@George: by pure coincidence, I have just downloaded NX Studio, whilst I can get it to show the focusing points for other Nikon cameras I own, I cannot get it to work with NEF files from the D800? According to the exif data ‘Subject Distance’ was 2.66 m, which would suggest I focused on the bridge.
That’s what I think you did by looking at the image as large as I can make it.
@George, I also have NX Studio. Not sure if that feature will work for me, but if I’d like to test it, how do I activate it?
(I have most of the editors we’ve been discussing, but I never installed GIMP on my newer computers.)
I don’t think I need it - I can just enlarge the transition from “closer” to “farther” on my screen. Looks pretty obvious to me which side is sharpest.
. … the focus points are not displayed in the following cases:
The image shot with the Nikon digital single-lens reflex cameras attached to Non-CPU lens.
The image shot by manual focus.
The image shot using AF-C (Continuous-servo AF) mode without the in-focus indicator appearing in the viewfinder.
The image edited using another application.
From a Flickr group. It was about Nx2 but looks logic.
George
Which is absolutely fine as it is near enough to get everything in from 1.06m to infinity without diffraction according to TrueDoF-Pro.
Mike is trying to judge sharpness on a 1920px x 1281px reduced size version of your 7424px x 4924px original, which means there is no way you are going to be able to determine sharpness.
However, if I pass the small file through Topaz Photo AI and enlarge it to its original dimensions and take a screenshot at 100%…
… I think you will find there is a lot more detail.
I have never been to a camera club training (maybe I should visit one) and I have never taken part in a competition (cobbler stick to your last). My personal opinion is that subjects often come out better if I take the Fibunacci formula into account a little. I completely agree with you, if we all do the same thing, our pictures will all look similar and then it gets boring. That’s why I don’t see this forum as a Bible, but as a welcome suggestion to try something different. Let’s continue with these flexibilities.
1 Like
Agreed. Here is a shot that I took a while back and used for a tutorial…
… but I wasn’t aware of using it until I went to process it.
For me, the most common device I use is leading lines, but there is no single “rule” that I would ever recommend to any photographer.
1 Like
Actually, I was only trying to judge sharpness in the first of the two images, not the image being talked about above. The structure up front was much closer than the background.
Regarding the second image, this is what looks best to me:
The background pulls my eye away from what I enjoy looking at.
Just me, I guess.
@mikemyers This is a further sectional enlargement of the image cropped to 16:9, which I quite like:
1 Like
A different view of Weymouth Harbour:
Whilst likes or dislikes of a photograph are subjective, I think you have to agree that PhotoLab does an excellent job of processing raw files.
2 Likes
I prefer the elements you want to leave out - as they are. They add depth. Late AA talked about ‘the near-far approach’ and used this technique to create the illusion of a third dimension.
1 Like
OK, it’s your photo, so it should look the way YOU want it to look.
No question, no debate.
Just finished dinner, going to have a Quick Look around, and either finish setting up my Fuji X100F, or turn on a good movie. We all see things differently. If it wasn’t so durn hot outside (thermometer says 109, which I don’t believe, I’d go outside on my balcony and just watch “my” boats on Biscayne Bay. I enjoy “your” boats SO MUCH MORE!!!
Agreed and I agree with @Eigil_Skovgaard that the images are showing what I want to see, the details of the location and the context of the shot, maybe not artistic (?) but informative.
Can we stick to one location per topic?
@Joanna I apologise.
I actually consider the whole category a ploy by DxO to fill the forum with “fluff” and obscure the many and various complaints that tend to fill the forum, but “whatever floats your boat”.
I will attempt to avoid this Topic Category in the future.
Suggestion - start your own, new, discussion, about whatever it is that you want to discuss, whether it be a “how-to” question or a "complaint. Since you started the topic, you can push things in whatever direction you want the discussion topic to be about. Or, sort of in your words, rather than participate in THIS topic category, start your own, based on what’s on YOUR mind.
As for me, I don’t really have any “complaints”. DxO PhotoLab, as it is right now, seems to me to be better than any of my other options for image processing. But what’s perfect for one person, may not be for another person. Also, the forum isn’t really a way to discuss things with DxO, it’s a way to discuss things between all the users of DxO software.
