How to create photos like "the masters", and is PhotoLab a useful tool?

mikemyers · May 11, 2022, 6:46pm

To me, P-mode is, or I should say “was”, for when I didn’t care about the shutter speed or aperture.

For racing photos, shutter speed seems to be very important, depending on whether I want a sharp, clear, photo, or if I want to show. motion. So for those photos, once I found a shutter speed that worked, I locked it in.

There weren’t too many photos where I decided I needed more depth of field. If I shot the drivers while I was up on the driver’s stand, unless I forgot to do so, I would adjust the camera to also have the track reasonably sharp in front of them. As I recall, if I had no particular interest in either setting, I left the camera in Program mode.

After the discussions we’ve had here recently, I doubt I will have much use for Program mode. My Leica is semi-permanently set to Aperture Priority mode, and Auto-ISO. I may set my D750 to auto-ISO. Most of my negative feelings about it date back to when too high an ISO resulted in an awful image, but with PL5, that’s irrelevant. I guess old habits die hard.

I did photograph full-size car racing at Homestead Speedway. It was SO much easier than photographing the r/c cars. I had lots more time to think, and I could use a monopod.

mikemyers · May 11, 2022, 7:34pm

Time to upload another photo from Colorado. My friends in Colorado knew of a nest where a pair of Osprey were showing up every so often. After many “false alarms”, we found an Osprey in the nest, and parked the car where we had a reasonable view. Susie used her new 600mm Tamron, while I got to use her older 70-300 Nikon lens (much older than the similar lens I bought). My camera was set to ISO in shutter priority mode, and the camera selected 1/3200th at f/9. I rested the lens on the side window of the car, being scared of stepping outside of the car and maybe scaring off the bird. It was then that its mate showed up, circled around the nest, and landed on top of the first bird. All this time my camera was firing away as fast as it could, with me trying not to breath or do anything to cause the camera to move. Eventually the second bird flew off, with me still taking photos. Susie and I were both feeling very excited!

There was a wire going across the top right of the shot, so I flunked my photojournalism credentials by using the PL5 “repair” tool to send it to oblivion. I like what I knew how to do in PL5 with the image, but I exported it to Topaz AI Sharpen which made the feathers look a little sharper. I’ll upload both the RAW image, my .dop file, and the finished Tiff.

It is what it is. If I want to do better at this, I think I ought to invest in a 600mm lens like the one we found for Susie.

I can’t claim much credit for the photo - the birds did their thing, while I tried to not mess up my photo. There are lots of shots I like, but this is by far my favorite.

Because it was exported to Topaz AI Sharpen, I now have a Tiff file, not a finished and fully edited RAW file. Any advice on how to do better next time would be welcomed. I don’t think I screwed it up too much, but I really needed a longer focal length lens. There are two “.dop” files, one from before exporting to Topaz AI Sharpen, and one from after.

MM2_0543 | 2022-04-17.nef (27.7 MB)
MM2_0543 | 2022-04-17.nef.dop (15.3 KB)
MM2_0543 | 2022-04-17_openWith.tif.dop (11.9 KB)

mikemyers · May 11, 2022, 8:23pm

Another bird photo, this time taken with Susie’s 600mm lens. The flock of pelicans was fishing in the lake/pond behind Susie’s house, and I went to get my camera and her lens to shoot them from the treehouse they built. With my left hand, I held the base/foot of the lens against the railing of their tree-house, hoping the camera was being held still enough. The 750 was set to shutter priority again, set to 1/2500th, ISO 2500 and f/9.

The image looked very noisy on my screen, but PL5 took care of that. I then sent it to Topaz AI Sharpen again, which made a nice improvement in clarity.

The EXIF data implies it was taken around 9pm, but that’s because the goofball using the camera forgot to set the DATE/TIME to Colorado time, as in 6pm. It was starting to get dark, and I guess the Pelicans were finished catching their evening meal. Once again, I captured sequences of shots (manually) as first one bird, then the others, prepared for take-off, skipped across the water, then got airborne. Lots of photos, but this one shot was by far my favorite.

