Part 2 - Off-Topic - advice, experiences, and examples for images being processed in DxO Photolab

[mikemyers]

@Joanna

That may be the case in your mind but, as with every photo you’ve ever seen, it is the photographer who decides. You seem to be imposing your limits on where the edges of. photo should be. But where does that stop?

It never stops; that’s just the way I think. Like in this photo, I think the camera should have been lower, to raise the top of the boat higher than the horizon (as you explained, too). Color vs. b&w? In this case, I enjoy the b&w more. Great find, and a fascinating photo.

Since I don’t have a ten foot wide display, I appreciate your close-up shots, with detail I would otherwise not have noticed.

@Joanna

with the beautiful compositional element of the jet trail to lead the eye back into the image…

Oops, I ignored the jet trail as “irrelevant”, but now that I see it, I think you are right.

@Joanna

• … but there is an unavoidable distraction of the top of a tree, visible above the rail of the wreck. Is this acceptable, or…
• … should it be removed in post-processing - at the same time, altering the aspect ratio to better suit the shape of frame it will occupy?

Since this photo is more “art” than “record”, that’s your choice - but I don’t find it “annoying” or a “distraction”.

@Joanna

Is the “truth” more important than the artistic merit?

It depends - people have lost their first place awards over this sort of thing. I’d like to think that I wouldn’t delete parts of the image other than by cropping, or changing the point of view, if possible.

@Joanna

The subject is the rusted metal fittings on the tip of the prow. Yes, you can see a hint of the background, but it is soft and returns focus to the main subject. It also adds “grounding” to indicate that it is not something that is handheld or flying through the air. The focus of this image and what the photographer wants the viewer to focus on is just this part of the wreck. Including any more would draw the viewer’s eye away from this exquisite detail. It is not meant only as a documentary, it is a piece of geometric art.

To me, it’s more “documentary” than “art”, regardless of what your intentions were. If it were me taking this photo, I would have cropped off the bottom of the image, along with giving the subject more “breathing room” if possible. Like you wrote, this something for YOU (as the photographer) to decide. Me? I’m not being critical, just explaining how I see these images, for better or worse.

@Joanna

And a photograph is very much like that. It is a “guided tour” of the parts of a scene that the photographer found the most interesting.

That’s not how I feel, or see the world usually. To me, the photograph itself stands alone, and I look at it as if I had taken it myself, and consider how I would have photographed it, and what I might have done differently. Most likely, I’m the exception, and most of the world thinks as you describe.

Regarding lenses, because of something you wrote long ago, I did buy the 20mm lens.

Regarding Ken, that’s what he wrote several years ago. Now he has tested the “P” version of the lens I bought, and long before that I found out what changes the “P” version were. I decided I wanted the latest version.

@Joanna

if you are predominantly using

The purpose of my 24-120 is a single lens that does most of what I want, and I use 24 much more than I would use anything beyond 150. The 24-120 was intended to be my “all in one” lens. I also have a much lighter 24-85 which what I put on my camera most of the time, as it’s lighter.

For most people, most of the time, I think your advice is sound. From my past life, “all in one” means compromises.

[mikemyers]

@Joanna

And a photograph is very much like that. It is a “guided tour” of the parts of a scene that the photographer found the most interesting.

Interesting concept…

There was what I would call a “boat party” outside my balcony, with a growing number of boats all tied up together, perhaps for a meal, perhaps for a party, who knows. Then a fellow on a paddle board showed up to join in on the fun.

Naturally, I took a photo, and started to post it here, but I didn’t think it would be interesting to others. So I deleted the post.

Thinking back to what you wrote here, perhaps I should post what I want to show, even though others might find that I cropped it way too tight, cutting off bits and pieces of the boats. I’ll post the end result here, and maybe you or others will tell me I did right, or not. It would have been shot with my D780, but that is packed away for my upcoming trip. So, it was D3 or Df, and I grabbed the D3.

It’s a more interesting image than the full image, but now it just includes the things I found most interesting:

Had it not been for your previous comments, this is NOT what I was about to create, but I like it more this way.

[Louie (Louis David Durpanski)]

The only thing in focus is your watermark.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@mikemyers

Had it not been for your previous comments, this is NOT what I was about to create, but I like it more this way.

