Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: awolfe on October 23, 2009, 10:41:33 am
-
OK - we have raw files from 10 folks now. I will distribute the raw files tonight and send out the download links.
Raw files received from 10 of 12
AndrewKulin
Brammers
EduPerez
EricM
Jeff Philips
Panopeeper
awolfe
Sigi
Tim Gray
nniko
Participant List: 12 out of 12 slots filled
Tim Gray
Panopeeper
PeterAit
nniko
AndrewKulin
Brammers
Sigi
Jeff Philips
awolfe
EricM
EduPerez
Christopher
The Process
- signup - complete
- upload links provided - complete
- Everyone upload 1 RAW file - 9 out of 12
- Upload your own take on your own RAW file.
- Everyone receives a link for 3 RAW files - not started
- Everyone processes all 3 RAW files and uploads a full resolution jpeg at full quality, and also at 1280x1024
- I will present links for the rendered versions of the files - small, as well as full size.
- I will present links for all the RAW files.
Original Post:
I remember reading something that Brooks Jensen wrote, something about him wondering when we'll get to the point where we sell raw files to other photographers for them to print. All the benefits to the learner, yet none of the risks to the negative. I think I'd have a tough time pulling off "Moonrise, Hernandez" from a scan of the negative.
Buy you know what? I'd love to try.
I'm curious if on some image that I feel is just "not quite there", if someone else could pull it off. I'm also curious if I could pull off the same job on an image that someone else has.
Here is what I'm proposing:
People sign up to participate on this thread.
Everyone that participates will contribute 1 raw file that they are willing to put in the public domain (but still, no cats please) along with their own development of that raw file.
Everyone that participates will be assigned 2 raw files to process.
The photographer's original rendering of the image along with the 2 other renderings will be gathered and posted in the same post once they are all collected and the exchange has finished.
I have server space (VPS) I would be willing to use to host and exchange the raw data (unless the volumes became too large - then we'd have to find something else)
I expect the timeline would be a month or more from end to end.
Some people have hangup about working other people's negatives/files. Think of it more as a workshop with peer review!
-
Sounds like fun. I'd be interested. Files would be from 1DS MK 3
-
A Canon 40D here.
-
I remember reading something that Brooks Jensen wrote, something about him wondering when we'll get to the point where we sell raw files to other photographers for them to print. All the benefits to the learner, yet none of the risks to the negative. I think I'd have a tough time pulling off "Moonrise, Hernandez" from a scan of the negative.
It sounds like a good idea in theory but I wonder if it would actually work. For one thing, I don't have the time to process my own photos let alone other people's. Second, I think there's sort of a catch-22: this idea is most appealing for photos I think have a lot of potential, but I would be hesitant to put such photos in the public domain.
Anyway, I'd probably give it a try if you can get some people involved. What would be particularly interesting, I think, is to see the different "takes" that we have on processing the same RAW image.
-
I like it! Count me in too. (Nikon D70, D200 or D300, depending on how old an image I pick.)
It would be very interesting to see how others would process the same photo differently from me.
Lisa
-
I'm intrigued by this. A 40D here.
Andrew
-
This sounds like fun! Would there be any limitiations on our PP - would we be looking to get close to the original, to maintain the style of the original, or could we do whatever we wanted?
Sign me up please
-
Sounds like fun - I am in
Siegfried
-
I'm in with a D700 or D300...
-
I've updated above with the participant list so far.
PeterAit - I agree completely with what you say re: image quality/willingness to give up rights. I think it might be fun to do it with more complex terms to allow everyone to protect/retain IP if this works out well - but wanted to start simple.
We're at 9 participants right now. I plan to cut it off at 12 on the first run.
Does everyone have an FTP client they're comfortable using?
-
What the heck. Somebody's got to be the worst PP-er in the list, so count me in, too.
I do have an ftp client that works fine for me.
EricM
-
Yes, I'm happy with FTP
-
Looks like fun, add me to the list, please.
-
I can deal with FTP.
