RC & Photography
#78
My Feedback: (15)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: La Vergne,
TN
Posts: 3,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RC & Photography
sfs,
May I toy around with a couple, see if I can clean em up a bit, and offer up a comparison?
Certainly don't want to muck about with someone else's work without their permission!
#80
My Feedback: (15)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: La Vergne,
TN
Posts: 3,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RC & Photography
First, let me say again that at least for ME, personally, your stuff is some of my favorite in this thread, sfsjkid. Certainly that's not a "shot" at anyone else's work...we've discussed before how subjective all this is...but your stuff captures the "soul" or airplanes for me. There's some great stuff in this thread, but I'd be more likely to hang your work in my shop than even my own in m any cases. *heh*
Having said all that, here's a couple of my favorites of yours. i've posted the 'originals" (original in the sense of what you put in this thread...I realize those are many times compressed/resized/uploaded) and then my 'cleanups" of them for comparison.
Couple of comments about each:
The P-47 shot is ABSOLUTELY the result of the JPEG format, and image manipulation, and NOT the original shot. It still retains the EXIF info to show that it was shot at 200 ISO, 300 DPI, F9.5, 1/750th. I can't IMMAGINE those settings introducing speckle/grain, so it HAS to be the product of later formatting/resizing/etc.
The Yak image doesn't have any EXIF, so we can only make guesses here, but given the similarity in the speckling, along with your comments about where the images came from, etc, I'm going to guess it's much the same thing.
There was a LITTLE digicam noise in both...but that's almost certainly a function of the camera storing the image as a JPG on the fly. There's not a camera in the world that I know of that won't do that with JPGs. Some are better than others in RAW mode (personally, I'm a fan of Canon's software here, but again, deeply personal)
In any event, here's all 4 images, For each pair, the processed one is first, then the "original" Not really "proving" anything, just an interesting exercise in who sees what how.
Having said all that, here's a couple of my favorites of yours. i've posted the 'originals" (original in the sense of what you put in this thread...I realize those are many times compressed/resized/uploaded) and then my 'cleanups" of them for comparison.
Couple of comments about each:
The P-47 shot is ABSOLUTELY the result of the JPEG format, and image manipulation, and NOT the original shot. It still retains the EXIF info to show that it was shot at 200 ISO, 300 DPI, F9.5, 1/750th. I can't IMMAGINE those settings introducing speckle/grain, so it HAS to be the product of later formatting/resizing/etc.
The Yak image doesn't have any EXIF, so we can only make guesses here, but given the similarity in the speckling, along with your comments about where the images came from, etc, I'm going to guess it's much the same thing.
There was a LITTLE digicam noise in both...but that's almost certainly a function of the camera storing the image as a JPG on the fly. There's not a camera in the world that I know of that won't do that with JPGs. Some are better than others in RAW mode (personally, I'm a fan of Canon's software here, but again, deeply personal)
In any event, here's all 4 images, For each pair, the processed one is first, then the "original" Not really "proving" anything, just an interesting exercise in who sees what how.
#82
My Feedback: (15)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: La Vergne,
TN
Posts: 3,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RC & Photography
Oh, absolutely. Nothing fancy about it.
Most photo editing programs (I use a fairly old version of PaintShop Pro and it has it) will even have quick "one click" enhancement features. Look for something like "despeckle" or "remove noise" for example. Most of what I did there was use the "JPEG Artifact Removal", "Digital Camera Noise Removal" and "Despeckle" tools in Paint Shop Pro Version 9.
For finer control, you can look at using a "soften" brush or tool. This can be especially handy for "flat" surfaces like skin, or the sky in the yak picture, etc.
The real "trick", honestly, is learning to find those 2-3 places where a particular effect or tool makes a HUGE difference. That's really nothing more than looking at a few zillion photos. *heh* And, honestly, it too is an extremely personal judgement.
For one example....I did a bit of extra touchup work with a "smudge" tool as well on the flash of light off the right wing of the P47. Take a look at the original and "redone" photos and you can probably see it now that you know what to look for.
It's one of those spots that, for me at least, your eye is drawn to to give the image some depth and character...and any noise there is a pretty big distraction. Hence why it got the extra attention.
There's obviously tons more methods, ideas, and tricks...the folks who do this sort of thing for a living would laugh at my feeble attempts. *lol*
But those fairly simple tools are more than enough to achieve the sorts of results I did there, and will only take you a minute or so per picture once you find the ones that work best for you.
#83
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
RE: RC & Photography
Along those lines, most of you may be familiar with GIF and JPG files, but you might want to consider doing what I do (I am a graphic artist by trade)
I always save a copy of EVERY image in TIF format (Tagged Image File). Unlike GIF or JPG, a TIF file does not lose or change any of the original picture data.
Every time you open and re-save a JPG, it gets re-compressed - sort of like making a Xerox copy of a Xerox copy. The more you do it, the worse it gets.
