May 1, 2016, 14:26
(This post was last modified: May 1, 2016, 14:28 by Freeman.)
It was for me a bit of journey. You will know that NIK software is now freely downloadable. But a previous trial version I used would not allow the new free version to download. After seeking help from Ed, I succeeded and Ed has encouraged me to float a few examples. Here's one for starters taken in Stratford tube and DLR station near the Olympic Stadium - you may know it?). Hopefully I shall improve (an initial example posted in the competition thread as it was a highly blue sundown image).
Please share any thoughts or experience on using NIK software.
I am sorry, but I am not a great lover of heavily processed HDR images.
Give it a try perhaps? The NIK editing software is widely recommended, and includes an array of facilities including sharpening, noise reduction and conversion to mono. The use of HDR facility is not a requirement of course.
All the best
Jeff, i am with John on this, very much.
Your "other" image, cottage blue, is much better, more "Subtle", going in the right direction, to me.
Again, to me, most HDR pics I see, are Digital Images, not Pics. Simplistically, If a pic I see cannot seen with the naked eye, at some time, then it becomes a Digital Image. Open to criticism!!
You seem to have settled into NIK quickly, I have looked, will keep it, was free, but will stick with P/S for all I do anyway.
Keep at it, there is a big difference on your pics since you joined. Regards. Ed.
May 2, 2016, 08:10
(This post was last modified: May 2, 2016, 08:13 by MrB.)
Graham, I tend to agree with you and John in preferring realism. This one feels quite different from what would usually be regarded as a photograph, and is more like a painting by a skilled artist.
There is a problem with misuse of terms. For example, HDR photography should simply mean applying techniques to fit the range of brightness of tones that human vision would normally perceive in the actual scene, into the final photographic image that we produce from the captured light, in order to make it look more realistic by revealing detail in shadows and highlights. In my view it has, unfortunately in many minds, come to mean producing images with the exaggerated and strange colours, saturation, and contrast, that often result from the more extreme use of those same techniques. HDR applied well should not be obvious.
May 2, 2016, 14:13
(This post was last modified: May 2, 2016, 14:15 by Freeman.)
Your illustration would do very well in a Worcestershire Camera Club competition. There are various categories of photograph which they recognise and provide specialist groups for, including creative, digital, and contemporary. I hope the forum can embrace the wider range?
Each to his own then?
My aim in attempting NIK editing is to broaden my scope and options a bit.
I tried something different today - here it is. This is a water rail, a secretive bird giving only brief glimpses generally speaking. I had about a second or two with this rail in view and it was gone. Maybe a little over sharpened?
Many thanks to Jocko and Ed for helpful comments - would welcome info from Jocko on which parts of NIK he uses most and how.
Super capture Jeff, not seeing the original, don't think you far out. Ed.
I do my conversion from raw using Lightroom 6.5.1. I have all the noise reduction and sharpening switched off in Lightroom and I have all sharpening switched off in camera.
My first edit in Nik is Dfine 2 Noise Reduction. I do all my Nik processing in TIFF, ProPhoto RGB, 16 bit and 300 resolution. I find that the default setting for Dfine is perfect for all bar noisy images. I then use Sharpener Pro 3: RAW Presharpener. I usually use the default setting, but sometimes I increase the Adaptive Sharpening to 55 or 60% and may also increase the Sharpen edges.
I use Viveza 2 if I have an area I want to either increase or decrease the Structure. I use Structure decrease to throw background that little bit out of focus.
I use Color Efex Pro 4 quite a bit for the Graduated ND filter. Great for slightly darkening the top of the sky (or sometimes the immediate foreground). I sometimes use the colour Grad filter for sky effects.
Silver Efex Pro 2 is great for creating Black and White conversions. Or for "old fashioned" looks and making images look like old faded images.
To finish off I use Sharpener Pro 3: Output Sharpener. I use this in two stages. I do any Creative Sharpening first, turning Output Sharpening off altogether. I then export that image as a 16 bit TIFF file. This is my default storage.
When I come to use the image, either for printing, for display, or for posting here, I first resize it for the use I intend it for, then, using Sharpener Pro 3: Output Sharpener, I sharpen it for the output medium (usually display). I then convert to JPEG, and use that image for the output.
Philip, I agree totally with what you have said. Jeff, that's a superb capture, never mind the sharpening.
I agree wholeheartedly Jocko - some things work for me and others don't. It merely depends on what I'm trying to achieve. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I just consider that part of the creative process whether in the camera or in post.
BTW my original comment was 'If not, photography is merely a recording medium ..
interestingly many famous photographers consider themselves artists first, who just happen to use a camera. David Bailey - definitely a creative artist in my book - once commented when asked about camera equipment he used commented if there were Polaroid paints [instant drying] he would have painted more [than using a camera]
Very creative, Philip. And a lovely shot.
Super Pic Philip, and, a pic, not a digital image. "Darkroom" techniques skillfully applied. A scene that could be observed by a passersby. Great. Ed.
Re. "Shrub and Bench" - thank you, John and Ed.
John, that is a good series to show your work-flow, together with a pleasing final result.
That is how I like to see my HDR images, Graham.