I’m probably going to edit it more later today. I wanted to include all the splashes they made in the water, but I want to remove more of the image from the right side. I might get rid of the tree at the top, as now I think that’s distracting. Maybe I’ll zoom in a lot closer to the birds. Too many choices…

I’ll attach “Plan B” at the bottom.

Several files to attach…
MM2_1389 | 2022-04-26.nef (30.5 MB)
MM2_1389 | 2022-04-26.nef.dop (12.7 KB)
MM2_1389 | 2022-04-26_openWith.tif (14.2 MB)
MM2_1389 | 2022-04-26_openWith.tif (14.2 MB)

mikemyers · May 11, 2022, 11:38pm

One more photo before I put away my computer gear, and get back to work preparing for tomorrow’s range session. I almost stumbled across this photo, and quickly grabbed a shot immediately, hoping the camera settings were correct. It’s my “standard” 24-85 travel lens, with the ISO at only 800 (I should have raised it, but I was moving from the barn to outdoors), and I had the camera in Aperture Priority at f/4.5 (for the earlier shots inside the barn). So, the camera selected a shutter speed of 1/4000th, but by the time I noticed all this, the Pig Family decided dinner was finished.

My mistake. I didn’t need ISO 800 for photos in the sunlight, and f/8 would have been perfectly fine. I took the photo first, then checked the settings later, to maybe get a better photo, but that was not to be.

I don’t know how I ever existed without PhotoLab. I guess I used to use Lightroom, but that now seems to me like it’s from the Caveman Days. I know I’m wrong, and I know I’m not being realistic, but that is how I feel, right or wrong.

I’m sure I’ll find out otherwise by tomorrow, but as I’m writing this, I don’t think even @Joanna , or even @Wolfgang is going to change what I did. Famous last words - every time I feel that I’m finished, I find out about so much more I could have done, or that I didn’t do properly.

MM2_0601 | 2022-04-19.nef (30.7 MB)
MM2_0601 | 2022-04-19.nef.dop (13.6 KB)

Wolfgang · May 12, 2022, 7:12am

well, you applied the DxO Standard profile without any edits and went to Topaz …

Wolfgang · May 12, 2022, 7:59am

… with the given pic, I might go with something like this

for better composition

MM2_1389 2022-04-26.nef.dop (310,2 KB)

M = Masterfile
VC1 = Mike
VC2 = Wolfgang
VC3 = Joanna ( post #255 )

Joanna · May 12, 2022, 7:59am

I don’t know why you put up the second DOP. It doesn’t contain any changes made in Topaz AI Sharpen

What it does appear to contain is the use of PL’s Unsharp Mask, which is neither necessary nor advised when you already have the lens profile.

Here is my version using nothing but PL5…

… and here is my DOP…

MM2_0543 | 2022-04-17.nef.dop (5,0 Ko)

Joanna · May 12, 2022, 8:18am

I agree with @Wolfgang about the crop. But I would also say stop playing with your new toy (Topaz AI Sharpen). Using fine contrast more judiciously can bring out amazing amounts of detail without having to leave PL and what you did with this image is a bit overcooked to my liking.

Here’s my version…

… and here’s the DOP…

MM2_1389 | 2022-04-26.nef.dop (25,8 Ko)

Joanna · May 12, 2022, 8:32am

There really isn’t much wrong with this image apart from the rather flat contrast, but this was due to your insistence on using global Smart Lighting on all your images, even when it isn’t needed.

I boosted up the fine contrast for the shadows and highlights and reframed it to allow more “breathing room” around the pigs.

Then I added a couple of Control Points to selectively raise the shadow detail…

And the DOP file…

MM2_0601 | 2022-04-19.nef.dop (28,4 Ko)

mikemyers · May 12, 2022, 12:38pm

Two thoughts. First, about the crop. Both you and @Wolfgang see things so differently this time than I do. Both your images look “unbalanced”, “top-heavy” to me. I’m trying to understand what I’m missing about this. My first attempt at the image showed what I wanted, but in a small image, the detail in the birds was lost. My second attempt zoomed in a lot more, to show the birds more clearly. With both your view, and Wolfgang’s image, all that beauty and detail I struggled for so hard is lost - unless the image was enlarged, a lot.

