Jump to content

More comparisons?


Guest Silver Back

Recommended Posts

A few weeks ago we had some comparison pics up, PS and Elements. Took a few pictures of the river Stour on Wednesday morning at 8am whilst I was waiting for a customer. The morning was overcast with light high cloud, we had had a dusting of snow and I happen to have the P&S Canon S50 with me. Only got one pic I thought was worth the effort, out of half-a-dozen.

 

The other day I purchased a copy of 'PS Elements 5'. (£35 from Amazon) Well, is it me, or have Adobe lost the plot? I prefer 'Elements v.4' I read a magazine review, after the purchase. Reading between the lines, its a great photo and album organiser, but I got the impression the writer was struggling with describing it in its digital photo manipulation abilities. My jury is still out on v.5??

 

However, here is what I did with v.4 to the Stour picture I liked best:

 

This is the original shot. Auto white balance was thrown by the snow!:

Stouroriginal.jpg

 

'Elements 4', Auto fix plus a little tweaking from me:

StourPSE4rw.jpg

 

And finally, a crop that I liked, remember the camera only has 180 pix per inch to start with, these are re sized to our standard 800 on the longest side:

Stourcrop.jpg

 

 

I just wish I had time (inclination?) to go out with my Nikon DSLR.

 

Any one got any comments?

 

:ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would if I could CJS2!!! Just getting my feet wet with juggling the pictures at the moment.As far as I can see messing about with the pictures seems a lot more complicated than taking them.

 

I do intend to learn as much as possible on the subject though. Just have patience with me :thumbs:

 

 

Fishing digs on the Mull of Galloway - recommend

HERE

 

babyforavatar.jpg

 

Me when I had hair

 

 

Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy

Link to post
Share on other sites
Would if I could CJS2!!! Just getting my feet wet with juggling the pictures at the moment.As far as I can see messing about with the pictures seems a lot more complicated than taking them.

 

I do intend to learn as much as possible on the subject though. Just have patience with me :thumbs:

 

What you do with your pictures Snatcher, is worth looking at, they are of the moment! Messing about with the picture? I do as little as possible, just balance it a little perhaps. I prefer to get the picture that I want at the shutter stage, especially composition. Stitching different photo bits together does nothing for me, its false! See that get a reaction!!!! lol However I admits to it obviously floating some ones boat? :unsure:

 

The pictures posted here are not dramatic, it was 8am on a standard working morning, I was able to grab 10 minutes, thats what they say to me, an ordinary work day, but I looked again and again, discovered the crop, that gives me a little tingle?. Try it, zoom into the picture, move the zoom about, there are 'pictures within a picture'. Sure there has been a thread on that in the past?

 

I still have my doubts about the commercial version of PS, we dont use a fraction of its power, and the complexity???

 

Personaly, I have problems with complex progams, its allied to having mild dislexia, so may be this is why I am happy to 'be simple' :doh: One certainly cant focus a camera manualy these days with any reliabuility, thats just aging 'minces' and a stigmatisum that seems to very from momth to month, bring back the old split screen!!!

 

:ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never even installed elements yet so cant comment on it, unfortunately, although I do have a copy of elements 4 lieing about somewhere (came free with my camera).

 

Agreed, less is more but it really depends on what your trying to achieve or what look your after. Different film and print mediums have been about for decades and coupled with wet lab techniques to provide different "images".

 

"Stitching different photo bits together does nothing for me, its false! See that get a reaction!!!! "

 

Why, where is that being done? I've not seriously heard about such things in digital, but plenty back in film days. Do you have examples of spliced images, apart from anglers with dubiously larger than life pike..:D

 

Steve...:)

There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. - Ansel Adams

 

Focal Planet

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey boss can now do "brightness" as well as level and crop :thumbs: The photos I posted up on photo of the day yesterday had the brightness "tweaked".

 

I tried to duplicate in the photo what my eye seen at that time. Fair game or what. :rolleyes:

 

 

Fishing digs on the Mull of Galloway - recommend

HERE

 

babyforavatar.jpg

 

Me when I had hair

 

 

Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Stitching different photo bits together does nothing for me, its false! See that get a reaction!!!! "

 

Why, where is that being done? I've not seriously heard about such things in digital, but plenty back in film days. Do you have examples of spliced images, apart from anglers with dubiously larger than life pike..:D

 

Steve...:)

 

Steve, examples!!!? you only have to look at the tutorials in magazines, every other one is showing a 'sky' being added, or a stormy sea pasted over a light house shot, or the light house added. Then to ad insult to injury, the added sky is colour tweaked, often to saturation, 'just for effect', nature can do its own thing usually much better. I suppose cutting out 'Auntie Marry' and pasting her into a better back ground or with the family group, thats fair enough? The over worked offerings one can sees, on web sites, offered as a Photographers work, one questions the title 'photographer', how about 'digital manipulator', digital has a lot to answer for?

 

Personally. I find cut, stitch, past images, increasingly offensive and very flat, (cardboard cut out style) light reflections are nearly always wrong or even non existent. It has to be said one or two do get it right, they are artists, but then there have been very few Picasso's?

