Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Before and After?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • skids
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Dave - Please consider my hat tipped firmly in your direction - fantastic capture sir.

    Leave a comment:


  • wornish
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    I live in the sticks so light pollution isn't too bad as long as the neighbours to the South don't have their garden flood lights on. Almost all mounts are heavy it helps in keeping them stable.

    Leave a comment:


  • MJ224
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    I use the go to EQ5, which is very good.

    But heavy

    And my back garden is awash with LED street lights...Also need to learn how to flip the telescope. Andromeda is on the flip side...:-(

    Leave a comment:


  • wornish
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Thanks. Its a Sky Watcher AZ-EQ6. Because I hadn't used it for over a year I just let the mount itself do the tracking last night. Normally, I would use guiding which means you can do much longer exposures and still have round stars.

    Without guiding you are at the mercy of the mounts internal tracking and the challenge of getting your Polar Alignment as good as possible. That has recently become a lot easier since Sharpcap introduced a new polar align feature in their software which works amazingly well.

    Leave a comment:


  • MJ224
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    That is a fantastic shot Dave.

    Assume the scope mount moved with the earth rotation.....

    What mount do you use??

    Leave a comment:


  • wornish
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    One from last night. Used my EM1-mk2 on my telescope. First time out for over a year.

    8 x 4 minute shots ( ISO 800) of the Andromeda Galaxy. Showing only one to give an idea of what you get including pesky satellite trail.

    Then the end result after stacking and quite a bit of post processing.



    Before

    [IMG][/IMG]



    After

    [IMG][/IMG]
    Last edited by wornish; 15th November 2017, 06:01 PM. Reason: Reprocessed After

    Leave a comment:


  • shenstone
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Having spent much ot the last 6 months repairing photo's I though that I should add one to this thread



    The original glass plate (est. late 1920's) was rephotographed using a lightbox, EM1mkII and the zuiko 50mm macro using an MM3 converter

    The OOC JPG is on the left. The one on the right is from the ORF which has been run through DXO

    Smart lighting = slight
    Clearview = 20%
    Highlights & Midtones down 20%

    Then into faststone and using the clone and heal tool with a hardness of 0.4 and remove the obvious scratches and soften the lines where there is some staining across the picture. im not aiming for perfect, but to make any issues not immediately obvious

    Side point .. The gent himself has now been featured on the CNS history pages I am working on - he was an early member of the Alpine Society and one of the first climbers of the matterhorn. http://www.cardiffnaturalists.org.uk...s/150th-28.htm

    Leave a comment:


  • Bikie John
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Originally posted by tomphotofx View Post
    I suggested using the auto button primarily as a learning curve trying it out on a varied selection of images to get an idea how the sliders position themselves, its a good way of understanding the workings of Photoshop. Take for example you've taken a batch of photos of a rugby/football match under the same lighting conditions, try the auto button but then tweak the settings to suit, add noise reduction plus white balance correction and maybe dehaze slider save that out as a preset to use on all the images. It will put you in the right ballpark for the majority of images and the ones that didn't work will only take some mild tweaking. It's a time saver nobody wants to manually work on maybe two to three hundred images individually.

    Cheers,

    Tom
    Good points all, Tom. I hadn't really thought of using the auto function as a way of understanding the effects of the sliders, that's a very good idea.

    Certainly being able to apply a set of adjustments to several files is useful, but I don't know how generally applicable it is across different editors. Lightroom is quite well designed for it, I don't know about Oly viewer or others.

    Sadly it isn't all that useful for outdoor sports as the light changes all the time. Most dramatically if you change ends at half-time, but also - as well as natural variations of sun & cloud - a lot of outdoor sports tend to be timed to finish as it gets dark which means the light changes a lot and rapidly in the last half-hour or so.

    I have to photograph some indoor walking football at a leisure centre tomorrow. The lighting is horrible from what I remember, but at least it is constant. It will be worth taking a lot of care to balance the first one right then apply the mods to the whole set.

    John

    Leave a comment:


  • Ricoh
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    From the title I thought we were talking diptychs. Elliot Erwitt was/is a master at these - even triptychs - magnificent!
    Worth having a separate thread on Diptychs / Triptychs.

    Leave a comment:


  • tomphotofx
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Hi Phill,

    Two examples of "Before and After" or as I prefer to call it "Developing the Image".



    BEFORE







    AFTER





    BEFORE





    AFTER


    Leave a comment:


  • KeithL
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    A word of warning here! I processed a portrait (mono) and printed it. It looked quite bright on screen, but a bit flat on paper. So I used a Topaz plug-in to give it some impact. Printed, thought 'great', and submitted it to a club comp with no further thought. The judge slated it as being over exposed! I hadn't checked the curve after Topaz did its worst. After Topaz, what had been an almost perfectly exposed shot now had an exaggerated histogram curve, with over exposure evident. In the finished print, it was only in some highlights, but it has made me very cautious since.

    Be careful how you use plug-ins, particularly those that promise to give an image 'impact'. It's VERY easy to overdo it. If I can find the original images, I'll post here to demonstrate the effect.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phill D
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Interesting comment Tom. I tried the auto button on one shot and added a few tweaks and it worked well however I did it on the next image and it was awful...? really don't know why. I agree though when it works it's a great way to learn by looking where the sliders go. I've certainly done that for the few shots I've tried to process to date.

    Oh btw one of your magnificent processed shots would be great on here Tom if you wouldn't mind showing a before and after

    Leave a comment:


  • tomphotofx
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    I suggested using the auto button primarily as a learning curve trying it out on a varied selection of images to get an idea how the sliders position themselves, its a good way of understanding the workings of Photoshop. Take for example you've taken a batch of photos of a rugby/football match under the same lighting conditions, try the auto button but then tweak the settings to suit, add noise reduction plus white balance correction and maybe dehaze slider save that out as a preset to use on all the images. It will put you in the right ballpark for the majority of images and the ones that didn't work will only take some mild tweaking. It's a time saver nobody wants to manually work on maybe two to three hundred images individually.

    Cheers,

    Tom

    Leave a comment:


  • MJ224
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    I find the Auto key ups the exposure and brightens the shot.

    Not always what I feel is a good solution. But nothing lost, you can always reset...............

    Leave a comment:


  • Bikie John
    replied
    Re: Before and After?

    Thanks Tom, I had forgotten about the Alt key - I just keep an eye on the histogram when adjusting but the Alt key is more graphic.

    I gave up trying auto adjustments a long time ago - maybe the stuff I shoot just doesn't react well, but I always seemed to get awful results. Still, there's no cost in trying it and it might save a lot of work.

    John

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X