I need to think about this for a while, because at first glance, it feels to me like an upside down bowling pin, with all the “weight” near the top, making it feel unstable. Maybe I’m not saying this very well. I’d like to know what I’m missing here.

The other thought was when I saw the image on the screen, the detail in the feathers and especially the head was missing. You’re right, Topaz AI Sharpen is one of my new “toys”, but it cured that instantly. I know the image was in focus, I know the camera/lens was not moving on top of the wood railing on the tree house, but there was a good bit of wind, and I suspected the railing itself was “moving” which cost me the detail, especially in the heads. Of course, on your images up above, the head is smaller, so I don’t see that detail because of the size anyway. It was really my first time shooting at 600mm, and I really wanted to capture what I saw in my viewfinder, with all the detail. What I really needed was a rock solid tripod. I’m surprised things came out as well as they did.

Regardless, I will download your .dop files, and “disect” them, to try to understand how you created the same sharpening effect using only PL5. To me, that is obviously preferable, because the image remains a RAW image, rather than being converted to a TIFF. (Whether or not that makes such a big difference is something I’m not sure of - but to me, the TIFF image is like a “dead end”, no further processing permissible, while if I keep it in PL5 I can make additional changes, or correct changes I’ve already made - meaning there are big advantages for me if I avoid using the Topaz software.

I will compare your images to what I did with Topaz, early this afternoon.

mikemyers · May 12, 2022, 12:48pm

I suspected both .dop files might be the same, as Topaz was making changes outside of the file PhotoLab created. From what you just wrote, that Topaz was also using the .dop file to include the changes from the “unsharp mask”.

If I don’t use Topaz, this will not be an issue in the future.
If I do use Topaz, which .dop file should I be posting here in the forum - and why?

Even more confusing, what does any of this have to do with the Lens Profile? I would expect the lens profile information to be included in both .dop files - am I wrong?

Time to stop typing, and study what you did from within PL5 to “sharpen up the feathers”.

mikemyers · May 12, 2022, 12:59pm

I’ll have to do some more thinking about this. Why do you feel “more breathing room” is more important than making the subject of the photo a little bit larger? I always leave more “breathing room” when I take the photo, so I have it to use if I need it, but why not fill the image with (in this case), the pigs? My version makes me feel “uncomfortably close”, feeling I want to step back. Your version feels perfectly close, no such emotion as in mine. People viewing the image don’t feel that with my zoom lens, I was quite safely distant from the pigs - I think the feel “uncomfortable” as if they want to step back.

Most of the time, I want breathing room. If it was a house, or a car, or a statue, breathing room feels essential. In this case, that’s probably also true, as you noted, but I thought the closer I got, people would react the way I did - and want to move their head a little further away from the image.

Just curious - the little piggies, and the symmetry, were what I was after. Everything else was less important.

Joanna · May 12, 2022, 4:40pm

What we both did was to include the reflections of the birds. Yes, the top is darker than the bottom but, with reflections that is fine.

And the problem that you have created is over-sharpening. I have taken your TIFF file and zoomed in on it…

You can see that Topaz AI Sharpen has created a lot of “overshoot” on transitions between dark and light - something that PL fine contrast doesn’t do as much.

Then you’ve got to consider that, if you were to print the image, your crop gives a finished size of 3005px x 1631px, which would print (@ 240ppi) to only 12.5" x 6.8"

Using Wolfgang’s or my crop, which gives an image of 4480px x 1874px, would print to 18.7" x 7.8" and could possibly enlarge more than that without the transitions becoming as obvious as with your sharpened version.

No, what you needed was a 1200mm lens. Then you wouldn’t have had to lose over half the image area and incur the wrath of the low resolution jaggies and the need to sharpen.

Topaz doesn’t touch the DOP file - it is proprietary only to DxO and will only ever contain adjustments you made in PL and nothing external.

Do a Google search for “photography negative space”.

Your version makes me feel that you were either too close or trying to crop out unwanted background distractions.

In which case, why not concentrate on the piglets, crop it more and get the symmetry of a part-pig on both sides?

mikemyers · May 12, 2022, 8:46pm

Hmm, I didn’t think people would see the reflections in these photos - in other photos, where the water is still, the reflections were certainly a part of “my image”. I need to think about this some more. I see both points of view, but my favorite was the last one I posted way up above - but maybe I’ll try to not use the Topaz software that much any more. PL5 apparently is still a better tool.

