PDA

View Full Version : So..



ravage3000
06-19-2009, 07:49 PM
What's wrong with these? Other than missing 2 wheels. Pick away, Pap's.

http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/564921133_fJ6gW-XL.jpg

http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/564898323_Cwtqz-XL.jpg

http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/564921200_2EtmN-XL.jpg

http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/564920902_opgjv-XL.jpg

Pappy
06-19-2009, 08:18 PM
Lookin great on this end Mark!

ravage3000
06-20-2009, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Pappy
Lookin great on this end Mark!

C'mon, pick away. I'm dieing to know. And since I have your attention, is there any tips or tricks to 300mm?

Pappy
06-20-2009, 09:45 PM
There really isnt much to pick apart....

The reds are a tad hot

#1 is ever so slightly underexposed, but easily fixed

The subject matter is little flat in the first two


You've made a marked improvement and it shows!

No tricks to the 300, just learn to stabilize it (if its a 2.8 then you already know its heavy!)

Now you need to get back to some of the action shots you used to post and apply what you know now. You always had some great action and now you are zeroing in on good... techincal aspects of teh photography. Get the two together and look out!

Pappy
06-20-2009, 09:53 PM
Here ...maybe I can show it better then I can say it.

These are slight tweaks and all done in less then a minute. Some of this stuff you arent going to get with just the out of camera shot, thats why we have such great editing software.

Are you running a calibrated monitor now?

http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/564920902_opgjv-XL.jpg

Pappy
06-20-2009, 09:58 PM
http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/564921133_fJ6gW-XL.jpg

Pappy
06-20-2009, 10:19 PM
I know i'd like some nice soft evening light:p All I have been getting is bright mid day harsh or gloomy storm light:p

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3605/3645246187_f058a71521_o.jpg

ravage3000
06-21-2009, 02:51 PM
So what are these slight tweaks? I need more explanation. The edited samples you put are great help.
No to the calibrated monitor. For me it's not worth the expense. I have Lightroom 2 also.
"The subject matter is little flat in the first two". Boring? Explain.

Pappy
06-21-2009, 03:18 PM
If you are using lightroom, then just read about online...brightness, contrast, saturation etc

If you are serious about your work, you will sooner or later have to make investments and working on a calibrated monitor is a huge step in getting things right in your post work. I can instantly see color shifts, over saturation, tints etc that those without a calibrated monitor will usually miss.

Yes..boring/flat/doesnt make the action jump off the screen. Trying to catch the riders doing something helps a ton in a spot where there really isnt action (jump/turns etc)

In this shot, it would be flat as well if Upperman had't made his body position the way it is as he sets up for a corner. With some bike riders its extremely hard as they have no style or are being captured in a spot that doesnt lend itself to anything that shows action.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2421/3631300942_12ac50fd49_b.jpg

meankfx
06-21-2009, 07:08 PM
hey pappy what kind of lens did u use for that shot?

Pappy
06-21-2009, 07:23 PM
Nikkor 70-200mm 2.8

ravage3000
07-05-2009, 01:09 PM
Straight out of the camera..

http://markgoodwinphotography.smugmug.com/photos/582641192_xpR6d-X2.jpg

Pappy, how would you edit this? Please explain how you did.

Pappy
07-05-2009, 01:53 PM
about a 1/3 of a stop under-exposed, yellows are good and accurate but the reds are still a touch hot. greens look great

the exposure is subjective however, and its close enough that its a personal thing over technical IMO

this is how you want the shots....looking like you are standing there instead of looking at a picture...well its atleast how i like them. I think its a good shot!

with no exif data included on the pic, i cant see what the info was at the time of capture. the histogram shows the story of the underexposure though

email me the original if youd like

bkperformance@verizon.net

ravage3000
07-05-2009, 07:39 PM
Will do. Don't understand why it's not showing EXIF.:ermm:

Pappy
07-05-2009, 07:54 PM
You have it turned off in whatever program you use to open the file. It can also be turned off or not included with the file data depending on where you host the picture

nighthawk99
07-09-2009, 06:42 PM
Im curious to ask , Wouldn't it be better to critique the picture itself rather than correcting the photoshop job? I've been into photography for a while, and I just joined this forum. But why all the photoshop? I'd rather see a a decent plain jane picture than one that has been photoshoped to perfection. Am I a missing something? Don't take this the wrong way but, your pics, pappys, and many other shots are quite amazing. Nice Shots!
:D

Pappy
07-09-2009, 07:20 PM
Welcome to the world of digital

When you have film, its processed, digital is no different. You can be happy with what comes from the camera (in a sense, you are processing it by the internal set up in the camera) or you can make the very basic adjustments in post processing work flow.

I am all for doing everything I can when taking teh shot to getting it right, but some issues rely on post work. My newest camera does not do well at final sharpening, it was built this way so it can be controlled better in post work. There is so much to learn with teh digital stuff beyond photography its mind boggling.

And Mark sent me the original and its fine, the hosting company he is using boosts their shots and it shows.

nighthawk99
07-09-2009, 07:36 PM
Intersting... Perhaps I may be jelous of the work of photoshop? I don't know lol. I have the programs. Just never quite got the hang of it. Just basic crap. Thanks though. Since we are on the topic Pappy, Do you mind looking at my post and letting me know what can be done with these pictures? As for photoshopping.

http://www.exriders.com/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=402889

Thanks again

Pappy
07-09-2009, 08:27 PM
Not a lot really, well, not worth spending the time on them for the end result. Whats not out of focus is over-exposed to the point you cant save the highlights, the others are underexposed to the point you have no detail to save.