March 06, 2015, 02:49:20 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - privatebydesign

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 226
1
....You can use soft-proofing in LR5 to estimate colour loss...
I like the way you put it there, I'd add that color loss is estimated rather accurately.

No it isn't, Lightroom soft proofing does a very inaccurate job of any decent printers true gamut potential. Try it, make two prints one that you have 'adjusted' for what LR says is in gamut, and send one straight to the printer, the one that went straight to the printer will be much more saturated and closer to your original image on screen.

Rendering intent is very important, but soft proofing as done in LR, is not.
whatever, sheesh

We have zero respect for each other, that is fine, but the difference is I back up everything I say.

This guy is a world authority on colour management and his findings align with my empirical results.

http://digitaldog.net/files/LR4_softproof2.mov

2
....You can use soft-proofing in LR5 to estimate colour loss...
I like the way you put it there, I'd add that color loss is estimated rather accurately.

No it isn't, Lightroom soft proofing does a very inaccurate job of any decent printers true gamut potential. Try it, make two prints one that you have 'adjusted' for what LR says is in gamut, and send one straight to the printer, the one that went straight to the printer will be much more saturated and closer to your original image on screen.

Rendering intent is very important, but soft proofing as done in LR, is not.

3

If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.

I'm a bit confused by this statement. In what context (desktop, web-browsing, photo-editing, videos,etc.)? And are you just talking intense bright saturation or like even whites popping your eyes out because the monitor's backlight is set so high?

I'm not quite sure what you describe is necessarily how it should always be.

And I rest my case................

4
Black & White / Re: Dark or light?
« on: March 05, 2015, 04:05:44 PM »
Screen brightness will play a huge factor. Most people that are using calibrated monitors in the 100cd/m2 range will like the first, most that are looking on 'normal' brightness screens will hate the first because it is 'over' exposed.

5
Let me offer an analogy to audio, one that you may be easily able to reproduce on your own.
What is pleasing in audio is subjective as are visuals.
 
If your PC's sound hardware has a graphic equalizer, open it.
Next open a media player with it's own equalizer leaving the software's equalizer off, play a song while tweaking the hardware's equalizer to your taste.
Now, with the hardware equalizer still active and tweaked, tweak some more with the software's equalizer.
I've found there's about nothing I can do to get pleasing results with both equalizers running on top of each other.
 - - -
Back to color management for printing.
 Calibrate your monitor. Best to use something like the x-rite i1Display Pro that takes ambient light into consideration.
Run the calibration in a darkened room on a well warmed up monitor that's been on at least two hours.
If your monitor has it's own hardware LUTs, use that.
If no hardware LUT, use the calibration software's monitor adjustment.

 
If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.
Any other adjustments made through the OS will result in the equivalent of using multiple equalizers on audio signals.
Now, when the PC hardware and software send a red signal to the monitor, the monitor will display the truest red it is capable of and the same for all colors, white point, black point.
- - -

 
Printer can't print the same though, it needs profiling for each and every printer/ink/paper combination to be used.
A device and software such as a Datacolor SpyderPRINT is used to profile.
Profiling software sends a print job to the printer of many many different colored squares, software knows exactly what colors were sent to print.
Profiling hardware is then used to read to the profiling hardware exactly what the printer actually did print for each color, software then creates a difference or error file which is an .icc or .icm file. Name this file distinctly and descriptively.
- - -
Now in your photo editing software, edit using soft proofing or print proofing with the appropriate .icc/.icm file. If your editor has no such option, get one that does.
DO NOT ADD IN THE PRINTER'S DRIVER SOFTWARE, if you do, you're back to the multiple equalizer analogy. Print directly from the photo editor's print function.
- - -
Short version......
Calibrated monitor displays the truest color it is capable of.
Printer profile in photo editor displays what printer can and will do.
Any other tweaks result analogous to multiple equalizers.

- - -
With end to end color management in mind I spent many hours over several months reading most everything I could find, much of what I found left me more confused than when I started.
The best reading on the topic I found was at Keith Cooper's most excellent Northlight Images site, specifically starting from this page......
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/what_is_colour.html
Keith has written so extensively on this and so many other topics I wonder how he finds time to shoot.
Shoot he does and very well, up on a level I aspire to.

