in subject matter, but a straight rendition seemed
    : >> rather blah.
    : >>
    : >> My objection to the HDR look - which I agree this one has - is that
    : >> HDR is too often used to make what could be a good photograph treated
    : >> straight-up into one with the "hideous postcard look".
    : >
    : >My objection to inappropriately over cooked HDR is the over saturated
    : >and glowing "Kinkade" look, rather than what you call the "hideous
    : >postcard look". I feel that you get more of a "postcard look" from
    : >attempts to use Kodachrome or vivid Velvia simulations in post.
    :
    : Well, the difference between the "Kinkade look" and the "hideous
    : postcard look" are just the choice of terms to describe something that
    : not appealing to us.
    :
    : I'm older than you are, Duck, and from an era where a particular style
    : of postcard was on every rack in every tourist destination. Garish
    : images of mountains and beaches were the usual subject. That
    : association has stayed with me. Kinkade came much later.
    :
    : Not that I wouldn't try the "postcard look"; just not the "hideous
    : postcard look". Not all postcards had the same look. I'll try to
    : come up with something that replicates the other postcard look, but
    : not soon. I'm currently immersed in trying to master the Adobe
    : Premiere Pro movie editing program to process some footage the
    : grandchildren are making.
    :
    : >This particular image has a look & feel of one which has had a fair
    : >amount of tonal contrast, or even tone mapping used in post, giving it
    : >a hardish, grunge look. That said, it has an interesting appeal, and I
    : >like it.
    :
    : Like I said, it's just a rather ordinary image tarted up to make it a
    : little more interesting. Not all may agree that it's more interesting
    : this way, but I like to experiment.

    Out of curiosity, why did you make it a vertical? It feels cramped somehow.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 14, 2014
    #15
  16. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    :
    : >On 02/06/2014 07:43 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    : >> A hardware store in Zephyr Hills FL on a rainy day.
    : >>
    : >>
    : >>
    : >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-FMxV3Wt/0/X2/2014-01-31-09-X2.jpg
    : >>
    : >
    : >
    : >another great photo!
    : >
    : >
    : >Here is a NOT great photo but it seems to somehow go with the concept of
    : >bugs:
    : >
    : >
    : >https://scontent-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t31/339377_548138148546892_1569100747_o.jpg
    :
    :
    : The thought that came to me when I photographed the hardware store was
    : "What kind of people live in this town?" if bed bug killer is a
    : necessity. I have the same thought about that store selling wigs.
    :
    : My reaction is wrong, of course. Both bed bugs and head lice are
    : insidious little hitchhikers. It's not the fault of the person who
    : gets them.

    In the schools hereabouts, few events generate more hysteria than the
    discovery of a head louse. It's probably second in line to the various mass
    shootings.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 14, 2014
    #16
  17. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    The choice of landscape or portrait is usually determined - as it was
    in this case - on what is wanted in the scene. Or, you might say,
    what is not wanted in the scene.

    When you shoot landscape, and use a standard ratio for the final
    version, the width is determined by the height of what is to be
    included. In landscape, to include the full front of the building, I
    would have to extend the width of the composition to accommodate the
    ratio. I normally crop to a 2:3 ratio.

    It's possible, of course, to crop unrestrained and ignore the confines
    of a standard ratio. I prefer not to unless the composition demands,
    say, a 1:1 ratio.

    When you see a "cramped" image from me, you can pretty much assume
    that there were elements in the scene that I didn't want to include.

    One of my "rules" for cropping is that you should see only what I want
    you to see of the scene. You shouldn't be distracted by elements that
    I don't think should be part of the image.

    Here's an image from this past weekend that's "cramped". The shot
    itself included the entire front of the vehicle. However, in post, I
    decided that effect I wanted could be achieved with just this much of
    the front:

    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Rusty-Wrecks/i-nVBQB5n/0/X2/2014-02-08-19Z-X2.jpg

    In an unrestrained crop, I would have cut a little more off the bottom
    and ended it just below the front bumper on the right.