Lisa
-
I can deal with FTP.
Lisa
Well I could only do it on my notebook screen, so colors might not be 100% like I would like them, but I would be interested if you don't mind that.
-
We have a full set of participants now.
I'll be PM'ing everyone FTP login information over the next day or two - we'll give it a week to collect everyone's files, then I'll write a quick program to anonymously shuffle them and we'll get them passed out!
-
I'm glad to see my name at the list!
Is there any guideline / advice / suggestion about which RAW file I must send? Any one I find suitable?
-
I would suggest:
- Anything you want
- Something that is going to be open to numerous interpretations - tonal ambiguity? multiple cropping options?
- Anything that you want to see how someone else would do it.
- Something that is not going to be offensive or potentially illegal in the processor's jurisdiction (not the place for your Maplethorpe self portrait)
-
awolfe, I'd actually be interested in trying my hand at processing *more* than two other participants' raw files. Something more like six, maybe. What do the rest of you think?
Or maybe we could each be assigned two (per your original plan), but have the other nine available so we can try out any of those we find interesting if we feel like doing more of them, and a way to communicate our final results back to their original owners like our assigned two. What do you think?
Lisa
-
awolfe, I'd actually be interested in trying my hand at processing *more* than two other participants' raw files. Something more like six, maybe. What do the rest of you think?
Or maybe we could each be assigned two (per your original plan), but have the other nine available so we can try out any of those we find interesting if we feel like doing more of them, and a way to communicate our final results back to their original owners like our assigned two. What do you think?
Lisa
I'll second that but also say I don't want to create a lot of work for awolfe. Having additional files available to those that want to process them is a great idea. I agree - keep it at 2 files to participate but make the files available to those that want to do (or see) more. Whatever allows more knowlege base to filter out while keeeping the work-load for awolfe as small as possible...
Jeff
-
Not a bad idea to make all available in the end. But I'd rather not do that in the beginning, because everyone will cherry pick the same few best images.
Let's do 2 rounds:
Round 1 - everyone is assigned 3 files, returned, aggregated and posted and we have a good discussion on it.
Round 2 - once round 1 complete - I'll provide links for all the raw files to everyone, and then we can have a free for all on all the images.
To save those that have issues with FTP the problems - I built a browser based uploader. I'll be sending out the individual links today.
-
Not a bad idea to make all available in the end. But I'd rather not do that in the beginning, because everyone will cherry pick the same few best images.
Let's do 2 rounds:
Round 1 - everyone is assigned 3 files, returned, aggregated and posted and we have a good discussion on it.
Round 2 - once round 1 complete - I'll provide links for all the raw files to everyone, and then we can have a free for all on all the images.
To save those that have issues with FTP the problems - I built a browser based uploader. I'll be sending out the individual links today.
so how many raw files should I upload now in round 1?
-
Everyone should have their upload links now. Please begin to upload your 3 files.
Everyone go ahead and upload 3 files - we'll keep this open until the middle of next week.
Everyone will then be given a link for 3 files to download and process themselves - everyone will have a week or so to process the images and then resubmit them through the upload link.
We will present the results at the end of that period, and the the links for all the files will be presented to everyone.
Let's give this a whirl!
-
Everyone should have their upload links now. Please begin to upload your 3 files.
Everyone go ahead and upload 3 files - we'll keep this open until the middle of next week.
Everyone will then be given a link for 3 files to download and process themselves - everyone will have a week or so to process the images and then resubmit them through the upload link.
We will present the results at the end of that period, and the the links for all the files will be presented to everyone.
Let's give this a whirl!
Hello Wolfe,
I have just tried to upload a file. Did not work. I pressed "send" it started to work but the progress bar did not move an inch. Have to catch a plane, try it again on Sunday
Siegfried
-
Hi all,
I'm not particularly sure what files people would like to process, so what I've done is uploaded a load from which I'll let you select 3. For me it's a fine balance between not putting in the public domain anything that I'm proud enough of to want to use in some way, while also not giving you lot utter rubbish to work from. I've split the shots into 2 groups - those which I'm prepared to relinquish all rights to, and those which I'll upload as long as everyone accepts that the usage is restricted to this competition only. I've also included a few notes where necessary.
