So What's the Camera Doing?


Gravelrash

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 18:34
Sorry for what may end up being a lengthy post but here goes...

Brother-in-law buys some studio lighting and asks me to go down and have a bash with my K-5II

I used him as Guineapig, background is just the magnolia wall.

I have never used a studio light set-up before but had an idea of what I wanted to produce

Camera was set to RAW+, with the jpg output I used the B+W in-camera setting, I was raised on monochrome so please don't bash it, just my thing.

To the point. The camera did a great job of creating the image I wanted the problem is I don't understand how/why, and that bugs me.

Let me explain with 3 pictures to illustrate.

The RAW output produces exactly the picture I took, warts and all...



The In-camera filter produced exactly what I wanted...


Please note that the camera's filter has significantly reduced the skin imperfections whilst simultaneously balancing the background, which was a result that I was hoping to get, along with the creation of a mono image.

If I take the RAW image and simply click the B+W option on my computer I get, a more expected, mono version of the RAW image, blemishes and all...



I think that it would be advantageous to have the ability to re-create the blemish improvement on a regular basis but if I don't understand what just happened I'm going to struggle.

If anybody is able to follow what I'm on about I would be interested to know what process or settings are going to affect this for future reference (apart from the obvious "just use the filter")so I could perhaps recreate the process in colour, if needs be.

I see some very flattering images of the ladies and I'm guessing they're not all Photoshopped to death?

If it helps it was a background flash used on the wall and a single flash to the right in a lightbox a little above head height, but you probably knew that.

We have some brilliant talent on the forum so was hoping for your insight.
Steve

Sometimes I'm serious and sometimes not, but I consider sarcasm an artform. Which is it today?
Last Edited by Gravelrash on 02/05/2014 - 18:37

McGregNi

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 19:19
The B & W camera processing options consist of two sections - the main 'B & W' preset (just like Landscape, Natural etc in colour) and the colour filter choices (like orange, red yellow). The preset options are just as it says on the tin ... preset settings of the custom image parameters, including contrast, sharpness, fine sharpness, high / low tone contrast etc. The mono choice has reduced those parameters affecting the image sharpness and contrast to produce the more smooth-toned look. You can fine tine the individual setting sliders more yourself, or also apply a colour filter ... these are usually used in outdoor shots to increase contrast and emphasise tonal differences (like red to boost sky depth).

I think this is basically 'what is happening'. Its just a preset JPEG processing going on. It seems to me to make sense to take fuller control of the effect yourself to fine tune it as well. If the camera is doing a good job for you of processing the images, thats great. Bear in mind you lose the advantage of 16bit processing immediately, something that you could retain if doing your own RAW conversions on a computer.

If you open your RAW in PDCU it should (in theory) be converted to B&W already, as you had that preset active on the camera - here you can look more easily at all the individual settings on the various panels and learn more about them, as well as experiment more easily with fine tunings. You also win this way by retaining 16bit editing, and can output a 16bit TIFF, retaining far more image data for better further editing if you need to.
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Last Edited by McGregNi on 02/05/2014 - 19:28

Helpful

Gravelrash

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 19:55
That makes sense now Nigel. I may have altered the preset in the past and forgotten.

Thank you.
Steve

Sometimes I'm serious and sometimes not, but I consider sarcasm an artform. Which is it today?

McGregNi

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 20:19
If you open the RAW in any other programme other than PDCU, then the camera preset has no effect - that is why your mono RAW conversion just looks like the colour with no colour! There has not been any extra processing in terms of sharpness and contrast.

The camera preset (well, whoever programmed it when it was designed) is assuming you want a more refined, softer 'arty' effect with B & W. Because PDCU reads all the camera metadata and has equivilent control sliders then it will reproduce the camera-created 'look' accurately, but also offer even more fine-tuning control.
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver

Smeggypants

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 21:32
Gravelrash wrote:

I see some very flattering images of the ladies and I'm guessing they're not all Photoshopped to death?

If you're referring to ladies in the media then yes they are all photoshopped to death. In fact way further than death.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

Smeggypants

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 21:33
This will give you some idea

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omBfg3UwkYM

of how photoshopped ladies are.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

Smeggypants

Link Posted 02/05/2014 - 21:36
Another one here


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17j5QzF3kqE


[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

Gravelrash

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 02:34
Eye opening videos Smeggy...