Do you not see all the issues with this image, including to start with that it is only 1.37 MP in size and is extremely blurry. Even if it was sharp as a tack, the composition is also way too crowded and is a jumble with nothing of particular interest standing out. It is a mishmash of boats melding into a non-cohesive mess.

There are no interesting shapes, textures or colors. There is nothing suggesting where I should be looking. or what your intent was. I thought Joanna discussed with you the futility of such tiny cropped images. which lack detail as well as any adjustment leeway. This one can safely be deleted in my opinion.

Contrary to your comments, there is nothing to suggest that there is a meal or a party in the making. There are only three people in the entire image. I have no idea what you find so interesting about this one that you felt the need to share it, but I know you are capable of doing much, much better.

You need to go back to your own website and review some of the very nice images you captured years ago. You seem to put more emphasis these days on the camera equipment you are using rather than on the pictures you are creating… With all deference to @Joanna’s opinions, I still think you should be revisiting your Leica which you know so well, and put the D780 away for a while.

Mark

[Wolfgang ([ Win10, PL+VP+FP, Nik7 / 3.3 ])]

@Louie

The only thing in focus is your watermark.

The poor boy needs attention.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@mikemyers

It’s a more interesting image than the full image, but now it just includes the things I found most interesting:

I’m sorry Mike but this has absolutely no interest to anybody else. It is taken with a low resolution 12Mpx camera from way too far away and well over-cropped. Even allowing for the low resolution, there is no attempt at composition, it is horrendously blurred and totally lacking in detail.

@Louie

The only thing in focus is your watermark

Well, I can fix that

@mikemyers I really don’t know why you bother with watermarks. Surely one thing you must have learnt by now is that it is a matter of seconds work to remove it in PhotoLab, so absolutely no use at all for copyright protection and it just annoys the heck out of everybody.

@mwsilvers

With all deference to @Joanna’s opinions, I still think you should be revisiting your Leica which you know so well,. and put the D780 away for a while.

Mark, I agree with everything you said in your post but, with the proviso that Mike doesn’t go back to using the Leica for shots that need cropping, at least, not to the degree he has done here. and certainly not if he intends to try and shoot birds. The right tool for the right job.

Mike, I’m going to say it loud and clear

Compose it and frame it in the camera!!!

And, if you can’t get close enough to fill the frame, simply don’t shoot it, at least if you’re considering posting it here.

But even more importantly, find a subject worth shooting or I am going to start ignoring your posts again.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@Joanna’s removal of Mike’s watermark got me to thinking. I am not a birder but since Mike seems to have recently taken an interest in them I decided to post this flamingo image taken recently at a local zoo. It was captured on my very basic Nikon Z fc body with a Voigtländer 23mm f/1.2 manual focus lens at f/11.

The second version shows the original steel cable crossing the image, which I removed. Mike and some others here would never consider modifying a image like this, but the cable was an unnecessary distraction and had to go.

My removal was far from perfect. It was done somewhat quickly and is not as clean as I could have achieved if I had spent more time on it, but I am presenting it mainly as a demonstration to Mike and others of PhotoLab’s ability to clean up an image.

Mark

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@Joanna

Mark, I agree with everything you said in your post but, with the proviso that Mike doesn’t go back to using the Leica for shots that need cropping, at least, not to the degree he has done here. and certainly not if he intends to try and shoot birds. The right tool for the right job.

Unless one is a police investigator, cropping and blowing up a tiny low resolution portion of a larger image is almost always bad practice. The only reason to do it is if the content of the crop has some significant value regardless of how poor it may look.

Mark.

[mikemyers]

Agreed, 100%.

The image isn’t the problem, posting it is the problem. Other people in my building want/need this, for their own purposes, as soon as I can send it to them. They just want a record of what happened.

D3 is left at home. I took the d780, two lenses and my monopod. Unfortunately the Sandhill Cranes seem to be missing.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@mikemyers

The image isn’t the problem, posting it is the problem. Other people in my building want/need this, for their own purposes, as soon as I can send it to them. They just want a record of what happened.

Mike,

If your goal was the creation of an interesting and well captured image, this one was very much a problem regardless of your decision to post it here. It is a poor picture by virtually any measure. And, what exactly happened that would make other people in your building want a record of it? Based upon the many good images on your website why would you decide to keep and share a washed out, low detailed, blurry one like this?