Simply shout out if you've any preference from the shots below, and I'll bear those in mind when uploading in a few days' time. All shots as they came from the camera - no PP whatsoever on these - I feel a little naked showing you unfinished results to be honest!!!
[Edit]Ignore this - I've uploaded now
-
[Edit] - Ignore this - I've uploaded.
-
awolfe, just to clarify - in round 1, we upload 3 images our own? Or just one? If 3, then how many other people will be working on each one? Sorry, it's not yet clear to me...
Lisa
-
awolfe, just to clarify - in round 1, we upload 3 images our own? Or just one? If 3, then how many other people will be working on each one? Sorry, it's not yet clear to me...
Lisa
I'm confused too. If everyone uploads three files and everyone processes three files and they are selected by chance, then as far as I can count every raw file is processed only once. Or some not at all if it is random without removing the chosen ones from the pool. However if we upload one each and process three than we get a lot of variety.
I don't have a problem uploading three, just don't see the sense if we only edit three.
-
I'm confused too. If everyone uploads three files and everyone processes three files and they are selected by chance, then as far as I can count every raw file is processed only once. Or some not at all if it is random without removing the chosen ones from the pool. However if we upload one each and process three than we get a lot of variety.
I don't have a problem uploading three, just don't see the sense if we only edit three.
I'm now not sure what the original plan was, but like you I originally thought it was upload one, and process multiple ones (2, 3, or whatever), so everyone can see how *several* other people would process their one.
I think we need some clarification...
Thanks,
Lisa
-
You're all of course right - was answering on the fly in between meetings.
Upload 1 raw file per person, that image will get distributed to 3 different people for 3 different takes on the development.
Brammers - that's exactly the idea. We all understand that raw files straight from the camera are going to look very bad.
Sigi - yes - please try again. There is no status bar, so you just upload and let it sit for several minutes until it is done.
-
OK, i think I'm ready to upload. I picked a bunch of images that seemed to me to have "problems", so they would provide a challenge to pull a nice image out of them. Narrowing them down wasn't easy. I think I know which one I'll upload.
But: I see that the original 'specs' indicated that I should include my own best processing effort. So I'll upload the raw (Canon .cr2 file from a Canon 5D) file this evening and the processed version later on.
Good luck everybody!
Eric
-
Right, 1 image then, I was also under the impression it was 3.
In that case if people would care to make a little vote on any image from the ones I've posted above that they feel particularly strongly about, I'll get something up before the end of the week.
Cheers!
-
Thanks for the clarification! It all makes sense now.
I've uploaded mine. I had some problems at first - about thirty seconds after hitting the "Send" button, I would get the standard IE "cannot connect to the webpage" error message. Similar problem with Firefox on the same PC. But when I tried it on another PC running linux (using Firefox), it worked fine. I would guess that the Windows PC I was originally using had some security settings that were interfering with the uploading. I mention this in case someone else has a similar problem...
Lisa
-
Should one upload the own rendering together with the raw? What image size?
-
Should one upload the own rendering together with the raw? What image size?
Good question. I have just uploaded two renderings of my own raw file, one in color and one converted to B&W, which is my preference for this image. I made them both 6.67x10" at 360 dpi as jpegs. Perhaps they should be more like 800 px or so in the long direction, suitable for web posting. Suggestions cordially invited, and I'll upload replacements if a consensus is reached.
Eric
-
Good question. I have just uploaded two renderings of my own raw file, one in color and one converted to B&W, which is my preference for this image. I made them both 6.67x10" at 360 dpi as jpegs. Perhaps they should be more like 800 px or so in the long direction, suitable for web posting
I suggest to stick to image sizes for the monitor, but we need to agree on the size. I don't think printing size is useful, because (I guess) every one of us will want to see all images and different renderings.