Once you point things out, they are obvious. I’m not sure if anyone else would notice, but I think your main point is why use Topaz at all, if PL can not only do the same things, but do them better.

I ain’t got no argument with that!!! I still need to try it myself, with m original RAW image before I ever exported it to Topaz.

You wrote I need a 1200mm lens???
I found a used Nikon 1200 for only $6,000.
Such a deal!!!
The day after I buy my Ferrari, I’ll get one of these too.

I’ll need to think about this. I like your version, as art, but I think most people that view the image would prefer to see the whole thing. Maybe this forum could use a “survey tool”, as in '"Do you prefer “A” or “B”? ’

I’ve got more images to go through from Colorado. I will avoid the Topaz tools, and just use PL5.

Wolfgang · May 12, 2022, 9:26pm

So often in the past you were ‘not contented’, that I saved the effort to add my dop-file …
After deleting my interim version, the pic is now → VC2, @Joanna’s version added as → VC3.

Deactivate the local adjustments and reactivate them step by step to see, what & why I did.

Can’t comment on Topaz (don’t use it).

mikemyers · May 12, 2022, 9:42pm

Actually, I wasn’t referring to the editing, but to the cropping.
To me, both your finished version and Joanna’s look “wrong”, or at least not what I wanted the photo to be. My first version was what I wanted, but after seeing it on-screen, I revised it as my second version. I wanted the Pellicans appearing very large in the photo, so they stood out. Both of you saw it differently. I was trying to find out why you did that. I apparently saw “the scene” very differently than you two.

The editing details are over and beyond the cropping. I will do what you suggested over the upcoming weekend.

MJB · May 13, 2022, 12:44am

I quite like this crop, @Joanna! Much more focused, but also a little unconventional. Well done.

mikemyers · May 13, 2022, 2:05am

I think that I see “the obvious”.
@Joanna and @Wolfgang see the not-so-obvious.
In a year of playing around with this image on my computer, I don’t think I would have seen this.
Unconventional? Certainly. But everything that has to be there, is there.
Brilliant!!!

I need to remember this from now on, and try to use my imagionation (my word) to SEE better.

mikemyers · May 13, 2022, 2:21am

Having seen what @Joanna did with my piggies, maybe I can ask what I’m not “seeing” in this image.

My version:
https://forum.dxo.com/uploads/default/original/3X/e/c/ec98714132a61822703919af13eb39f8cd08033c.jpeg

@Wolfgang’s version:
https://forum.dxo.com/uploads/default/original/3X/a/0/a07fd12ff08414144e1fb8cf52a28499036d33ca.jpeg

@Joanna’s version:
https://forum.dxo.com/uploads/default/original/3X/1/9/1972d1fdad78fc4adf2bbca992589f394252a24c.jpeg

My goal, was to capture images of the Pelicans. That they flew off was a bonus. I cropped it a lot, to make the birds more visible. Joanna and Wolfgang cropped differently, to show the surroundings, which decreases the detail in the birds. In explaining, please ignore the editing - now I know that what they both did is better than what I did, and I won’t be using Topaz as much in the future, but I’m puzzled why they both cropped it so wide. To me, the weeds were a distraction, so I got rid of them. But by doing so, I got rid of the reflections in the water, but the reflections didn’t seem to do much (as I saw them). In retrospect, the tree at the top of the image certainly is distracting, and when I re-do this image, they tree will be gone.

Wolfgang · May 13, 2022, 7:20am

@mikemyers

When you don’t like the proposal, you do it different – simple as that. No reason to react ‘unhappy’.
Nobody is taking the toy from you.

You have chosen a pic with the birds in action (taking off as you explained now – I’m not in wildlife),
so nothing static.

To show this action, I started with some wide crop, experimented with the nice light, dimmed fore- and background to bring out the subject and changed sizes to finally decide for a wider crop, which then made it a better composition. Playing with my adjustments you see, what & why I did.

Better to compare / judge the different versions in PL. The forum software doesn’t handle the colour
profile, which results in muted colours ( → no picture forum ).