Bottom line, should you wish to, avoid this Topic Category as you noted, and start a new Topic Category, to discuss whatever you wish to discuss. Just my thoughts, and maybe I don’t fully understand what the issue is, at least not as well as you understand it.
Mike,
It is not surprising that you are completely missing @BHAYT’s point. That is because of your limited use and knowledge of PhotoLab’s tool set, your general lack of understanding of the many issues that have been discussed here and your almost complete non-participation in those discussion threads over the years. In addition, there have also been a number of ongoing private group discussions on this subject to which you don’t have access.
His belief is simply that these photo evaluation threads were set up by DxO as a smokescreen to dilute the very significant number of threads highlighting both new and long standing issues that have not been addressed. While I am not certain his assumption is correct, it very well could be.
Those of us who continue to champion PhotoLab do so in spite of the many unresolved issues and missing or incomplete features because in many ways it is still a superior product. However, our frustration is real… and growing.
Mark
Actually, what happened is after there were many discussions about setting up a DxO Coffee House for chat and sharing photos in the “Off-Topic thread”, I contacted DxO and asked for them to do this. Only one other person in the forum was aware of what was happening. And I made it very important to DxO that it was set up and run by DxO, with me as just another participant, and in NO WAY in a position of any control. It was my idea (greatly influenced by someone in the off-topic discussion) but he didn’t want to be the one to talk to DxO. I copied everything he wrote, and included it in the reasons why this would be a good idea.
Who knows, perhaps the reason that @BHAYT feels that way is part of the reason that DxO agreed so readily to do this. But it was “our” idea, not theirs, and there were lots of discussions about how to do it. I have heard back that they are very pleased at how well it is working out, and they must be pleased to see so many people posting new threads with their photo(s).
I can’t comment on that. Maybe they did see this new forum addition the way you describe, but I doubt it, as if users are having problems, they can and will still post out in the open, where a huge number of people will become aware of them. Not sure, but these complaints are likely in a discussion I don’t read.
Maybe they saw the new forum as a way for many more people to use to post their work, ask for assistance, and/or just “chat” which was the original purpose of having a “DxO Cafe”.
To me, it is what it is. Nothing is ever “perfect”, and “progress” usually takes ten steps forward, along with one or two steps backwards".
What if DxO never, ever, solves most of those issues. Maybe all of their available staff are too busy developing what will become PL8?
(Maybe you, or someone else, can make an itemized list of what these problems are, so the full list is in one place? That list could be submitted to DxO, both in the forum, and in an email.)
To me, it’s much more a matter of what PhotoLab can do, than what PhotoLab can not do.
If someone really is that frustrated, they could switch to different software, where they can be frustrated by a different list of other things instead.
Anyway, please post a list of these unresolved issues, preferably in a new thread, so the rest of us will know what you’re talking about.
Not that any of this has anything to do with “Weymouth Harbour”. We should discuss this in a separate thread, that one of you can please create.
Mike,
There is no “rest of us”. You are the only regular long term poster here who is blissfully unaware of what’s going on because of your almost total lack of interest and participation in those many hundreds of threads discussing issues and features since you joined this forum. It would take me hours to put together a comprehensive list of the dozens of issues in a way you might possibly understand and it would be a complete waste of my time since you are only interested in a very small subset of PhotoLab’s toolset. If you are really interested in learning about all the issues, and all the incomplete and missing features, I suggest you start by becoming a less isolated member of this forum. You need to be willing to educate yourself, I am not going to do it for you.
And yes, this should be a discussion in a separate thread but this is where @BHAYT decided to make his comment and you posted your response to him.
Mark
Thank you. To me, PhotoLab is a tool, and it does what I need. I’ve been here since PL3, and I have no such issues. I am extremely thankful for the people here in the forums, who explain how to get the most out of PhotoLab.
I’m surprised there isn’t any list of issues.
How do you know the appropriate people at DxO are aware of them?
I’m certainly not the right person in this forum to start a discussion about issues - if there is no such issues discussion ongoing, perhaps you can start one? I assume there must already be discussions about this. You are correct, I am not interested in reading about this, especially so in this topic about Weymouth Harbour.