All Forum Comments
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on wanted nd filter at 21/07/2013 - 17:50
In number 2 the hoverfly really comes to life and has a lot of impact. Having said that, is the image slightly oversharpened? Could be my work monitor but looks like a bit of halo-ing around the leg (for example).
3 is the more natural looking image for me. Depends on your intention though.
Both of them are great though. Very impressive skills on show.
3 is the more natural looking image for me. Depends on your intention though.
Both of them are great though. Very impressive skills on show.
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Way To Much Time On My Hands! at 16/07/2013 - 15:01
Photos have turned up (very quick) and from a quick look at work I am very impressed. The auto correct seems to be fine.
If no-one else has experioence of their fine art papers I will maybe try some out for my next order to see how it looks.
If no-one else has experioence of their fine art papers I will maybe try some out for my next order to see how it looks.
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Printing: DS Colour Labs at 02/07/2013 - 16:29
Hi everyone
Looking for a bit of advice on using DS Colour Labs (who seem to come highly recommended). We are going to put a few images on our walls and so I have ordered a couple of test prints from them. They are cheap enough that the postage is about the same cost as the 6 prints (of varying sizes) I have ordered.
However, having been through the order process I was hoping to get some advice from those who are a bit more experienced than me.
My main question is whether to let them do their image optimisation or not (they have that as an option when you are ordering). My monitor isn't properly calibrated but I have tried to eliminate any colour casts and prevent the monitor being overly bright. I don't have my own colour profile etc though. Is their optimisation going to produce really bright, contrasty, over-saturated images (like the horrible ones I have had from Truprint in the past)? I would guess not but I am not sure if the good results people mention are due to them going the extra mile and calibrating images before they send them.
My second question is what paper to use. I have gone with the Lustre paper as this is generally the finish I prefer. I don't really have any images that would benefit from the extra punch of gloss. The other option is their fine art print papers. Would I be better using these for the final larger prints? There is quite a price difference (£1-£10 for a 16x10) but the prints are still very reasonable. If so, what paper would people suggest for:
- Wildlife
- Landscapes
- Black and white (detailed fairly contrasty images)
Many thanks.
WG
Looking for a bit of advice on using DS Colour Labs (who seem to come highly recommended). We are going to put a few images on our walls and so I have ordered a couple of test prints from them. They are cheap enough that the postage is about the same cost as the 6 prints (of varying sizes) I have ordered.
However, having been through the order process I was hoping to get some advice from those who are a bit more experienced than me.
My main question is whether to let them do their image optimisation or not (they have that as an option when you are ordering). My monitor isn't properly calibrated but I have tried to eliminate any colour casts and prevent the monitor being overly bright. I don't have my own colour profile etc though. Is their optimisation going to produce really bright, contrasty, over-saturated images (like the horrible ones I have had from Truprint in the past)? I would guess not but I am not sure if the good results people mention are due to them going the extra mile and calibrating images before they send them.
My second question is what paper to use. I have gone with the Lustre paper as this is generally the finish I prefer. I don't really have any images that would benefit from the extra punch of gloss. The other option is their fine art print papers. Would I be better using these for the final larger prints? There is quite a price difference (£1-£10 for a 16x10) but the prints are still very reasonable. If so, what paper would people suggest for:
- Wildlife
- Landscapes
- Black and white (detailed fairly contrasty images)
Many thanks.
WG
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Printing: DS Colour Labs at 01/07/2013 - 12:34
I haven't used Lees but do own 2 sets of Hitech. I have stacked 2 before and haven't noticed a particular colour cast.
As far as cost was concerned I don't use grads frequently enough to justify Lees. Hitech seem to provide me what I need at a much more reasonable price. You may have different needs though.
One thing to watch for though - one of the filters in the first set I had did not have a straight grad line (a bit wobbly at one point). I haven't heard of that before or since though so I put it down to a one-off. I doubt very much it would have affected the final image but I picked them up in the shop so exchanged that one straight away. They seemed very surprised to see the imperfection.
As far as cost was concerned I don't use grads frequently enough to justify Lees. Hitech seem to provide me what I need at a much more reasonable price. You may have different needs though.
One thing to watch for though - one of the filters in the first set I had did not have a straight grad line (a bit wobbly at one point). I haven't heard of that before or since though so I put it down to a one-off. I doubt very much it would have affected the final image but I picked them up in the shop so exchanged that one straight away. They seemed very surprised to see the imperfection.
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Lee vs Hi Tech ND Grads at 17/06/2013 - 14:56
McGregNi wrote:
I have been wondering if the characteristics of images that people commonly identify as 'natural' is in fact just those characteristics caused by DR limitations that we have all known and accepted as normal for so many years - newer techniques like HDR and other processing controls just contradict these ingrained memories, and whether or not they are more 'realistic', they are interpreted as unnatural. (By realistic I mean a try reproduction of all that the eye could detect as scanning around the scene)
Interesting. I have thought about this before - what dynamic range we can actually "see". If you look at a scene you are often able to discern more detail in shadows or highlights than the camera can reproduce. I have been wondering if the characteristics of images that people commonly identify as 'natural' is in fact just those characteristics caused by DR limitations that we have all known and accepted as normal for so many years - newer techniques like HDR and other processing controls just contradict these ingrained memories, and whether or not they are more 'realistic', they are interpreted as unnatural. (By realistic I mean a try reproduction of all that the eye could detect as scanning around the scene)
I had read somewhere that this is due to cognitive processing of the information. Your eye adjusts to the highlights and shadows and the brain interprets the information into one cohesive image. That's kind of like an HDR image. I'm not sure if that is proven fact or not (can't remember the source now).
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Cannizaro Park Wimbledon at 28/05/2013 - 17:18
Bit of a delay in me posting but the converter turned up on Saturday. As described - in perfect condition. Thanks for the rapid posting Carmagw.
WG
WG
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on FS Sigma 2x T/C at 08/04/2013 - 18:10
Snap - I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. I have been looking for something similar as well. I'd love to know how compact it is for a set of Ltds. Tempted to buy one anyway.
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on WTB Case/Bag for 'Limited' lenses at 04/04/2013 - 15:52
I find the ice cracks in the foreground very interesting but I'm not sure about the background setting. Maybe the mountain doesn't stand out from the sky enough. Is the contrast a bit high?
To me the hills between the mountain and the foreground are what jumps out and therefore you maybe lose a bit of the depth.
Having said that I am nitpicking and like the picture.
To me the hills between the mountain and the foreground are what jumps out and therefore you maybe lose a bit of the depth.
Having said that I am nitpicking and like the picture.
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Snow-capped Snowdon mon conversion at 18/01/2013 - 14:30
Interesting - a new Limited lens case has been released in the US
link
A shame I can't find it in the UK as I've been after one of the originals for ages.
Hopefully it will get a UK release (and soon) so I can spend my Christmas money
link
A shame I can't find it in the UK as I've been after one of the originals for ages.
Hopefully it will get a UK release (and soon) so I can spend my Christmas money
Comment by WobblyGoblin posted on Limited case mkII at 27/12/2012 - 14:24
Depending on what you are after, shouldn't be too expensive to buy new. If you just want a screw in filter for the kit lens then something like:
link
would probably do you. If you want a square lens filter system (that can be used on more than one lens) the cost is higher and there are more choices.
Consider that slower shutter speeds means a tripod (or convenient rock).