Clearly.

I have edited your post for clarity, relevance, and useful information.

The best reading on the topic I found was at Keith Cooper's most excellent Northlight Images site, specifically starting from this page......
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/what_is_colour.html

6
Lighting / Re: Diffuser for Canon 600ex for event
« on: March 05, 2015, 01:51:07 PM »
I absolutely agree that for bigger umbrellas the money is often well spent on better build. But I was talking about the smaller models for VAL situations. Those don't benefit so much from the more expensive build and shouldn't be falling over, if they are you need a new VAL  ;D

In the OP's specific situation I would be looking at $15 cheapies, I use [pro]master, and although my favourite umbrella is a convertible by PhotoFlex I don't rate the convertibles very highly as unless you have a decent amount of time converting them is not a quick process.

7

Hey thanks!  BTW, I got my camera December 2014 and had it exchange for new ones  4X.  Two times, for me is ok, but 4x???. Then I got tired of returning defective cameras so I sent the last one for repairs. I got back the camera but the issue still exist. Makes me wonder how those pros take care of those issues. The camera has a huge potential hence I switched from nikon to canon. I guess I will wait until a newer model comes up and hopefully taken care of this issue.

Generally they don't treat them like very expensive toys or jewelery. They are just tools and having dust in the viewfinder isn't an issue for most pros, neither is having spots on the sensor or any number of other 'issues' that keen amateurs and enthusiasts have the time and energy to obsess about. Sure some products in any production run are lemons, but anybody that thinks they got 4 defective products in a row is statistically more likely to win the lottery (though somebody does) or suffers from OCD and doesn't understand these things are just image making tools.

8
Lighting / Re: Diffuser for Canon 600ex for event
« on: March 05, 2015, 10:33:11 AM »
I second the Large Rogue Flashbender and the option to take the speedlite off camera. If you can get some help, A speedlite+umbrella on a mono-pod w/ an assistant moving it quickly through the event will be a life-saver if everything is black.

I'm in a similar situation, as the OP. I use a pair of Canon 580exii flashes though. I do have access to an assistant. So... what kind of umbrella would be ideal, and what size? Thank you!!

I use 32"-36" white shoot through. Don't get expensive ones as they are effectively disposable, even the good ones break or get damaged, and if they are much bigger they start hitting ceilings, light fittings and fans, or peoples heads! I prefer shoot through as the light just goes everywhere and there is no chance of having it at 'the wrong angle'.

Most people/assistants use monopods or collapsed lightstands to elevate the light but I use a converted painter pole as it is much more comfortable to hold for hours.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Check your 11-24L for decentering!
« on: March 05, 2015, 12:32:49 AM »
Regarding the section on your guide about infinity focus, isn't the purpose of the "past infinity" part of the focus ring to allow for the effect of different temperatures on the lens?
The 16-35L II isn't parfocal. Thus focus must always change for different focal length settings. Temperature of the lens has little effect on where infinity must be set, in my experience. These lenses are very well designed to withstand thermal expansion. It still plays a roll, but not by any noticeable degree.

Also, the article is not saying anything about going past true infinity. It is only stating that to achieve infinity, you must not go by the marking and instead there is extra sharpness to be had by going past it a little based on lens variation from copy to copy. The test is to know where you should set infinity focus by knowing the offset for different focal lengths. Setting it to the marking still gives acceptable sharpness for the most part due to the hyperfocal distances. As you can see in the article, the added sharpness is very little but real.

The lens design also allows for the AF mechanism to hit infinity without hitting the stops when it must rock back and forth. It is important to give a bit of extra room for this to happen. I had a 70-200 lens that was too far out of spec, and at 70mm the infinity setting was too far past the marking, causing the AF mechanism to hit the stops and give up on finding true infinity, even though I could put it manually to true infinity.

It has nothing to do with zoom parfocal or not, if it did the primes wouldn't go past infinity yet they do.

