Part 2: "Becoming A Great Arch. Photographer

[Lust4Life]

Why not just ask Michael whether we can get our own small part here ? I think that would be a great solution.

I agree - does anyone know him personally that could present our case for a specific heading of our own?

I have enough to do and would only do it if there is no other option from LL - seems the moderator would have noted the exceptional interest in this topic and suggested that at least these thread become "sticky".  But best of all would be our own heading/topic section.

Jack

[stewarthemley]

+1 to the "keep it here" brigade. There are so many places to check these days that it's almost too much effort. Maybe the only hesitation Michael might have (sorry if it's out of order to maker assumptions) is that people might post many extra images that might soak up even more bandwidth. I've noticed on the various "show your best work" threads that images get repeated when people add a reply. Maybe that should be avoided by all of us as much as possible. But keeping it in one place is clearly the best option IMHO.

[rainer_v]

+1 to the "keep it here" brigade. There are so many places to check these days that it's almost too much effort. Maybe the only hesitation Michael might have (sorry if it's out of order to maker assumptions) is that people might post many extra images that might soak up even more bandwidth. I've noticed on the various "show your best work" threads that images get repeated when people add a reply. Maybe that should be avoided by all of us as much as possible. But keeping it in one place is clearly the best option IMHO.

he would have to make for fashion car advertisement landscape hobbyists portrait and so on forums as well if starting with architecture. i dont believe that there are enough people here to hold alive such specialised forums. its work fine here in the mf forum if we dont bite the 35mm users too much, isnt it?  

[Lust4Life]

OK Folks, got the 5DMkII, 17 and 24MkII.
Feel like I've left Salma Hayek for Phyllis Diller, and that before her face lift!!!!

I've been running test and shooting a building/condo here that I've shot with the H3DII-39, thus target of comparison is a know object.

Initial findings:
5DMII - Dmax is no where near the Hassie;  Sharpening is sorely needed, and at that a lot of it compared to the Hassie;  Color cast in the highlights are common, yet fixable in CS4 (but nothing like that in the Hassie).

However, that 17mm Canon lens with the shift is what allows the image to be created.  I'm finding it far more used than I expected, and working in many situation when the 24 isn't giving me the FOV that I need.  Shooting all test shots are f8 and f11.

Al right, I do understand that I can't expect a Prius to give me the thrill of a Porsche 911-S Cabriolet.
I'll have to adjust.

Just wondering if my work flow needs to be altered.

Would like to hear how others are processing their RAW files, and all the way through to the finished image; meaning Plug-Ins your finding essential when shooting SLR, 3'rd party stand alones for sharpening; how are you adding "punch" to the SLR image to get the dynamic range, etc. to come a bit closer to the MFDB.

Jack

[Craig Lamson]

OK Folks, got the 5DMkII, 17 and 24MkII.
Feel like I've left Salma Hayek for Phyllis Diller, and that before her face lift!!!!

I've been running test and shooting a building/condo here that I've shot with the H3DII-39, thus target of comparison is a know object.

Initial findings:
5DMII - Dmax is no where near the Hassie;  Sharpening is sorely needed, and at that a lot of it compared to the Hassie;  Color cast in the highlights are common, yet fixable in CS4 (but nothing like that in the Hassie).

However, that 17mm Canon lens with the shift is what allows the image to be created.  I'm finding it far more used than I expected, and working in many situation when the 24 isn't giving me the FOV that I need.  Shooting all test shots are f8 and f11.

Al right, I do understand that I can't expect a Prius to give me the thrill of a Porsche 911-S Cabriolet.
I'll have to adjust.

Just wondering if my work flow needs to be altered.

Would like to hear how others are processing their RAW files, and all the way through to the finished image; meaning Plug-Ins your finding essential when shooting SLR, 3'rd party stand alones for sharpening; how are you adding "punch" to the SLR image to get the dynamic range, etc. to come a bit closer to the MFDB.

Jack

I find Focus Magic is a superb addition for Canon files

[aaronleitz]

OK Folks, got the 5DMkII, 17 and 24MkII.
Feel like I've left Salma Hayek for Phyllis Diller, and that before her face lift!!!!

