Read more..
Visit Camera Enthusiast!
Just a few days ago, we announced that James Ables's photo "Reflecting the Future" was the winner of our ofiicial June "Shadows" photo contest. Today, the author would like to tell us a little bit about how this photo was shot and processed.
Equipment & Settings Used
- Pentax K-r
(Hand-Held) - Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM
- Shutter speed: 1/640s
- Aperture: F8
- ISO: 200
- Shooting mode: Av
- File format: RAW
Post-Processing
"I always shoot in raw with Adobe 1998 color space. I processed in Lightroom 3. First I adjusted the White Balance then pulled in highlights with recovery and negative exposure. Next I lightened the shadows with Fill-light slider. I balanced color saturation with each individual color and then pushed up vibrance a bit and some brightness. Lastly, I sharpen according to which ISO I'm shooting at then reduce noise and balance them till I'm satisfied. My interest in the shot was the sun rising and shining its light, creating long shadows and bouncing its light off of the glass doors. I love how the light cuts through its own shadows. A very interesting picture."
Here is the original photo:
And now, the final result:
For another shot at B&H gift cards and other prizes, don't forget to enter in our July "Motion" photo contest, which closes at the end of the month!
Maybe it's just me, but these do not appear to be the same photo. They appear to be taken very close together, time wise, but if you look at the reflections off the door on the left, in the edited photo reflections exist which did not exist before and the ones which existed before are gone. The sun also seems to be higher in the second photo. It's hard to tell in the first photo because it's blown out, but it appears to be sitting lower in the first picture. The door reflections are a dead give away though. They're coming almost straight down in the original and instead moving significantly to the right in the edited one. The next door back also shows discrepancies in the light reflection.
Congrats on the win, Jim! You know I've always loved this shot! Just joined the Forum and saw your shot!
Looks like Asbury Park Convention Center. Nice picture
Very nice image. Impressive how much detail you pulled from the raw file. Looks like fine photography to me.
Raw is raw. Yes you are right. I don't like to limit myself to srgb when editing, only when printing on certain printers. Everything I learned was from either the internet, running my own Costco 1 Hour Photo lab or picking up a camera. I only had a camera for a year when I shot this. Its my award winning newbie shot that won 2 contests so far.
The first sentence ("I always shoot in raw with Adobe 1998 color space.") does not make sense. RAW files do not have a colour space. Very nice image, though! :)
I like the graphics in this photo, really nice. I wonder if a proper B&W conversion would be even more powerful??
Good picture. Nice to know it wasn't HDR. Thanks for illustrating your workflow.
Maybe another way to look at it is "photography with computer post-processing" vs. "photography with darkroom post-processing"??
I like to be creative. I like my pictures bold and vibrant. Thats why I shoot in RAW. So I have full control. Thats me. I love black and white as well. I shoot all kinds of photography. I started with a Kx. Check out my website. jim abels dot com
Initially I thought I used the kit lens but I was wrong. It was the Sigma 8-16mm shot at 16mm not 18mm. I didn't have that lens very long and the photo was from 2 years ago. I realized this when I went looking for the original. LR3 and ACR it doesn't show me proper Exif info with this lens. Brand and focal length are missing on certain shots. Other shots in the same location show 16mm. Adam updated the article with correct lens. I probably need to update my software. What software/version are you using?
Overprocessing vs. photography. Which one is this in your opinion?
Why does it say you used the 18-55 kit lens in the article, but the EXIF on the picture says you used the Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6?
Wow! Impressed with the processing and the information recovered from both the very dark and very light parts of the image. Particularly the colour put back into the sky. Well done.
Congrats on the win. Very nice example of what original RAW looks like compared to post processing. The building frames nicely and the light/shadow keeps the eyes moving around within the picture. If you had a tripod, you could have gotten a little more starburst out of the sun (f/16).
I like the original more!