The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[aychd]

Thanks keko jones for helping out and putting me onto some spots. Fun fact... took this pic and forgot where I parked my car. Took me an hour to find it smh.

Views from NYC by HENRY DOMINGUEZ, on Flickr

 

[keko jones]

Thanks keko jones for helping out and putting me onto some spots. Fun fact... took this pic and forgot where I parked my car. Took me an hour to find it smh.

Views from NYC by HENRY DOMINGUEZ, on Flickr

good job. Are you shooting in RAW? In this edit, I would bring out more of the shadows and maybe do a lens correction or level the picture as to me, it's leaning to the left.

 

[aychd]

good job. Are you shooting in RAW? In this edit, I would bring out more of the shadows and maybe do a lens correction or level the picture as to me, it's leaning to the left.

I’m not should I?

 

[Nawzlew]

yes

shoot in raw.

 

[keko jones]

I’m not should I?

Absolutely.

Especially when you have extreme highlights and shadows in a shot.

Google raw vs jpg or raw before/after to get an idea.

 

[Fong$tarr]

Shooting in RAW helps with shots like that but I find bracketing shots better if you are a pixel peeper. It's a lot more processing but it comes out cleaner. But RAW in general are good for bringing out shadows. You're photo does have a lot of black and a nice balance of blacks, mids and highlights makes a landscape look better. It is all how you want to portray your photo though, so there isn't like a hard rule saying you can do or can't do anything.

 

[keko jones]

Shooting in RAW helps with shots like that but I find bracketing shots better if you are a pixel peeper. It's a lot more processing but it comes out cleaner. But RAW in general are good for bringing out shadows. You're photo does have a lot of black and a nice balance of blacks, mids and highlights makes a landscape look better. It is all how you want to portray your photo though, so there isn't like a hard rule saying you can do or can't do anything.

Are you talking about bracketing and then processing them in PS to make an HDR image?

 

[Fong$tarr]

Are you talking about bracketing and then processing them in PS to make an HDR image?

Yeah. I hate calling it HDR cause people reference those photos with the halo effect but you can make HDR photos look natural nowadays. But as far as noise is concerned, you can get a cleaner image if you bracket rather than just raising your shadows via in photoshop. Mind you RAW files have really come a long way so most would not want to bracket shots just to make things easier. Ultimately though, your shots can pretty much look the same but if you really want a clean look and are printing large stuff, definitely bracket your shots.

 

[keko jones]

Yeah. I hate calling it HDR cause people reference those photos with the halo effect but you can make HDR photos look natural nowadays. But as far as noise is concerned, you can get a cleaner image if you bracket rather than just raising your shadows via in photoshop. Mind you RAW files have really come a long way so most would not want to bracket shots just to make things easier. Ultimately though, your shots can pretty much look the same but if you really want a clean look and are printing large stuff, definitely bracket your shots.

I used to bracket a lot and the merge, but it was time and space consuming. In addition to finding myself doing a lot of long exposures, its not really for me. But o do agree that you can drastically remove the noise while keeping all the detail vices using a noise filter and loading detail.

Never bracketed night photos though, you have examples?

 

[Fong$tarr]

I used to bracket a lot and the merge, but it was time and space consuming. In addition to finding myself doing a lot of long exposures, its not really for me. But o do agree that you can drastically remove the noise while keeping all the detail vices using a noise filter and loading detail.

Never bracketed night photos though, you have examples?

It's definitely time consuming. Have you ever seen Elia from F-stoppers youtube page do bracketed/blended shot? The guy literally will just sit at a location from golden hour till night (or longer) to get one shot.

Like this photo of his below. I have the ripped video of it but he shot this photo from moon up to sun rise just to get a clean image of the lake, then mountains and then the sky. I think the sky had the most noise but he used some software to help clean it up that wasn't photoshop. Then he shot the mid-ground during moon up to use that ambient light to get a cleaner shot and then shot the lake when the sun was coming up to get a clean shot of that. So it's a super long process to just bracket a night photo when you can also take one long exposure as a RAW file and just bring ups he shadows and control the highlights. Then only real difference probably would be the noise and the lighting to a degree.