    Shot in the rain, by the way. The shine on the hood is because the
    hood was wet.

    From the same day, a wider shot but still somewhat cramped. I got
    everything I wanted in this frame, though.

    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Rusty-Wrecks/i-2Dh2t5S/0/X2/2014-02-08-55Z-X2.jpg

    Incidentally, that Buick was born the same year that I was. We are in
    comparable shape.
     
    Tony Cooper, Feb 14, 2014
    #17
  18. Tony Cooper

    PeterN Guest

    For printing, I too usually use 2:3 or 1:1. For digital presentations, I
    sometimes don't stick to the "standard" ratios.

    Have you tried cloning out, or blurring unwanted objects?

    I can't put my finger on it, but something is bothering me about the
    conversion.

    Much better. Maybe you will get a W/A for Fathers Day.
     
    PeterN, Feb 14, 2014
    #18
  19. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    :
    : >On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 11:11:45 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    : >wrote:
    : >: On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 07:12:23 -0800, Savageduck
    : >:
    : >: >On 2014-02-06 14:19:27 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >: >
    : >: >>
    : >: >>> In article <>, Tony Cooper
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>>> A hardware store in Zephyr Hills FL on a rainy day.
    : >: >>>>
    : >: >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-FMxV3Wt/0/X2/2014-01-31-09-X2.jpg
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> I find this pretty odd...
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> Tony Cooper
    : >: >>> Re: 50x and 60x zoom cameras
    : >: >>> 01/16/2014 <>
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> "No need for anything more in post unless someone wants to give it that
    : >: >>> hideous postcard HDR look."
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> Tony Cooper
    : >: >>> Re: Apple is purchasing Twitter analytics firm
    : >: >>> 12/10/2013 <>
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> "I've commented (usually somewhat negatively if they HDR)
    : >: >>> on the photographs of others who have linked to their images."
    : >: >>>
    : >: >> It's not an HDR image. Just some tweaks in post using Photoshop.
    : >: >>
    : >: >> Every image presents a choice in post. In this case, the scene was
    : >: >> interesting to me in subject matter, but a straight rendition seemed
    : >: >> rather blah.
    : >: >>
    : >: >> My objection to the HDR look - which I agree this one has - is that
    : >: >> HDR is too often used to make what could be a good photograph treated
    : >: >> straight-up into one with the "hideous postcard look".
    : >: >
    : >: >My objection to inappropriately over cooked HDR is the over saturated
    : >: >and glowing "Kinkade" look, rather than what you call the "hideous
    : >: >postcard look". I feel that you get more of a "postcard look" from
    : >: >attempts to use Kodachrome or vivid Velvia simulations in post.
    : >:
    : >: Well, the difference between the "Kinkade look" and the "hideous
    : >: postcard look" are just the choice of terms to describe something that
    : >: not appealing to us.
    : >:
    : >: I'm older than you are, Duck, and from an era where a particular style
    : >: of postcard was on every rack in every tourist destination. Garish
    : >: images of mountains and beaches were the usual subject. That
    : >: association has stayed with me. Kinkade came much later.
    : >:
    : >: Not that I wouldn't try the "postcard look"; just not the "hideous
    : >: postcard look". Not all postcards had the same look. I'll try to
    : >: come up with something that replicates the other postcard look, but
    : >: not soon. I'm currently immersed in trying to master the Adobe
    : >: Premiere Pro movie editing program to process some footage the
    : >: grandchildren are making.
    : >:
    : >: >This particular image has a look & feel of one which has had a fair
    : >: >amount of tonal contrast, or even tone mapping used in post, giving it
    : >: >a hardish, grunge look. That said, it has an interesting appeal, and I
    : >: >like it.
    : >:
    : >: Like I said, it's just a rather ordinary image tarted up to make it a
    : >: little more interesting. Not all may agree that it's more interesting
    : >: this way, but I like to experiment.
    : >
    : >Out of curiosity, why did you make it a vertical? It feels cramped somehow.
    :
    : The choice of landscape or portrait is usually determined - as it was
    : in this case - on what is wanted in the scene. Or, you might say,
    : what is not wanted in the scene.
    :
    : When you shoot landscape, and use a standard ratio for the final
    : version, the width is determined by the height of what is to be
    : included. In landscape, to include the full front of the building, I
    : would have to extend the width of the composition to accommodate the
    : ratio. I normally crop to a 2:3 ratio.
    :
    : It's possible, of course, to crop unrestrained and ignore the confines
    : of a standard ratio. I prefer not to unless the composition demands,
    : say, a 1:1 ratio.