TIF files will be much larger (file size) than the others, but they CAN be made a lot smaller by turning on the LZW compression. Without going into great detail, just accept the fact that this is a type of compression that has no data loss.
So now, any time you want to rework an image, you open the original TIF, rework it, re-save it as a TIF, and then save a JPG copy for internet use.
PS, if you ever want to put your images on a disk and take them somewhere to have them printed, use the TIF version.
I always save a copy of EVERY image in TIF format (Tagged Image File). Unlike GIF or JPG, a TIF file does not lose or change any of the original picture data.
Every time you open and re-save a JPG, it gets re-compressed - sort of like making a Xerox copy of a Xerox copy. The more you do it, the worse it gets.
TIF files will be much larger (file size) than the others, but they CAN be made a lot smaller by turning on the LZW compression. Without going into great detail, just accept the fact that this is a type of compression that has no data loss.
So now, any time you want to rework an image, you open the original TIF, rework it, re-save it as a TIF, and then save a JPG copy for internet use.
PS, if you ever want to put your images on a disk and take them somewhere to have them printed, use the TIF version.
#85
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
RE: RC & Photography
BTW, I don't know if other imaging programs have this feature, but if you use Photoshop, there is a pallet called "Actions". Learn how to use it.
You can make an Action so that with one click of a button, you can save one copy as a TIF to one folder and another copy as a JPG to another folder (or the same folder for that matter)
For my product reviews, I have an Action that saves the finished image as a TIF, saves a full-size copy as a JPG, and then it resizes the image to thumbnail size, adds a drop shadow (about 5 steps in itself) and saves it to the thumbnail folder. All with a single click.
A VERY useful tool!
You can make an Action so that with one click of a button, you can save one copy as a TIF to one folder and another copy as a JPG to another folder (or the same folder for that matter)
For my product reviews, I have an Action that saves the finished image as a TIF, saves a full-size copy as a JPG, and then it resizes the image to thumbnail size, adds a drop shadow (about 5 steps in itself) and saves it to the thumbnail folder. All with a single click.
A VERY useful tool!
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
#90
RE: RC & Photography
I did that and I have posted photos before, but for some reason it shows them uploading ok, but not showing on my post. I tried editing my post and trying it again, but no go.
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
#96
Banned
RE: RC & Photography
Some nice shots there.
When I first started at my club(s) I spent far more time taking pictures than flying. That may have been because my picture taking abilities far exceeded my flying ability.
I produced a ton of 4 x 6 pix ( for about 20 cents each at Wal-mart) and posted them on the club bulletin boards. The guys seemed to like having their planes featured.
One small hint on the shot with the orange fence in the way. You can press your lens right up against plastic and metal fences and get a full (( or nearly full) frame shot. I've shot lots of baseball games with my lens squeezed tight to the chain-link fence. It is a good reason to use a filter of some kind over your expensive lens, of course.
I shoot a Sony A350 with a Sony 28-250 lens. Seems to cover all my needs. No lens to change..hardly ever.
The P-47 ( six foot wing-span) shot shown below was published in a local free paper.
Microsoft Office 2010
Microsoft Office 2007
When I first started at my club(s) I spent far more time taking pictures than flying. That may have been because my picture taking abilities far exceeded my flying ability.
I produced a ton of 4 x 6 pix ( for about 20 cents each at Wal-mart) and posted them on the club bulletin boards. The guys seemed to like having their planes featured.
One small hint on the shot with the orange fence in the way. You can press your lens right up against plastic and metal fences and get a full (( or nearly full) frame shot. I've shot lots of baseball games with my lens squeezed tight to the chain-link fence. It is a good reason to use a filter of some kind over your expensive lens, of course.
I shoot a Sony A350 with a Sony 28-250 lens. Seems to cover all my needs. No lens to change..hardly ever.
The P-47 ( six foot wing-span) shot shown below was published in a local free paper.
Microsoft Office 2010
Microsoft Office 2007
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
#98
Senior Member
Late to this party too, I see..
Guys - I have a facebook page called Wilbur Tipstall for RC stuff. Please feel free to post your photos and stories there. I need some company
Guys - I have a facebook page called Wilbur Tipstall for RC stuff. Please feel free to post your photos and stories there. I need some company
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)
#99
My Feedback: (9)
I just found this thread and it seams to have gone cold. here are links to some of my photos, hope it warms it back up
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-warbirds-warplanes-200/11130367-rally-giants-chenango-bridge.html
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-warbirds-warplanes-200/10700251-chenango-bridge-fly-2011-a.html
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-warbirds-warplanes-200/9128297-warbirds-over-chenango-bridge-binghamton-ny.html
Joe
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-warbirds-warplanes-200/11130367-rally-giants-chenango-bridge.html
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-warbirds-warplanes-200/10700251-chenango-bridge-fly-2011-a.html
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-warbirds-warplanes-200/9128297-warbirds-over-chenango-bridge-binghamton-ny.html
Joe
The following users liked this post:
jnayjaso (04-05-2020)