And what about the size of rendered image by the "candidates"? The same consideration?
Of course, one could say anyone can downsize a larger image, but if the topic is fine rendering, then that should not occur, because the sharpening depends on the size.
-
I suggest to stick to image sizes for the monitor, but we need to agree on the size. I don't think printing size is useful, because (I guess) every one of us will want to see all images and different renderings.
And what about the size of rendered image by the "candidates"? The same consideration?
Of course, one could say anyone can downsize a larger image, but if the topic is fine rendering, then that should not occur, because the sharpening depends on the size.
Agreed. My main monitor is 1920x1200 pixels. I suggest we choose a size that will fit on the smallest of our main monitors, so if, for example, someone has one that does 1600x1200 and everyone has one at least that big, then we use 1200 as max height and 1600 as max width for every image. Then the pix would all be as big as possible on screen without anyone needing to scroll.
Does that make sense? If so, then what is the native resolution of everyone's monitor?
Eric
-
My monitor has the same size. Hpwever, when someone loads the images in an internet browser, the max. size will be less than the monitor size even in "full screen mode", at least with MSIE, and if the image is only one pixel larger, then scroll bar will be added, which makes the available space even smaller.
-
1920x1200 here too.
Why the concern about the photo size? My 40D native resolution is 2592x3888 so in the end to get to say my screen size I'd have to end up with approx. 1/4 the pixels. I would be fine with submitting the photos for critical review at whichever resolution and zoom in/out using PS, and then make a smaller jpeg version for submission into this thread for easier viewing by the public.
Apologies if I am missing something - my morning coffee is just being brewed up now
Andrew
-
Why a browser? My processed images aren't SRGB anyway. Go full res and "save as" and view in whatever viewer you want.
-
Why a browser? My processed images aren't SRGB anyway. Go full res and "save as" and view in whatever viewer you want.
If we all go "full res", then most images will not fit on a monitor screen at full res, regardless of the viewer you use, unless the viewer is down-resing to fit on the screen, which will lose some detail anyway.
I'm happy to provide files at whatever size the team agrees on. If it's full res, then I would not apply any output sharpening.
We should probably decide on a common color space for the processed file, too. Since most of us are likely to be viewing them only on-screen, sRGB seems to me to make sense, although I will do all earlier processing in Prophoto, 16-bit.
I guess the ground rules need a bit more clarifying.
Eric
-
Everyone should have their upload links now. Please begin to upload your 3 files.
Everyone go ahead and upload 3 files - we'll keep this open until the middle of next week.
Everyone will then be given a link for 3 files to download and process themselves - everyone will have a week or so to process the images and then resubmit them through the upload link.
We will present the results at the end of that period, and the the links for all the files will be presented to everyone.
Let's give this a whirl!
I am traveling and away from my photo computer. I won't be able to upload anything until Tuesday.
-
Hi,
Another request to all photographers. I am working with DXO and would love to have "virgin" rawfiles. DXO is a bit sensitive if other raw-converters have touched the file already. In case you want to upload raw files that you have already woked on with another raw converter I can always user either ACR or DPP but I just hardly use them.
Siegfried
-
Hi,
whatever I do, the upload of Raw-files does not work. I am on an imac and have tried Firefox and Safari. It says "Sending request to wolfepackarts.com" and that's it.
Siegfried
How long do you wait? That's all you'll see but the message will change once it's been fully loaded.
-
How long do you wait? That's all you'll see but the message will change once it's been fully loaded.
Yesterday it suddenly worked. I have uploaded.
Siegfried
-
Hi,
Another request to all photographers. I am working with DXO and would love to have "virgin" rawfiles. DXO is a bit sensitive if other raw-converters have touched the file already. In case you want to upload raw files that you have already woked on with another raw converter I can always user either ACR or DPP but I just hardly use them.
Siegfried
I would hope we would all be providing "virgin" raw files as you request. That's the point of the experiment, IMHO. The only situation in which a raw file might need to be reworked is if the camera that took it isn't recognized by someone's favorite raw converter, in which case converting it to .dng might be needed.
