Image rescue attempt after frustration in the field
Discussion
5 replies
Posted by Curtis Knight on April 27, 2008 at 4:14 PM
This was the first victim of my tulip photography yesterday morning. I got the camera positioned and exposure set, no autofocus. Then I realized, oh, I'm too close, so I attached an extension tube. still no AF. OK, not enough light on the subject, so I settled for manual focus.
I finally tripped the shutter, and got different sounds from the camera than normal. No image. WTF??? I power cycled the camera, tried again, same thing. I pulled the camera off the tripod and found "ERR 99" on the display.
I spent the next 5 minutes or so trying a new CF card, new battery, all kinds of different sequences of swaping these items and power cycling the camera. Every time I tripped the shutter, I got err 99.
I then powered off the camera, removed the lens and put it back on. Same problem. At this point I'm guessing my shooting days are over untill I can come up with a nice grand to get the new body and SDHC cards I need.
I tried one more desperate manuver hoping it was the lens and not the camera. I removed the 70-200 and put on the 17-50. No more err! I put the 70-200 back on and no more problems after that!
All of this futzing cost me about 15 minutes. So after all that, I took several frames of this nice specimen, and moved on down the rows looking for more.
Well, in my frustration, I didn't notice that the subject was too dark. And I really liked this particular flower, so I'm trying to make something out of a crappy photo. Yes yes, I know, garbage in garbage out. You can't fix it in PS. But I had to try.
What do you think?
1/5 sec @ F10
ISO 100
70-200 @ 200mm
Processing:
converted to LAB
curves layer
select color range: shadows
curves layer
created composite layer
burned the BG flowers to near silhoettes
select color range: highlights (basically just the sky)
levels layer to bring the sky to black, which also created the halos around the BG flowers.
composite layer
select Lightness channel
USM
Posted by Darren White on April 27, 2008 at 4:21 PM
ultra sharp image Curtis........and great color...
is this a normal processing routine for you? I really am kinda in the dark about about the processing and am always curious as to how we all do it differently....
Posted by Derek Sedillo on April 27, 2008 at 4:49 PM
I am kinda liking this even thought the background may be a bit dark... It just has a different mood - kinda more black tie vs. light, bright & Springy. It might not hurt to try bumping the exposure up as a comparsion. But I like this rendition none the less. It almost looks like a night shot.
Posted by Zack Schnepf on April 27, 2008 at 5:22 PM
I think it looks beautiful Curtis. I love the dark BG, very rich image. Beautiful work, way to make lemonade out of the lemon situation.
Posted by Cliff Dodge on April 27, 2008 at 6:51 PM
You know the other day i was out shooting this duck in this pond......that reminds me of a funny joke, but anyway, i got an err 99 on my old 20d. I couldnt figure it out so after a few minutes of dicking with it, i popped the battery out and put it back in and it works fine again, well fine for an old 20d. As for the picture, i like it, nice job doing what you did. Oh thats right, its a trout in a pond joke....
Posted by Curtis Knight on April 28, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Thanks guys.
Darren, no I usually don't put this much effort into processing unless I'm doing a blend, or I'm just in the mood to play around with PS. Sometimes I'll read about a new technique and I'll try it out, but most of the time I'm just as happy with the results from simpler techniques.
I try to use LAB color when I can, and probably 80% of my images have one or two adjustment layers, and a composite layer for sharpening.
Discussion
5 repliesI finally tripped the shutter, and got different sounds from the camera than normal. No image. WTF??? I power cycled the camera, tried again, same thing. I pulled the camera off the tripod and found "ERR 99" on the display.
I spent the next 5 minutes or so trying a new CF card, new battery, all kinds of different sequences of swaping these items and power cycling the camera. Every time I tripped the shutter, I got err 99.
I then powered off the camera, removed the lens and put it back on. Same problem. At this point I'm guessing my shooting days are over untill I can come up with a nice grand to get the new body and SDHC cards I need.
I tried one more desperate manuver hoping it was the lens and not the camera. I removed the 70-200 and put on the 17-50. No more err! I put the 70-200 back on and no more problems after that!
All of this futzing cost me about 15 minutes. So after all that, I took several frames of this nice specimen, and moved on down the rows looking for more.
Well, in my frustration, I didn't notice that the subject was too dark. And I really liked this particular flower, so I'm trying to make something out of a crappy photo. Yes yes, I know, garbage in garbage out. You can't fix it in PS. But I had to try.
What do you think?
1/5 sec @ F10
ISO 100
70-200 @ 200mm
Processing:
converted to LAB
curves layer
select color range: shadows
curves layer
created composite layer
burned the BG flowers to near silhoettes
select color range: highlights (basically just the sky)
levels layer to bring the sky to black, which also created the halos around the BG flowers.
composite layer
select Lightness channel
USM
is this a normal processing routine for you? I really am kinda in the dark about about the processing and am always curious as to how we all do it differently....
Darren, no I usually don't put this much effort into processing unless I'm doing a blend, or I'm just in the mood to play around with PS. Sometimes I'll read about a new technique and I'll try it out, but most of the time I'm just as happy with the results from simpler techniques.
I try to use LAB color when I can, and probably 80% of my images have one or two adjustment layers, and a composite layer for sharpening.