really raw

[mysteryscribe]

I think in camera is fine. Film would come out a standard setting and the lab would make some corrections to print it and we are going with one hour lab type images. If you give them your memory card right from the camera and they print it is the standard we are using I think.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I like the clouds but I really like the tools. One thing I think I have noticed about digital you really have to have good light to have good contrast right from the camera. With film you can sorta make up for the quality of the light by giving it more exposure but I think the actual intensity of the light might have something to do with digital. Hell that is just a guess. But the tool with the burned wood is a dynamite image.

Switch tell me something do you like that crop now that you have seen it outside the camera. I'm more curious than anything else. Looks to me to be a bit topheavy to make a print from. But then I don't know what youi had in mind. One thing though it is great fill lighting. I do love strobe lights. Not only the exposure but the contrast on the subject is right on for me. the only think stopping the subject for being perfect is the two hot spots on his glass and I say SO F'n WHAT. Mama would love it just like it is.

 

[Alex_B]

correct me if i'm wrong but shooting in jpeg has in camera processing settings by default or can they be turned off and work like a raw image?

no, you need settings to convert raw data into an image. no processing, no image (jpg or tiff).

you cannot visualize raw data without a conversion with some settings.

 

[Alex_B]

in any case i cannot contribute at the moment since I am too tired to take a picture and too far from my archives (2400 km) to post one from them

 

[mysteryscribe]

OKAY LISTEN UP.... NEW SUGGESTION .. PLEASE COMMENT ON THE IMAGE ABOVE YOURS...

well Alex we will hold our breath for you... Wait a minute if I do that I wont have to post a picture and be humiliated again. There are some good things to holding your breath after all.

 

[DRodgers]

you really have to have good light to have good contrast right from the camera. With film you can sorta make up for the quality of the light by giving it more exposure but I think the actual intensity of the light might have something to do with digital. Hell that is just a guess.

I've come to notice that light is a major problem with digital .Myself I find the best shots come from overcast days with the digital and I can get some great ones on well lit days on film even in harsh midday, but the digital blows out too easy.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I was wondering about the lack of contrast I see in a lot of digital shots made without strobe. Seems there is enough lite to make the image, but it is muddy looking. Film you get that but it's because it is under exposed. I just wonder if giving a low intensity light source more exposure would actually increase the contrast. It will for film I'm pretty sure. At least as sure as my spotty memory allows me to be.

Which also brings me to a point about cameras like the panasonic fz series. If you use it like a film camera with an off camera strobe most of the time would you have that noise people talk about. My only other problem with that class camera is they look like toys they are so small.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I reshot this with a point and shoot $50 digital camera I use for ebay. So this isn't really what I want, but it gives you an idea of the composition I had in mind on the original one. With a real camera I would have used a smaller larger aperture and killed that house in the background. See that car on the right, remember me saying things slip into my shots. I swear that wasn't there but there it is.

 

[PNA]

When I shoot, er....shot, film I normally had the pictures scanned to disk (jpg) at the lab and then into the computer, no prints.

Question: Under you guidelines is that permissible? or do you want prints then scanned from the flatbed into the computer? Does it make any difference?

 

[mysteryscribe]

mine are negative scanned to the computer file same as you are saying so sure they are fine they don't do any heavy processing. Just post the image as scanned by the lab. No photoshopping.

 

[Puscas]

Two I took recently. Click, usb-hook up and right onto TPF. No funny stuff in between...

pascal

 

[mysteryscribe]

You know I really like the first one. Has almost a sci fi look about it. Very nice also the bottom one has a slightly cluttered look but its still better than my shot lol.

 

[Puscas]

bottom one has a slightly cluttered look but its still better than my shot lol.

slightly cluttered? It's a mess! (I couldn't find a way to get fewer ropes in the pic)





pascal

 

[mysteryscribe]

I tell you what if you can find that three master alone in a frame it would make a hell of a shot. I would love to shoot one of those undersail even it it were a small one.

 

[crownlaurel]

Here's a cloud pic I took recently and haven't edited at all.