I decided not to include an image from my ancient Canon S60, since it isn't supported by most decent raw converters (and not by DxO), so my raw is from a Canon 5D.
Eric
-
I have just uploaded my files:
- A RAW file, as it left the camera.
- A JPEG file, my best effort with it.
I have also included a PP2 file: it is the 'sidecar' file used by RawTherapee, the convertor I used to process that file, just in case the 'victim' who receives my files is curious. I tried to select a photograph that best matched both this site's name and the spirit of the thread. Hope you like it.
-
I've updated the first post with the remainder of the process.
Most notably, upload your rendering of a raw file as a full resolution, 100% quality jpeg. I will take care of batch generating the smaller sized jpegs (1280x1024, 800x600) so that everything is consistent across the board with respect to resizing results.
Also, let's upload your own take on your own RAW file as well.
-
Hello awolfe and others,
as already mentioned above I use DXO - in other words it would be great if we somehow let each other know what camera and lens we have used so that I can download the correction modules if available.
Thanks
Siegfried
-
Most notably, upload your rendering of a raw file as a full resolution, 100% quality jpeg. I will take care of batch generating the smaller sized jpegs (1280x1024, 800x600) so that everything is consistent across the board with respect to resizing results.
I have a problem with this concept, namely that the sharpening depends on the presentation size. The image has to be resized before sharpening, everything else is barbarity.
This means, that we should agree on the size, for example as a from-to width and from-to height.
-
I have a problem with this concept, namely that the sharpening depends on the presentation size. The image has to be resized before sharpening, everything else is barbarity.
Revised:
Everyone provide a resized, sharpened and completed full size and 1280x1024 version of their image.
-
Hi!
How far away are we from distributing files? I'm all ready to go
-
We've got 10 raw files at this point.
Tonight I'll distribute the links to everyone to download their RAW files for processing.
-
We've got 10 raw files at this point.
Tonight I'll distribute the links to everyone to download their RAW files for processing.
It looks as if we are still missing the processed versions from PetrAit and Christopher. Come on, guys!
Eric
-
It looks as if we are still missing the processed versions from PetrAit and Christopher. Come on, guys!
Eric
I have selected the raw file and I'm ready to go, I'm just bin a little bit off the human track the last weeks. (Only slow GPRS Internet) I'm getting back to a big city tomorrow evening and can upload it than. Sorry guys for the waiting time, didn't plan to go that long with a normal connection.
-
I have selected the raw file and I'm ready to go, I'm just bin a little bit off the human track the last weeks. (Only slow GPRS Internet) I'm getting back to a big city tomorrow evening and can upload it than. Sorry guys for the waiting time, didn't plan to go that long with a normal connection.
You have my sympathy, Christopher.
Now that I have blazing fast fibre optic DSL, I have to remind myself from time to time what it was like in the "good old days" when I was using a 300-baud acoustic coupler on my regular phone line. Ouch! Text only, of course. Before the days of The Internet or even email.
Eric
-
You have my sympathy, Christopher.
Now that I have blazing fast fibre optic DSL, I have to remind myself from time to time what it was like in the "good old days" when I was using a 300-baud acoustic coupler on my regular phone line. Ouch! Text only, of course. Before the days of The Internet or even email.
Eric
What was it like hooking up horses for your morning commute?
-
What was it like hooking up horses for your morning commute?
Horses? Nah. We'd just go out and collar a woolly mammoth.
-
Horses? Nah. We'd just go out and collar a woolly mammoth.
Oh it feels so great to have normal internet access and not having to wait 30 seconds for every page to load. I uploaded two different packages and sent the link. I first had one finished, but realized at the end that some might be unhappy with a P65 files, because they could not use their raw converter of choice. (only c1, RD and LR)
Then I uploaded a different image from my 5DMk2. I personally would prefer to use the P65 image, because it is more difficult and challenging. However I understand if some people don't want to use their "none" favorite raw converter for this.