 

The old style techniques using different mediums, masks? Print medium and technique I can accept, but those old cut and chop one neg to another, were they not often questioned, only the best got it right?

 

A very personal view this, I see my often dodgy efforts, as a point in time, start chopping them about 'mix and match style' and the point has been destroyed and they become meaningless . . . to me . . . poster fodder. Tweaking brightness and levels, even adjust the colour a touch to match what you saw as you viewed the original in real time, I have no problem with, its still the same photograph, that moment in time!

 

I still need to get out with the DSLR!!!??? I'm not enjoying my picture taking, not enjoying much at all at the moment? :wallbash:

 

:ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ref the tuts in mags I can see what you mean, but one rarely sees one of these "images" posted anywhere. This kind of tutorial (for me) is reserved for image creation for projects such as making a greeting card for example, and as you rightly mentioned, a very small percentage can do that well..and even if they can its even more difficult to hide the fact.

 

Hellbelly posted a link to a landscape site the other day, this photographer has great compositional skills but I'm not sure I like his work as his photos seem over staurated to me, which in the end confuses me when I view them. I can view them and appreciate the time he has put into composition, but I'm turned off by the over-satted colours...catch 22 I guess.

 

But then again we could also say that some cameras can be set up to record this way with over satted colours so where are we with that, as its then a photograph. Going back over the years we could remove auto everything (mode/focus/whitebalance/exposure) and remove built in light meters and battery power. We could eventually go all the way back to exposing silver chloride with a Camera Obscura to find true photography.

 

The above highlights the great strides forward that digital has given photography, knowing when and where to stop is as much a personal choice as getting a bus or taxi, and liking what you like is the same. Its a fine undefinable line between photography and imagery and its a subject discussed widely accross many fora, and will continue to be so. From my personal standpoint, I'll edit and save a photograph that represents what I saw, unless I'm using the photo for a project of sorts. I'll commend and appreciate those works that I like, and view and quickly go past those that I dont.

 

Steve...:)

There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. - Ansel Adams

 

Focal Planet

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hellbelly posted a link to a landscape site the other day, this photographer has great compositional skills but I'm not sure I like his work as his photos seem over staurated to me, which in the end confuses me when I view them. I can view them and appreciate the time he has put into composition, but I'm turned off by the over-satted colours...catch 22 I guess.

 

But then again we could also say that some cameras can be set up to record this way with over satted colours so where are we with that, as its then a photograph. Going back over the years we could remove auto everything (mode/focus/whitebalance/exposure) and remove built in light meters and battery power. We could eventually go all the way back to exposing silver chloride with a Camera Obscura to find true photography.

 

The above highlights the great strides forward that digital has given photography, knowing when and where to stop is as much a personal choice as getting a bus or taxi, and liking what you like is the same. Its a fine undefinable line between photography and imagery and its a subject discussed widely across many fora, and will continue to be so. From my personal standpoint, I'll edit and save a photograph that represents what I saw, unless I'm using the photo for a project of sorts. I'll commend and appreciate those works that I like, and view and quickly go past those that I dont.

 

Steve...:)

 

 

Cant disagree Steve, I to, hade my doubts about that Landscape site? The saturation of colour creates a rather 'blocky' appearance that I tend to associate with 'chop and stitch' offering. Therefore, assuming the photographer has used an original shot, I'm still not going to like it. For me, it still come into the 'over worked' category, and whilst I can sometimes admit to the 'wow' factor at first sight, one soon sees through it and looses interest very quickly.

 

Digital photography is great, offering so much, 'instant' (almost) processing, low cost viewing, easy storage, restoration of poorly exposed shots, etc. However, it has a down side, everyone thinks they are Sir David Baily, the ease of producing a non 'photographs'.

 

"Cant please all the people all the time, you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you wont fool all the people all of the time." . . . . ? :unsure:

 

:ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic this, the pics that I started this thread with were taken on the upper reaches of the river Stour. We took the dog for a run this afternoon, at the river Stour where it enters the river Owells estuary. These reeds are in some field drains beside the rivers.

 

Got the white balance better sorted, used 'Auto P' and then let 'Elements 4' do an auto fix, it added strength to the colours, especially the sky, have not put on any sharpening. Finally, a crop to power up the reed frons blowing in the wind.

 

"Reeds in the wind"

reedsshotley.jpg

 

 

This is the original un touched!

Reedsoriginal.jpg

 

File size: 287521 bytes

File date: 2007:01:28 10:52:34

Camera make: Canon

Camera model: Canon PowerShot S50

Date/Time: 2007:01:28 04:31:13

Resolution: 600 x 800

Flash used: No

Focal length: 7.1mm (35mm equivalent: 115mm)

CCD width: 2.22mm

Exposure time: 0.0031 s (1/320)

Aperture: f/2.8

Whitebalance: Manual

Metering Mode: matrix

 

Hey you may prefer the original? The above were taken with the Canon S50

 

I know I should have take the DSLR! :wallbash::doh:

 

 

:ph34r:

Edited by CJS2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...