Mark

[mikemyers]

They want a copy of this specific incident, not one of my previous photos. I will send them the full, uncropped image that looks fine.

I meant to post the .nef file here.

Outside of this forum, a poor photo is far better than no photo, not as art, but as a record. As to no people, they were inside.

Taking the photo was deliberate, not a problem. Both cropping and posting it here were things I shouldn’t have done.

I couldn’t find the meteorites last night, but it was a special moon, extremely bright, but I need to wait one more day for a full moon.

I’ve spent two days getting my brothers Df and D200 working again.

Last thought - I now wish I had bought a 50 megapixel D850, as I could crop it more.

Oh, I agree with all the above responses, but one, which I need to re-evaluate in the future.

As to my D3, I did get my “fix”, and the best thing it did for me, is to get to appreciate my 24 megapixel D780 that much more. I wonder how @joanna compares the D850 to the D6…

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@mikemyers

Last thought - I now wish I had bought a 50 megapixel D850, as I could crop it more

No, no, no!!! That is not what high resolution cameras are for. The extra pixels are there to add quality to the image, not to save you having to buy a decent long zoom, or take the time to approach the subject more.

@mikemyers

I wonder how @joanna compares the D850 to the D6

That’s like comparing apples to oranges. They are built to do different jobs.

The D850 is a pure high quality, 46Mpx beast with the ability to replace a medium format film camera and to produce high definition prints to insane sizes

The D6 is a sports photographer’s, rapid fire, never mind the quality, fill the memory cards camera, which doesn’t have much in the way of resolution but that can capture high speed bursts for sport or journalism.

For me, at well over twice the price, for the work that I do, the D6 is not something I have, or would ever, consider.

[mikemyers]

Joanna, the president of the Board of Directors for my condo wants the photo of the group of boars all tied together. No cropping, so it shows Miami in the background proving where it was taken. The city is trying to get rid of the live aboard boats, where nobody pays taxes and have been known to dispose of waste by dumping into Biscayne Bay.

[mikemyers]

In the birding forums people prefer the large sensor cameras where they can crop more. If that is a bad idea, as you suggest, most people seem to feel that way anyway. They also want looong lenses which they may not have. Their ideal camera seems to be the Nikon Z9. D850 and D780 and D6 are some of the better cameras in their discussions. (Fast focus is at the top of the list, meaning D5, D6, and Z9. )

[stuck (Canon, PL7 on Win 10 + GTX 1050ti)]

@Joanna

if you can’t get close enough to fill the frame, simply don’t shoot it, at least if you’re considering posting it here.

At the risk of irritating @Joanna, here’s a bird shot that’s a mere 600x600pixels cropped out of 6960x4640.

Why did I take the picture? Because I wanted to be able to identify the bird.

Why post it here? Because I think it has educational merit, I had no idea flamingos lived in the Venetian lagoon so I was stunned to see one emerge from this handful of noisy pixels.

[rsp]

And so what?

[stuck (Canon, PL7 on Win 10 + GTX 1050ti)]

And so sometimes it’s OK to ignore ‘rules’

[rsp]

Ok, but using photography to identify species (which is completely respectable) has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

[stuck (Canon, PL7 on Win 10 + GTX 1050ti)]

That wasn’t the point of my post. I was picking up and poking fun at @Joanna’s ‘rule’ about not posting heavily cropped bird pics.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@rsp

Ok, but using photography to identify species (which is completely respectable) has nothing to do with the subject of this thread

Or to the art of photography either. Other than perhaps identifying the species or to document the event of three boats tried together, using heavily cropped, low resolution, low pixel count images with minimal detail, serve very little purpose. Now if the image was of a creature thought to be extinct, that in itself would give it great value, but that’s not what we’re about here. PhotoLab is a tool capable of making well captured images look great, and can often even help more mediocre pictures look far better.

The heavily cropped images of the flamingo, and Mike’s picture of those boats tied together may have a good reason for being saved but that reason has nothing to do with the art of composition or the skills utilized when creating a good image. If Mike felt it was important to save that image for legal purposes, then that is a valid reason. But as he himself admitted, his mistake was posting it here. I still don’t understand why he decided to post it if he knew it had so many issues.

Mark