Nigel I must confess to having little to do with PDCU...guess I'll have to do some homework. I'm pretty neanderthal when it comes to most Post Processing but there's becoming less opportunity to escape it.

P.S. After your initial comments I returned to the in camera filtering and then remembered applying the orange filter to the mono setting a couple of months ago, hence the result. Palm slap to forehead.

Thank you for your input guys.
Steve

Sometimes I'm serious and sometimes not, but I consider sarcasm an artform. Which is it today?
Last Edited by Gravelrash on 03/05/2014 - 02:39

Smeggypants

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 06:27
Gravelrash wrote:
Eye opening videos Smeggy...

And literally. Bigger eyes are more attractive and thats why they enlarge them





Quote:
Nigel I must confess to having little to do with PDCU...guess I'll have to do some homework. I'm pretty neanderthal when it comes to most Post Processing but there's becoming less opportunity to escape it.

P.S. After your initial comments I returned to the in camera filtering and then remembered applying the orange filter to the mono setting a couple of months ago, hence the result. Palm slap to forehead.

Thank you for your input guys.

If you want to get into post pro then get into Lightroom
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

McGregNi

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 15:22
Smeggypants wrote:
... If you want to get into post pro then get into Lightroom

Yes, its quite popular I hear ... what is it that you like about it, that you think the OP would enjoy? Can it do black & white ?

I suppose it wouldn't recognise the filter settings from the camera that Steve had used, but I guess there are some other controls or buttons for it?
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Last Edited by McGregNi on 03/05/2014 - 15:24

Smeggypants

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 16:54
Yes of course LR can do black and white andcan control which colours via sliders can contribute to the B&W image.

but where LR excels is the local adjustment brushes with ability to assign pretty much every parameter to them.

For example if you wanted to improve someone's complexion you could run an adjustment brush with a negative value of clarity and get and instant skin smoothness.

Another brush could for example enhance the eyes with a bit of brightness sharpness, contrast and saturation


In the meantime have a laugh with this .....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-kSZsvBY-A




[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

McGregNi

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 19:09
I think its the lack of any selective control over adjustments which is the real limiting factor of 'in-camera' processing. Whatever software we use, I'd have thought you need here at least to be able to select the eyes so that any smoothing is only applied to the skin, and perhaps the hair as well. Then you might want to brighten or sharpen the eyes. In-camera JPEG processing cannot give this sort of essential fine control unfortunately.

Are you saying there above that you could assign 3 parameters to a single adjustment brush for simultaneous application? If so can you control the relative strength ('flow percent') of each if needed?
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Last Edited by McGregNi on 03/05/2014 - 19:09

ISO

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 19:19
Smeggy – the content of your links are actually frightening in their manipulation of reality. I used to play a part in the ‘Ad Game’ and have similar stories I could tell. Not about people, but Food. E.g. Take 1 – Soup Manufacturer launches new Soup. Clear glass marbles in bottom of soup bowl, so the chunky bits are kept at the top and the soup looks packed with ‘goodies’. Has to be shot cold, so cigarette smoke blown over the dish to make it look hot….Take 2 – Shooting Ice Cream under studio lights is a no no. Use coloured cement instead.
Maybe now readers may understand why I have an aversion to PP!!!!!

SteveLedger

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 19:37
ISO wrote:

Maybe now readers may understand why I have an aversion to PP!!!!!

Lucky you don't shoot film then, you'd never get see any of your photos

McGregNi

Link Posted 03/05/2014 - 19:38
There's PP and there's PP. There are a limited range of essential photo editing ( I like 'developing') tools and skills that I believe are absolutely indispensable now to us digital photographers. This is not just to produce masterpieces, but simply to bring out and realise the potential of what the camera has recorded for every shot. If we do not take advantage of these essential software tools, then I believe we are not getting the most out of our cameras.

None of this has got anything at all to do with 'photoshopping', compositing, 'manipulations' and all that.
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Last Edited by McGregNi on 03/05/2014 - 19:40
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.