Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: AvidVisionary on May 28, 2011, 02:05:21 am
-
I went to the flower show yesterday in Chelsea London. I took with me 5D MKII and EF 16-35mm L USM
Some pictures came out great while others did not. There was distortion at the side and some vignetting. The pictures were exposed correctly.
They are all flat without white balance. I used the technicolour CineStyle and I am guessing maybe I should have used a white balance. I definitely need to study harder.
I need help as to why they came out like that and how to prevent them in future. What are the techniques and work flow professional use to make their pictures sharp.
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/8251/76145214.png
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7562/90271901.png
http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/3405/12670043.png
-
If you're shooting at 16mm, you get distortion, it's just the nature of that lens at that focal length. Likewise, if you're shooting wide open, you get vignetting. Try some shots at 20mm f/4, you'll see those effects largely minimized.
-
Yesterday was overcast and rather dull. Lighting is everything, and mainly the 'secret ingredient' in the way pro work stands apart from amateur efforts. If you had watched some of the pro photogs a Chelsea you would have noticed that most were using fill flash or even handheld off camera flash, albeit at low level. This gives their shots a visual 'pick-up' by slightly increasing contrast and adding a little sparkle. However good you are, or get, at post processing it's still quicker and more profitable to get the shot right in camera,...and only a 'photoshop' master can add what was not there!
If you have to use fairly extreme wide-angle you need to always be thinking about distortion and make it as inconspicuous as possible,...thus, the interior with 'deformed' lady,...you should have asked her nicely if she would 'pose' while you took the shot. The human form always look much worse when distorted than the structure. If you had placed her nearer to the centre of the shot she could have become a natural focus point and further distracted the eye from the unavoidable structural distortion. That way she would have adopted a more suitable and wide-angle friendly stance (all women know instantly how to do this when you ask the right way!) and her legs would not have poked into the corner of the frame to look about a bad as they could have done!! Additionally, with wide-angle you need to be very mindful of where you place eye-line, or horizon since this greatly effects the distortion for good or bad. Notice that your first shot is the most pleasing perspective and camera was at head height,...the interior with vaulted circular roof has exaggerated the lens distortion (also a little fill in flash popped at the ceiling would have lifted the whole shot and the distortion would not have looked so bad..... ) Using wide-angle is hard to do quickly and instinctively because small details get distorted and only become apparent when you are about to pass yor work to the client!
-
The pictures were exposed correctly.
..............
They are all flat without white balance. I used the technicolour CineStyle and I am guessing maybe I should have used a white balance. I definitely need to study harder.
The problem here is that you've selected a picture style specifically written for shooting video that is expected to be graded later in post production.
DPP has applied that style to your RAW conversions, so they're dull and flat (awaiting grading in effect). The good news is that this is only how DPP thinks you want the RAW data interpreted and you can still get a decent image out of the RAW file with a bit of work, or use a RAW converter that doesn't try to apply the recorded picture style (eg ACR or Lightroom).
Moral of this story is not to shoot stills with video picture styles, even if you are shooting RAW.
To help, set up a custom setting on the 5D with all the required video options for use when shooting video, then use normal settings on all the regular still modes.
-
I think if you invested in DxO Optics Pro you would be very happy
they have a 30 day free trial then at the end of the 30 days offer you a discount
well worth the list price and my RAW converter of choice for Canon
Marc
-
Thank you all for the replies and sound advice. It was my first ever shoot with a wide angle lens so I have no prior experience with it. I have not seen anyone with a flash yesterday, I may have missed them. I have looked at DxO Optics and I will try it for 30 days. See what it can do.
So, is there no professional picture styles for photographers. Do photographers only use white balance and create their own picture style?
Also, from my pictures, can you see the info tab to the right of the picture. Are my camera settings ok or do they need adjusting?
-
So, is there no professional picture styles for photographers. Do photographers only use white balance and create their own picture style?
Picture styles are unimportant/unnecessary if you're shooting RAW.
-
Ahh!! Thank you.
Is the info on the tap to the right of the picture, are the settings ok or do they need tweaking depending on the project?
