Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I think that is what has bothered me about that Fuji sensor. If you
> look at pix by average users on pbase.com they seem to alternate
> between really nice low light shots and washed out looking daylight
> shots. To paraphrase that old Pepsodent commercial you'll wonder
> where the RGB went. Maybe it is a specialized low light camera unless
> in the hands of someone like you who is willing to really learn how
> to use it and post process.
>
Fuji made many improvements going from the F10 to the F30. The biggest
things they could do for a next act are a histogram and to customize the
processing to be adaptive to brightness/iso. Well, the biggest things
for the mass audience, RAW would be one of the biggest things for me.
> I appreciate your superimposed histogram in the one shot. It really
> is interesting what they did with the curve in the shadows.
>
A picture is worth how many words?
> I have found some limitations of the Photoshop shadow/highlight tool
> besides the exposure of shadow noise which one might expect. I
> really hate that pale corona that surrounds dark edges that appears
> when the tool is overused.
>
> http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Summita/pages/DSCF1140a.htm
>
My bad. I skipped a step I "always" do when using ShadowHi or LCE on
dark areas next to light ones. You need to create a separate layer of
the light area before the other processing an set it above the processed
layer, covering the halo/coronas. Just takes a few moments for most
cases, but I forgot. Try it now.
> It looks very unnatural and manipulated to my eye. I decided I
> needed to work harder at nailing the exposure.
Always the best policy, if you can do it. I really should bracket more.
I would at least save me some work later.
> Unfortunately the
> narrow dynamic range of the Fuji sensor/curve seems to make it
> impossible to avoid the corona in contrasty situations. I realize I
> put the link to your darkest example which you provided to primarily
> demonstrate the low shadow noise, but the corona is there to a lesser
> degree in the the other corrected shots with sky.
>
It's a legitimate complaint, and easily avoided, so why not? I corrected
the first one too. With such a sensitive eye for this effect, you may
also have noticed it in 1191. That's a tougher fix, as selecting the
layer is more difficult. But for the sake of illustration, I corrected
it too. Although it's not noted on the page, clicking on the image
brings up the original corrected version, with subtle halo around the
wood. It's probably in some of the others too, but subtle enough most
folks won't notice.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|