10
Lenses / Re: Manual macro lenses for intraoral photographs
« on: March 05, 2015, 12:16:05 AM »
Hello guys. I take some intraoral photographs in the dental clinic using 70d and 100 2.8L. The combo works well, but sometimes I don't like the colors of the mouth tissues, even if shoot RAW. Once in a while I read very nice reviews about some other macro lenses (e.g., Voigtlander SL 125 2.5, Schneider Makro-Symmar 90mm 4.5, Leica R 100 2.8 APO) and I'm wondering if these lenses will give me some better image quality and color rendition?

All pictures I take are manual only, Canon Macro flash, ISO 100, shutter speed 1/100-1/150 sec and the widest aperture is 22 (I typically use aperture 32). Considering these parameters, would any of the above mentioned lenses give me any advantage over Canon 100L?

Another question is does anyone know if I cut a gray card to a small size to fit into the mouth, would I be able to more or less correctly adjust colors in LR?

Thank you!

No, a different lens will not help you, ignore anybody that says it will. Yes you can cut down a grey card but that will only give you a white balance, which is a start, but not the complete picture you need. What you need to do is create a custom profile for your camera using the lighting you do for your images. This can be done easily with a colour card (which doesn't need to go inside the mouth! Just have the same lighting as your images), the most popular one around is the X-Rite ColorChecker Passport. Their website has videos on how to create your profile and then use it.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Check your 11-24L for decentering!
« on: March 04, 2015, 11:18:52 PM »
Regarding the section on your guide about infinity focus, isn't the purpose of the "past infinity" part of the focus ring to allow for the effect of different temperatures on the lens?

Yes it is.

And the TS-E lenses focus even further past infinity to give you more control over the plain of focus.

12
Lighting / Re: Diffuser for Canon 600ex for event
« on: March 04, 2015, 07:26:08 PM »
Mini softboxes are a POS, they are not worth the postage unless you can get them off camera and close, very close, to a small subject. The Rouge FlashBender isn't much better, especially on camera, but it is better in that it has more flexibility.
I guess thats where I'm getting lost. I can bend it, but whats so great about that as far as softening light? It seems pretty useful if you're under white ceilings or a tent cause then you're not wasting all that light going up, but what about for the outside shots with sky overhead? Use the flash vertical and use flash bender to reflect the bit of light it'll catch as fill? Or is bare flash at a low power fine for simple fill?

Nothing.

On camera with no bounce they are both extremely limited, but the Rouge does give you the option to split light in any percentage you want between direct forwards and bouncing if the venue allows that capability. With a small softbox you are stuck with a slightly larger than flash head sized output.

Neither is ideal, the Rouge gives you more flexibility if you get the opportunity to use it, if you don't they also do a little cover to make it a pure softbox, which I also have.

Light is not magic, it is entirely dependent on the apparent size to the subject, with that softbox in this situation you are stuck at one size and one distance, with the Rouge you are not, you have all the capability of the softbox and more options if you can use them.

I'd use the Rouge for your outsides, it makes the light bigger, comparatively, and further from the lens axis, which are both good things. Just curl the top over and make a scoop.

13
Lighting / Re: Diffuser for Canon 600ex for event
« on: March 04, 2015, 06:11:49 PM »
Mini softboxes are a POS, they are not worth the postage unless you can get them off camera and close, very close, to a small subject. The Rouge FlashBender isn't much better, especially on camera, but it is better in that it has more flexibility.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Check your 11-24L for decentering!
« on: March 04, 2015, 02:18:25 PM »
Yes, and the sides. Imagine if this was done on a 5Ds with 50MP. The difference would be pretty huge.

No, the difference would be exactly the same at the same output size.

15
Lighting / Re: Color temperature and light source
« on: March 04, 2015, 01:15:43 AM »
The biggest problem you are running into is the actual spectral output of the bulbs. Don't be fooled by 'daylight' or high CRI figures, they are easy to get around. What you need are genuine full spectrum bulbs and the only brand that I use are the leading manufacturer of them, Solux.

Look through here http://www.solux.net/cgi-bin/tlistore/infopages/index.html and get the best for your situation, the halogens do produce a lot of heat but there are other options. Once you get them set it up, do the ColorChecker once and you are good for any subject, same exposure, same WB and same camera profile, make that an import preset and you are done.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 226