-
Everything seems fine. In general, very few of the parameters you set will have any permanent effect raw files. (E.g., white balance, picture style, noise reduction settings, etc.)
Question: why manual focus? Do you have the "S" screen installed to make manual focus more accurate? The standard Canon screen is coarse enough that it's very difficult to focus accurately in manual mode, especially wide open with very wide lenses.
-
Levels need adjustment...
(the histogram doesn't lie)
The original shows the lack of highlights
http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/373/fair1l.jpg
Here's the adjustment I've made...
http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/4011/fair2.jpg
here's some sharpening...
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/6310/fair3.jpg
local dodging at lower right
http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/38/fair4.jpg
-
What I am struggling to understand is how someone with no clue whatsoever about photography is starting with a $4500 of super fine photographic instruments? Trust-fund kid, dentist, golden-parachute retiree or what?
-
@k bennett
I do manual focus because I also work with video. I want to be a cinematographer. In cinematography there is no auto anything. Everything is manual.
@kitalight
Thank you for pointing that out. I will look in to that.
-
AvidV
....you should consider going to the "digital image processing" forum and participate in discussions there...
-
Kitalight,
I am not going to do anything with the pictures. I will delete them as I have no use for them. I wanted help with the lens and to know how to fix any distortion and vignetting. I got the response I was looking for.
-
What I am struggling to understand is how someone with no clue whatsoever about photography is starting with a $4500 of super fine photographic instruments? Trust-fund kid, dentist, golden-parachute retiree or what?
That may be a valid question for yourself, but surely it is a bit blunt in the general context of the original question and discussion. We could ask the same question of people who live in big houses, or drive fast cars. Is it any of our business?
-
Thank you Jim for your honest understanding.
-
That may be a valid question for yourself, but surely it is a bit blunt in the general context of the original question and discussion. We could ask the same question of people who live in big houses, or drive fast cars. Is it any of our business?
Jim, you are politely telling me I was not polite and that it is none of my business. Fair enough. Perhaps you are right.
With questions/posts like OP, some people try to answer matter-of-factly and some people see a broader significance, or a tangent and try to answer accordingly. Which is what I did.
To continue with your metaphors (big houses/fast cars), it certainly wouldn't be any of my business to knock on their doors and tell them what I think about it. But if they walk into a Ferrari club to ask questions that betray their cluelessness, I'd like to think they open the door for comments, in which case it does become my/our business.
It is certainly a privilege and a prerogative of certain people to teach their six-year olds to play violin on a Stradivarius, or to buy their 15-year olds a Ferrari to learn how to drive, but it does not prevent the rest of the world to gasp in disbelief or disgust.
"Earning one's stripes" phrase comes to mind. You don't learn to fly on an F-16 for a reason.
-
Jim, you are politely telling me I was not polite and that it is none of my business. Fair enough. Perhaps you are right.
He was, you were unnecessarily rude.
some people see a broader significance, or a tangent and try to answer accordingly
Your reply just looks like kit envy to me and you've provided no constructive help to the original question.
Whilst asking how much distortion should be acceptable might be seen as a beginner's question, the secondary issue of using picture styles with RAW capture is somewhat beyond the absolute basics and not something widely appreciated. So discussing it here is not inappropriate or acceptable to be ridiculed.
More generally you need to understand that the 5Dii in particular is being widely bought by people trying to get a foothold into cinematography. As such they might well have a lot of specialist cine expertise without much still digital photography knowledge. They also might have had to borrow a lot to get onto that foothold and may not be as financially well resourced as you might imagine.
-
Actually in my opinion the better the camera and lenses a beginner uses the more likely they are to continue the hobby because of the better results and feel of the equipment/tools. I am not rich but I have worked hard all my life since age 12 and my first digital camera was a Canon 5D and 24/105, 70-200 no regrets. now many lenses and cameras later I find my serious hobby very rewarding/fulfilling. BTW I chose to drive a 1995 Ford Explorer with 200,000 miles and shoot with a IQ180, most would chose a new lexus and a $200 point and shoot camera. Some people are rich some are hardworking most here just love the art of photography
Marc
-
@Rhossydd
Thank you for your support. And yes you are correct, the 5D MKII has replaced a lot of cameras at colleges, university, the army and even the BBC. Because it's a full frame sensor it has more to offer in terms of learning digital cinematography and photography in one tool.