I've been running test and shooting a building/condo here that I've shot with the H3DII-39, thus target of comparison is a know object.

Initial findings:
5DMII - Dmax is no where near the Hassie;  Sharpening is sorely needed, and at that a lot of it compared to the Hassie;  Color cast in the highlights are common, yet fixable in CS4 (but nothing like that in the Hassie).

Just wondering if my work flow needs to be altered.

Would like to hear how others are processing their RAW files, and all the way through to the finished image; meaning Plug-Ins your finding essential when shooting SLR, 3'rd party stand alones for sharpening; how are you adding "punch" to the SLR image to get the dynamic range, etc. to come a bit closer to the MFDB.

Jack

It may be useful if you post an example image or two and your current post processing workflow.

As for the dynamic range issue...you should've bought the D3x ;-).

[Lust4Life]

Here is my workflow:
1.)  Of course, capture 2 or 3 images  ( I use the Sekonic 758DR light meter to sample 4 or 5 areas of the scene, the press the Average button to get a mid exposure reading).  Generally blend images in CS4 or with conservative use of Photomatrix HDR.  I only shoot RAW files.

2.  With 5DMkII images, I'm using CS4 Camera Raw as the developer.  Testing out Raw Photo Processor but so far CS4 is better.  Generate a 16 bit file from CS4 in sRGB profile.

3.  Take image into CS4 and manipulate it;  usually start with Auto Levels, then hand tweak it there.  Then to Exposure and play with Gamma.  Then to Curves.  Finally to Vibrance.  

4.  Will take image over to Light Room and further refine there, usually with the Clarity tool, and several others.

5.  Sharpen with Unsharp Mask. in CS4 - which I'm not very impressed with - 5DMkII requires a LOT of sharpening compared to the Hassie images.

Now, another part of my trouble is that I'm not used to working Color images - I've spent the majority of my life focused on B&W.  One of the first color images I've worked in Afterglow in the Clouds section of my web site.
-------
I do not want this to turn into "should have" discussion - I find my decision was correct due to the 17mm lens - I've found its FOV to be essential in many of the test shots I've taken so far, and Nikon does not offer that nor do I want to get into stitching when it can be avoided by the 17mm TS-E.  Discussion needs to be focused on Work Flow and digital "tricks" learned that are specifically applicable to AP work.

Below is a 72dpi sample from the Canon 5D MkII, 17mm TS-E shot last night at sunset:

-------

It may be useful if you post an example image or two and your current post processing workflow.

As for the dynamic range issue...you should've bought the D3x ;-).

[attachment=18545:_MG_0143...hpnd_204.jpg]

[rainer_v]

are you exposing correctly?
i´d hardly surprised if the hassy would have significant more dr than the 5d2.

[Jeffreytotaro]

Hi Jack:

Whats the dark blue halo effect around the buildings in the sky from?  Using a lot of the shadow/highlight tool?  Looks over worked from something.  Maybe its just the low-res jpg.

[Harold Clark]

Hi Jack:

Whats the dark blue halo effect around the buildings in the sky from?  Using a lot of the shadow/highlight tool?  Looks over worked from something.  Maybe its just the low-res jpg.

Something strange is happening on the left side of the building, it looks like it is converging toward the bottom although the right side is vertical.

One little trick which I use is to slightly under correct tall buildings, as a perfectly parallel rendition often makes the building look top heavy. Sinar recommends that any building with an angle of view greater than 20 degrees above the horizon will look unnatural if perfectly corrected, although this may be too conservative.

[CBarrett]

Woah.....

sRGB?

Now, I always understood Adobe RGB to be the standard and have played with ProPhoto RGB too, while I always heard of sRGB as the web standard... what you would convert to for web output.  sRGB has a smaller gamut, which is not to say it has fewer colors but?

Do any of you use it as your standard workflow?  I admit I never really did any testing, just ran with the color space my retouchers and digital dealers advised me to use.  I'm sure there's a big, argumentative thread about this in the archives.

I agree, the shot above, Jack, feels overworked... maybe too much HDR and sharpening?  There is some distortion going on, the top of the building gets a little wider (perspective over corrected?).

Lastly, I would of preferred the light maybe an hour or so earlier... much more from the right, allowing some shadow on the left side so that the curve is more delineated.   The buildings feel flat to me.