    There are times when a photo has to be cropped to a specific aspect ratio. I
    often experience that when my photos are used on our Web site. But otherwise,
    granting precedence to the standard, rather than to the composition, sounds
    like the tail wagging the dog.

    : When you see a "cramped" image from me, you can pretty much assume
    : that there were elements in the scene that I didn't want to include.

    Fair enough, but the ultimate requirement is to include the elements you want
    to include *without* the picture looking cramped. Not that I'm claiming that
    it's always easy to do.

    : One of my "rules" for cropping is that you should see only what I want
    : you to see of the scene. You shouldn't be distracted by elements that
    : I don't think should be part of the image.

    Sure, but that effectively rules out the a priori imposition of a standard
    aspect ratio.

    Don't get me wrong: I use standard aspect ratios when I can; and when I can't,
    I try to at least use integral ratios. But except for the odd cases I alluded
    to above, composition should take precedence. If a picture is really worth
    hanging, you're probably going to have it professionally framed. And frame
    shops don't care what aspect ratio you tell them to use.

    : Here's an image from this past weekend that's "cramped". The shot
    : itself included the entire front of the vehicle. However, in post, I
    : decided that effect I wanted could be achieved with just this much of
    : the front:
    :
    : http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Rusty-Wrecks/i-nVBQB5n/0/X2/2014-02-08-19Z-X2.jpg

    I don't find that one cramped, because I see the logic of leaving out the
    other headlight. The picture shows a radiator holding up a headlight as though
    it were something in its hand; if the other light were shown, it would ruin
    the effect.

    : In an unrestrained crop, I would have cut a little more off the bottom
    : and ended it just below the front bumper on the right.

    I like it the way you did it and would not crop any more off the bottom.

    : Shot in the rain, by the way. The shine on the hood is because the
    : hood was wet.
    :
    : From the same day, a wider shot but still somewhat cramped. I got
    : everything I wanted in this frame, though.
    :
    : http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Rusty-Wrecks/i-2Dh2t5S/0/X2/2014-02-08-55Z-X2.jpg

    I don't see that one as cramped at all.

    : Incidentally, that Buick was born the same year that I was. We are in
    : comparable shape.

    Looks like I've got a year on you. But 1938 was an important year in my life,
    because my parents never tired of regaling me with tales of the hurricane that
    struck New England that year. I didn't remember any of it myself, of course.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 15, 2014
    #19
  20. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    I went back and looked at the shots for that day. Image 2013-01-31-09
    was shot in portrait mode and nothing was really cropped out of it. It
    was cropped to re-size, but very little was cropped out. A bit of
    garden hose on the left, and that's about it.

    As far as staying, mostly, with the same aspect ratio, I just prefer
    to do so.
    I also shot this scene in landscape, but there's nothing there that I
    would have included. There was an overhang on the store next door on
    the right (you can see a bit of it in this one) that looked out of
    place without showing the entire store, and a blank black sign on the
    left that I wouldn't have included.
    Hold on, there. I'm not rigid. I *prefer* to process to a 2:3, but
    process to what works best. I just didn't see any reason not to go
    2:3 on this one. Generally, I can process to 2:3 because that's how I
    see the image when I compose it in-camera.

    This one, for example, is cropped unconstrained and isn't to the 2:3
    ratio:
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-jDbXmd8/0/XL/Art Walk-XL.jpg
     
    Tony Cooper, Feb 15, 2014
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.