@marcmccalmont
That's a great kit to start out with. I have seen teenagers working very hard to kit out a new PC with the best specs so they can game on line. Serious specifications that goes into $1500. I am certain they are not asked why is your pc so powerful.
-
@Rhossydd
Thank you for your support. And yes you are correct, the 5D MKII has replaced a lot of cameras at colleges, university, the army and even the BBC. Because it's a full frame sensor it has more to offer in terms of learning digital cinematography and photography in one tool.
Yes, it's fashionable in some quarters at the moment.
Don't think it makes any serious impact into television production though. It's a momentously poor tool for television production.
-
I personally think they don't want to change their work flow.
-
I believe it's a testimonial to the ingenuity of the Canon 5d Mk2 that it can be used by "pros" as well as photographers of any other level. Many other camera systems are not that forthcoming.
-
I personally think they don't want to change their work flow.
If that's a reply to my comment; "Don't think it makes any serious impact into television production though. It's a momentously poor tool for television production."
You've just demonstrated you really don't have a clue about television production either.
-
The BBC it self does not want to change their work flow. They hire out work to production agencies who use the MKII. I should have been clear. I am not into television production. I am more into feature films.
-
The BBC it self does not want to change their work flow. They hire out work to production agencies who use the MKII. I should have been clear. I am not into television production. I am more into feature films.
You might find any credibility you have left will be best retained by not making any more uninformed replies here.
Don't kid yourself the 5D is any way into feature film production either.
-
I am not making things up. The BBC does not want to change their work flow of using BETAcam to DSLR. To many technical problems with MKII to be used as a video camcorder like over heating the sensor.
-
Kitalight,
I am not going to do anything with the pictures. I will delete them as I have no use for them. I wanted help with the lens and to know how to fix any distortion and vignetting. I got the response I was looking for.
Well I hope so...because your original post said that the image was correctly exposed and yet was flat...("The pictures were exposed correctly. They are all flat without white balance.")....and THAT is what I was addressing...
...Asking about the affect of technology on the image is a fair question to pose here, but I addressed the issue of technique
...that is why I suggested that you consider looking into the post-processing forum, where you may get get better answers and solutions to your disatisfaction....
-
I am not making things up.
Any real personal experience of working for the BBC ? or have you just read a few other uninformed web forum postings ?
The BBC does not want to change their work flow of using BETAcam to DSLR.
Get up to speed. Betacam is an SD format and hasn't been used for BBC acquisition for years
To many technical problems with MKII to be used as a video camcorder like over heating the sensor.
Hardly the main issue..............
You might like to seriously consider posting any more unfounded opinions to this forum. There are a lot of very knowledgeable people here that really DO know what they're talking about.
-
Kitalight,
I am not going to do anything with the pictures. I will delete them as I have no use for them. I wanted help with the lens and to know how to fix any distortion and vignetting. I got the response I was looking for.
Shoot raw and use ACR or Lightroom and use the lens correction part of your raw processing and you can solve your distortion issue.
-
@Wolfman
I have light room. I am going to find the settings and play around. Thanks.
-
If you shoot video you may be using a Mac pro so look at Aperture, £45 ?? on Apples apps shop last time I looked.
Pro software for Raw.
It is also a good library app, will play video.
I help a video editor buy his first 5D11 but you must not overlook the stills side.
-
Quote viewfinder.
Lighting is everything, and mainly the 'secret ingredient' in the way pro work stands apart from amateur efforts. If you had watched some of the pro photogs a Chelsea you would have noticed that most were using fill flash or even handheld off camera flash, albeit at low level.
Unquote
How do you recognize a pro from an amateur? Because one is paid and the other is not then it doesn't equate to competence. Also the gear they use isn't a guide. I am not a pro but today I am going out with a canong12 to shoot but tomorrow it maybe a Nikon d700 and some "good looking" glass. I think the comment is a bit presumptuous. :)
-
....Er,...no more "presumptuous" than thinking that lack of competance does not affect prefessionalism.