-
Oh it feels so great to have normal internet access and not having to wait 30 seconds for every page to load. I uploaded two different packages and sent the link. I first had one finished, but realized at the end that some might be unhappy with a P65 files, because they could not use their raw converter of choice. (only c1, RD and LR)
Then I uploaded a different image from my 5DMk2. I personally would prefer to use the P65 image, because it is more difficult and challenging. However I understand if some people don't want to use their "none" favorite raw converter for this.
This got me a thinking, I am using CS3 so I don't even think I would be able to process a 5D mkII file with ACR should I be assigned such a file.
Andrew
-
This got me a thinking, I am using CS3 so I don't even think I would be able to process a 5D mkII file with ACR should I be assigned such a file.
Andrew
I'm not certain, but I suspect the current version of Adobe's dng converter (free download) is likely to be able to handle most of the current files, such as from a 5D MKII. After converting, you should be able to process the dng raw file in ACR, even with CS3, or perhaps even with CS2 (I forget how far back the dng format goes).
I've got LR 2.5 (and 3 Beta), CS4, DxO 5, Raw Shooter premium 2006 (!), Canon's DPP, and C1 LE version 3.77 available to cover most files people might throw at me. And then there is the dng converter, if necessary.
Eric
-
Actually, I'd quite like a P65 file... Never seen one before! Seeing as most people should be able to use a DNG, could you reconsider that Christopher?
-
Actually, I'd quite like a P65 file... Never seen one before! Seeing as most people should be able to use a DNG, could you reconsider that Christopher?
As I said, both packages are uploaded. (One containing a P65 image and one 5DMk2 image) I think the P65 image would be more interesting, because it was shot under not to ideal conditions and it certainly would be interesting to see how other people work on it. I just uploaded the 5d file as back up.
-
Been away in Big Bend National Park in Texas the past week. Is there a next step here?
-
Been away in Big Bend National Park in Texas the past week. Is there a next step here?
As far as I can tell, we're waiting for Peter Ait to upload his processed file, and then for awolfe to send us all our raw homework files.
Got some good stuff from Big Bend?
Eric
-
we're waiting for Peter Ait to upload his processed file, and then for awolfe to send us all our raw homework files.
It is far from me to want to urge anyone or anything, BUT
why would we wait for anyone to upload the processed file?
I mean, the version created by the photographer of the image should not be published before others did their work. The goal should not be to make the same but somehow better (if one can), but to create own renderings, thus the best would be not to have seen how the photographer did it.
What do you think of this?
-
It is far from me to want to urge anyone or anything, BUT
why would we wait for anyone to upload the processed file?
I mean, the version created by the photographer of the image should not be published before others did their work. The goal should not be to make the same but somehow better (if one can), but to create own renderings, thus the best would be not to have seen how the photographer did it.
What do you think of this?
Makes sense to me, Gabor. What you are suggesting, I think, is that we should all do our best efforts on the raw files we are given, and only after we have done our best do we get to see the original photographer's version. That way we are not influenced by the original photographer's interpretation.
Eric
-
Makes sense to me, Gabor. What you are suggesting, I think, is that we should all do our best efforts on the raw files we are given, and only after we have done our best do we get to see the original photographer's version. That way we are not influenced by the original photographer's interpretation.
Eric
I agree, too.
-
I agree, too.
same here.
-
So as soon as awolfe gets back from vacation, or prison, or wherever, let the games begin!
-
same here.
Ditto
-
FYI, I'm going to out of town between Nov 26 and Dec 6, so I won't be able to do anything during that time, but will try to be reasonably prompt after I get back!
And I also agree that it's best to finish our attempts on other peoples' raw files *before* we see the original photographer's (or anyone else's) version.
Lisa
-
Sorry about that - work change, and 2 family changes happened in short order.
Back in the saddle!
Next step is me sending out the raw file processing links to everyone. I think we've gotten all the submissions we're going to get!