This is another one of his that is obviously bracketed but I am sure he shot this throughout the night as well and did a bracket in post.

 

[Fong$tarr]

Speaking of bracketed photos, that car photo I put up was from 4 photos. It wasn't for noise reason but I did shoot at ISO100 for all shots. The bracket was to get different exposures for different things. The 1st photo was for the detail for the headlights, the 2nd photo was for the backdrop to get exposed more, the 3rd photo was to light paint the rims and the last one was to light paint the whole care from above.

 

[yanky]

^^That shot is dope! Was that with a 35mm?

I took this shot of my buddies car a while back and some guy did a pencil drawing of it. Took him about 2 weeks to do the drawing but it came out so dope! He even got the little details in the emblem of the city in the background. He gave the original drawing to the owner but also sent me a print of it. This guy is really really talented.

https://www.instagram.com/obsessedus/

 

[Fong$tarr]

^^^^^That seriously is a draw? Man....that is nuts. Looks way too real.


I shot it at around 24mm or lower I think. I shot it on my 15-30mm Tamron lens so I must have been somewhere around the middle but sort of up close too. The wing backdrop was pretty massive but it worked for the photo.

I actually originally wanted to shoot more of a landscape but couldn't do it that night. The car shot I really want is to blend a landscape photo with a car photo shot like below. I think it is sort of the best of both worlds if I can do it right.

 

[yanky]

Yea it's an all pencil drawing, pretty insane what he did. Nice I was wondering how wide you were with getting the entire wing in the back. Putting both landscape and automotive together would be pretty cool, don't really see that alot.

 

[aychd]

So shot this in RAW.

Concrete Jungle by HENRY DOMINGUEZ, on Flickr

 

[doxen5703]

I think your image is slightly slanted? Help me if I’m wrong guys.

 

[aychd]

I think your image is slightly slanted? Help me if I’m wrong guys.

You might be right. I can't seem to get that right for some reason.

 

[Nawzlew]

might as well shoot like 100 iso

 

[dvsonm]

It says you shot it at f32??! Might wanna bring that down. Your lens sweet spot should be from like f8-11. In Lightroom you can straitened it with the lens correction section. Click on level, that should help. Also that bridge shakes a lot when the train passes by so be aware of that.

 

[keko jones]

So shot this in RAW.

Concrete Jungle by HENRY DOMINGUEZ, on Flickr

I know how hard it can be to shot at this bridge. If it's not the trains it is the joggers. You did a good job! However, like many have mentioned, your settings are way off for my taste. I would of have shot that at f/11 w/100 iso. It would of have been a longer exposure, but well worth it. Less noise and IMO probably sharper image.

Do you mind uploading the raw file and posting it here? I wouldnt mind trying to edit, see how much difference if any we could get.

 

[doxen5703]

You guys are saying to shoot that around f/10 with 100 iso because it’s dark out? Sorry if that sounds stupid, I’m learning the technalities.

 

[keko jones]

You guys are saying to shoot that around f/10 with 100 iso because it’s dark out? Sorry if that sounds stupid, I’m learning the technalities.

Lens usually perform better in certain aperture. They'll give you better sharpness. Once you start using those high apertures, the lens will lose a lot if sharpness and if anything will start showing more of the dirt spots and stuff.

Normally a lens will perform it's best around f/8 to f/11. Best sharpness from corner to corner and if using a zoom, to minimize distortion you should avoid the extreme low end.

In regards to iso, the lower the iso the cleaner and less noisy the image in. You should use this whenever possible. Its also help because you can pull shadows a lot more as you started with a cleaner image.

The exposure doesn't come into effect in what we are talking about.

 

[picasso swerve]

Grabbed the 16-35 f/4.

Super quick shot, quick edits.

 

[keko jones]

Grabbed the 16-35 f/4.

Super quick shot, quick edits.

Dope shot, ugly sneakers. LoL

How you like it? I love that lens.

 

[picasso swerve]

Literally the first thing I shot was the kicks. I got the 17-35 f/2.8 thats super old. Returned that for the 16-35 but I did take this shot with it (the G37). I can see why people say its a bit soft, though this is at f/2.8.