And really lastly, I look at the grass more than anything else.  I'd crop all the way up to the closest edge of that seating area, or better yet move 6 feet to the right, lose the seating and let the building stand free of the palm tree, I guarantee an architect will consider placing the tree in front of the building to be sloppy composition.

One of the big reasons I don't like dslr for architecture... the format.  If you crop this to 645 or 4x5 (taking it all off the bottom) the eye will be much more focused on the building...

I'm rambling... I need to go get some coffee and bring the boy his lunch (which he left by the back door).

Good start, Jack.  I can't wait to see what else you do.  And don't mind me if I get very critical, I'm just as nitpicky with myself, I think it's a necessity (as much as a disorder).

[Lust4Life]

Jeff,
I've just tried several different file reductions to jpeg - all produce the halo effect on the left side.
Not there in the Tiff file.

Jack

Hi Jack:

Whats the dark blue halo effect around the buildings in the sky from?  Using a lot of the shadow/highlight tool?  Looks over worked from something.  Maybe its just the low-res jpg.

[Jeffreytotaro]

Jeff,
I've just tried several different file reductions to jpeg - all produce the halo effect on the left side.
Not there in the Tiff file.

Jack

That makes sense.

[Lust4Life]

Chris,

1.)  sRGB converted for web by CS4.  I normally use ProPhotoRGB.

2.)  On HDR - this particular image is a straight single image, no HDR used in this particular one, thought I admit when used conservatively there are times I really like it.  There are also time I feel the HDR effect can be pushed and really create a great "mood".  

See http://www.boundlessmind.net/index.php?are...l&starter=0

I find Sven's work quite interesting, from an artistic perspective rather than what an arch. would find to be a "faithful" representive of his vision.

3.)  "or better yet move 6 feet to the right, lose the seating and let the building stand free of the palm tree"
Chris, I'll try to get down there earlier tonight and shoot as you suggest - be interesting to see results - I'll post it.

4.)  I devourer constructive criticism - keep it coming!

5.)  Building distortion - tripod shot, camera leveled precisely, 17mm TS-E with slight up shift, no tilt.  I did not apply any correction to the image in software.  Agree, the top of the building is distorted.  Oddly, when scene at time of shot in Live View, the building lined up perfectly on the viewing screen with the grid turned on.

6.)  Halo fixed - found Clarity was turned up in ACR by mistake.

Last, I've been experimenting with the various "picture profiles" in the 5D MkII - finding Faithful to be a more realistic rendering.

Jack

[stevesanacore]

I agree, although only still having just one 5dmk2, cause i didnt used it that often till the new lenses arrived in my bag. I will buy a second 5d too, in cases where i'll use the canon as main system. And as you say sometimes its usefull to setup more than just one body. I personally dont like the huge 1ds bodies, i prefer the 5d for weight and price. I dont believe that the "s" quality of the files is any better.

I agree the 5D is lighter but the 1Ds bodies are built like tanks and can be rained on and take much more punishment with no worries.

[stevesanacore]

Here is my workflow:
1.)  Of course, capture 2 or 3 images  ( I use the Sekonic 758DR light meter to sample 4 or 5 areas of the scene, the press the Average button to get a mid exposure reading).  Generally blend images in CS4 or with conservative use of Photomatrix HDR.  I only shoot RAW files.

2.  With 5DMkII images, I'm using CS4 Camera Raw as the developer.  Testing out Raw Photo Processor but so far CS4 is better.  Generate a 16 bit file from CS4 in sRGB profile.

3.  Take image into CS4 and manipulate it;  usually start with Auto Levels, then hand tweak it there.  Then to Exposure and play with Gamma.  Then to Curves.  Finally to Vibrance.  

4.  Will take image over to Light Room and further refine there, usually with the Clarity tool, and several others.

5.  Sharpen with Unsharp Mask. in CS4 - which I'm not very impressed with - 5DMkII requires a LOT of sharpening compared to the Hassie images.