-
Sorry about that - work change, and 2 family changes happened in short order.
Back in the saddle!
Next step is me sending out the raw file processing links to everyone. I think we've gotten all the submissions we're going to get!
I don't know how the rest did it, but in the link I send you both processed and raw file are in one zip package, so someone would need to split them up before handing it out.
-
Hello,
when do we start now?
Siegfried
-
Hello,
when do we start now?
Siegfried
Good question.
-
Everybody should now have their processing links for the RAW files. Have fun! Let's post the results back to this thread for now - and if folks want to exchange the fill size images you can upload again to your original sending links.
-
Ok, here are my 3... All global adjustments ie: no masks etc. Straightened the horizon on 1 and de-dusted another. I'll post my take on the ones I submitted when I figure out which ones I sent in :0 BTW, to whoever submitted the sailboats - I can see the condo where I used to live!
-
Hello,
here are my 3 attempts.
Happy new year
-
It's interesting to see already how different interpretations can be.
Anyway, here are my three tries:
[attachment=19127:LRraw_3b.jpg][attachment=19123:LRraw_4b.jpg][attachment=19124:
LRraw_5b.jpg]
No cropping except for a tiny bit off the right in the first one. All were initially processed in LR 2.6, then a little touch up in CS4.
Cheers,
Eric
-
Happy New Digital Photography Year
All three have been converted with ACR and post processed in CS3.
-
OK, stupid forum question: How do I post my three images so that I get thumbnails displayed like in the posts above? When I try to post them using "Insert Image", I get large images that fill much of the window, not convenient little thumbnails. What am I missing?
Lisa
-
Don't insert image, just under the screen where you enter text, choose Attachments, and select a file, then upload.
-
Don't insert image, just under the screen where you enter text, choose Attachments, and select a file, then upload.
And after you upload, you have to go to "manage current attachments", which will list the file(s) you have uploaded, and show three little icons that do not look at all self-explanatory (at least to me). By random experiment I determined that the left-most icon means "insert this thumbnail" and the middle one means "delete this attachment." I haven't tried the right-hand icon. Perhaps it pours a nice stein of beer.
Eric
P.S. Anybody know how to send the full-size jpegs? The original upload link now simply shows me the source code for the uploader instead of running it.
So, Lisa, I see your 'stupid forum question' and I raise you one 'sfq.'
-
P.S. Anybody know how to send the full-size jpegs? The original upload link now simply shows me the source code for the uploader instead of running it.
Why would one upload full-size JPEGs to this site? I guess we will send them to awolfe via yousendit or alike and anyone can download them from there.
-
[attachment=19141:raw_1_1280_AKulin.jpg]
Camera Raw
- Changed white balance (7650/-3)
- Exposure + 50, Recovery +64
- Clarity/Vibrance (+28/+24)
- Tweaked HSL - Oranges/Yellows to warm up buildings and Blues/Purples/Magentas to punch up sunset skies
- Reduced CA (-18/-21)
CS3
- Noise Reduction (Noiseware Pro) then flattened image
- Sharpened Image (Pixel Genius)
- Levels Adjustment Layer (0 to 236)
- Masked HSL Adjustment Layer - very minor adjustment to further enhance sky
[attachment=19142:raw_6_10...e_AKulin.jpg]
Camera Raw
- Left white balance As Shot
- +16 Fill light
- Reduced CA
- Applied Square Crop
CS3
- Noise Reduction (Noiseware Pro) then flattened image
- Sharpened Image (Pixel Genius)
- Levels Adjustment Layer (0 to 236)
- Masked HSL Adjustment Layer - very minor adjustment to further enhance sky
[attachment=19143:raw_7_12...e_AKulin.jpg]
Camera Raw
- Changed white balance (2850/0) to lose orange sky glow
- straightened image slightly assuming roofline over rail platforms should be level. This resulted in minor crop and I cropped further on RHS side because edge of frame was dead-centre on a bright orange streetlight with starlike radials (it looked odd so I cropped)
- Fill Light +9, Recovery +100
- Clarity/Vibrance (+25/+12)
- Tweaked HSL - Some increases to Oranges/Yellows/Red to imporve color on main building in distances and lowered Blues/Cyans to less blueness in the area of the train platforms following white balance adjustment
- Reduced CA (+7/-13)
CS3
- Noise Reduction (Noiseware Pro) then flattened image
- Sharpened Image (Pixel Genius)
Andrew
-
OK, thanks Tim & Eric, let's give this a try...