Now, another part of my trouble is that I'm not used to working Color images - I've spent the majority of my life focused on B&W.  One of the first color images I've worked in Afterglow in the Clouds section of my web site.
-------
I do not want this to turn into "should have" discussion - I find my decision was correct due to the 17mm lens - I've found its FOV to be essential in many of the test shots I've taken so far, and Nikon does not offer that nor do I want to get into stitching when it can be avoided by the 17mm TS-E.  Discussion needs to be focused on Work Flow and digital "tricks" learned that are specifically applicable to AP work.

Below is a 72dpi sample from the Canon 5D MkII, 17mm TS-E shot last night at sunset:

-------

[attachment=18545:_MG_0143...hpnd_204.jpg]

Nice shot but I agree with the other poster on a few points;

I usually crop to a 4x5 format for verticals.  
I think the saturation is bit too high.
It looks a bit distorted with too much correction in the verticals.
I think the table and chairs in the foreground detracts from the power of the impressive building.

I use Profoto RGB as my default colorspace until I export for other purposes and then use the appropriate colorspace.


Great shot  - you obviously have a talented eye and are technically qualified for this business. Keep shooting.

[Lust4Life]

Question:
When shooting AP exterior of a building/structure, are you "normally" placing the building as the main object in the viewfinder OR how it fits into the setting - landscaping, trees, adjacent buildings, etc?

Jack

[CBarrett]

Question:
When shooting AP exterior of a building/structure, are you "normally" placing the building as the main object in the viewfinder OR how it fits into the setting - landscaping, trees, adjacent buildings, etc?

Jack

I do tend to centralize it if the context is busy.  However, if it sits alone on a broad landscape (say a lone hotel on an isolated beach) I would have no issue placing it near the edge of the frame.

Sometimes a trailing or leading landscape can really set a building off...  It should always be readily apparent, though, WHICH building you are shooting.

[michele]

I know that Prophoto rgb is a very wide color space... But, don't forget the output of your files... Prophoto is impossible to reproduce at 100% with pigments print and much more less in CMYK! I do my own retouch and i find my EFI rip the only solution to get good colors from my files. The softproof of photoshop is better then nothing, but it's not like a print, it's ok for pigments printers but far from reality for CMYK. If you need your files for web, well sRGB is your profile; if you have to print offset, CMYK is the answer. Fine art prints, i think it's best having your own profiles and convert your color space into them... But a good rip for the convertion is a good idea. Basically Prophoto RGB is better for archive, but i suggest you to use always the softproof in photoshop with CMYK, i'm in Europe and I use the ISO coated V2 300%; in this way you are going to keep a lot of colors but in a simple way for conversion...
Of course, if you could print an hard proof with e good rip that emulates the behaviour of a CMYK printer it's better. When i'm shooting with the client i set captureone with CMYK proofing, why showing him colors that he cannot get? Less problems for me...

[stevesanacore]

I know that Prophoto rgb is a very wide color space... But, don't forget the output of your files... Prophoto is impossible to reproduce at 100% with pigments print and much more less in CMYK! I do my own retouch and i find my EFI rip the only solution to get good colors from my files. The softproof of photoshop is better then nothing, but it's not like a print, it's ok for pigments printers but far from reality for CMYK. If you need your files for web, well sRGB is your profile; if you have to print offset, CMYK is the answer. Fine art prints, i think it's best having your own profiles and convert your color space into them... But a good rip for the convertion is a good idea. Basically Prophoto RGB is better for archive, but i suggest you to use always the softproof in photoshop with CMYK, i'm in Europe and I use the ISO coated V2 300%; in this way you are going to keep a lot of colors but in a simple way for conversion...
Of course, if you could print an hard proof with e good rip that emulates the behaviour of a CMYK printer it's better. When i'm shooting with the client i set captureone with CMYK proofing, why showing him colors that he cannot get? Less problems for me...

Agree that you need to tweak the images when you export them to specific color spaces but I think it's best to do all retouching and work in the largest color space available. At this point I think that is Profoto RGB. I have an Epson 9800 and that color space works very well for me. As far as clients go, I had a prepress guy complain to me that we are giving all these 16bit color RGB images to his clients with colors he can't reproduce. I really believe that's his problem, not ours. Besides, that same client prints quite a bit of the work on their own Epson printers where most of those colors do reproduce. It was the same problem with different film types - each having specific colors that the cmyk guys couldn't reproduce.