[attachment=19154:raw_4_LAN.jpg] [attachment=19155:raw_8_LAN.jpg] [attachment=19156:raw_10_LAN.jpg]
I found it didn't work from Internet Explorer (probably something to do with the security settings), but did work for me from Firefox.
I really wanted to crop two of them, so I did, especially the second one (with which I couldn't resist getting a little goofy too) - that's the same image as the one of the beach rock that Tim & Sigi processed above. I recognize the third one as an IR image, something I have some experience with myself. :-)
Lisa
P.S. When do we post our best attempt at our own image?
-
Why would one upload full-size JPEGs to this site? I guess we will send them to awolfe via yousendit or alike and anyone can download them from there.
I guess I wasn't clear. I don't want to send the full-size ones to LL but to awolfe, as we sent the original raw files. But his upload server doesn't seem to work now.
-
D'oh! I've had to migrate between datacenters recently - that was not on my list of things to get running again. I'll post again when it's fixed.
I guess I wasn't clear. I don't want to send the full-size ones to LL but to awolfe, as we sent the original raw files. But his upload server doesn't seem to work now.
-
And I love the way these images are looking!
-
Here we go... (these are the thumbnails, I will upload the full resolution files to awolfe's server when it begins working again).
-
And I love the way these images are looking!
I love seeing different interpretations of the same images!
Eric
-
I'll get mine submitted in a little while - I'm currently without my PC... Good stuff so far - will make an interesting summary.
-
Hello,
I try to upload my processed images to the original raw upload link as requested but the link does not work anymore. Anyone else with this problem?
Siegfried
PS: I like the different interpretations - it is fun to see how people approach this
-
Hello,
I try to upload my processed images to the original raw upload link as requested but the link does not work anymore. Anyone else with this problem?
Siegfried
PS: I like the different interpretations - it is fun to see how people approach this
You can upload your smaller jpegs to this forum. We can't upload the full-res versions until Awolfe gets his upload gizmo working on his new datacenter.
Eric
-
Been a while with no action.
1. A few folks haven't uploaded jpegs to the forum yet, and
2. No word from awolfe on when he will get his uploader going again for the full-size versions.
I'm eager to see the rest of the renderings, so come on, folks!
Eric
-
Right - sorry that took a while, was without a PC and was expecting to get them a lot sooner too - things became busy. They're a bit rough and ready for the same reasons. Few thoughts on each:
[attachment=19644:raw_1.jpg]
Image is very soft - mostly because of lack of DoF but maybe also because of camera shake/high ISO smearyness. Loads of options for processing, decent dynamic range in there. Responded well to different colours too - could have gone for dawn or sunset look. Ended up trying to get good pop from all the illuminated windows, but wasn't happy with the way the mid-distanced buildings merge together.
[attachment=19645:raw_5.jpg]
This one was fun. Found it a struggle to get much real crispness out of the fine detail on the shuttle. Experimented with lifting shuttle out of shadows, but left it disappearing into the blackness in the end. Had a real mess around with the scaling - I didn't like the in-camera crop much and I wanted to emphasise the ascent. It's not particularly successful in this instance, but you can hopefully see what I thought - maybe what I'd have been doing with my own camera if I was there. Great clouds of smoke and fire!
[attachment=19646:raw_6.jpg]
This was also fun - loads of tones to play with. In the end I went for a really heavily processed, contrasty, aged B&W look - just by pulling sliders all over the place until it looked fun. Made it squarer too.