Lens Test

mhsp · 01-05-2016, 08:16 PM - **1 Like**

Now for some fun - Here are three of my test photos enhanced just a little and it is not an HDR photo enhancing. The contrast is so good on the Pentax 20-40mm Lens that I do not need to do HDR enhancing.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

Wild Mark · 01-05-2016, 11:12 PM

Very nice images. The enhancement was needed but I think you could wind it back just a tad. Perhaps reduce the saturation a little? Otherwise awesome - I like #1 - can you try a slight crop and take off a little of the left side leaving the stranded tree in the middle of the image?

**BigMackCam** · 01-06-2016, 01:15 AM

I agree - a small reduction in saturation or vibrance (primarily in the green) and you're there. They look very good indeed.

EDIT: I hope you don't mind, but I downloaded your original of #1 and did some quick adjustments in Lightroom: Whites (-5), Clarity (+12), Vibrance (+10), Tone Curve / Shadows (-5), Luminance (Yellow: -31, Green: -44, Blue: -11), Rotate (+1.6 to the right). Then a slight Crop to the left and bottom, and Spot Removal to get rid of the piece of white litter and what looked like a birds nest in one of the trees...

EDIT 2: In hindsight, I might have overdone the rotation a little... +1.1 looks a bit better, but I won't post it again

This, as you say, is all fun. You can go mad tweaking an image!

**BigMackCam** · 01-06-2016, 01:55 AM

No, I couldn't resist

Here's one more quick edit. Settings as above, but I tweaked Luminance and Saturation of Blue to -27 and +11 respectively, Rotate +1.1, then cropped to a different aspect. Just an interpretation though, it's no better than your original - merely a different take on it

In fact, what it gains by emphasising the length of the bridge, it loses by chopping away some of the wonderful cloud reflections in the water...

Attached Images

Last edited by BigMackCam; 01-06-2016 at 02:00 AM.

mhsp · 01-06-2016, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

I agree - a small reduction in saturation or vibrance (primarily in the green) and you're there. They look very good indeed.

EDIT: I hope you don't mind, but I downloaded your original of #1 and did some quick adjustments in Lightroom: Whites (-5), Clarity (+12), Vibrance (+10), Tone Curve / Shadows (-5), Luminance (Yellow: -31, Green: -44, Blue: -11), Rotate (+1.6 to the right). Then a slight Crop to the left and bottom, and Spot Removal to get rid of the piece of white litter and what looked like a birds nest in one of the trees...

EDIT 2: In hindsight, I might have overdone the rotation a little... +1.1 looks a bit better, but I won't post it again

This, as you say, is all fun. You can go mad tweaking an image!

Cool!

---------- Post added 01-06-16 at 08:47 AM ----------

Originally posted by BigMackCam

No, I couldn't resist

Here's one more quick edit. Settings as above, but I tweaked Luminance and Saturation of Blue to -27 and +11 respectively, Rotate +1.1, then cropped to a different aspect. Just an interpretation though, it's no better than your original - merely a different take on it

In fact, what it gains by emphasising the length of the bridge, it loses by chopping away some of the wonderful cloud reflections in the water...

Like it!

normhead · 01-06-2016, 08:07 AM

Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision.

I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that?

**BigMackCam** · 01-06-2016, 08:14 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision.

I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that?

@mhsp - I agree with Norm, and I certainly my comments didn't come across as criticism - they weren't intended that way. As I mentioned in my last post, my edit was just a personal interpretation & preference based on your original image; not a suggestion that my version is better in any way

mhsp · 01-06-2016, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision.

I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that?

I will always be true to what looks good to me and at the same time consider what others say. Sometimes what is said opens a door for me and if it doesn't I am glad to have had the opportunity to consider another view. Thanks normhead

---------- Post added 01-06-16 at 02:36 PM ----------

Originally posted by BigMackCam

@mhsp - I agree with Norm, and I certainly my comments didn't come across as criticism - they weren't intended that way. As I mentioned in my last post, my edit was just a personal interpretation & preference based on your original image; not a suggestion that my version is better in any way

No worry BigMackCam, I like to consider the views and ideas of others as I compare them to my own and I always learn something even if it is to continue as I have been or change, either way it is a win, win situation.

Wild Mark · 01-06-2016, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision.

I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that?

Sorry norm I'm a little puzzled by your comments. I think people have only provide their opinions here on the images. Nothing else. The OP can take or leave those opinions. 'Criticisms' have been constructive I would have thought and the OP has taken it that way. Well done mishap!

**BigMackCam** · 01-06-2016, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by Wild Mark

Well done mishap!

Ha ha. I love it

Wild Mark · 01-06-2016, 01:55 PM

yeah - shocker.

DOH - love the auto correct. I admit defeat - the computer is better than me!

Sorry mhsp - you might get a bit of this.

mhsp · 01-06-2016, 07:56 PM

Well I hope everyone will understand why I am moving on from this thread. Thanks again for the help, I appreciate the effort to contribute to my better understand of this lens and camera and I hope everyone has a good new year.

01-06-2016, 01:15 AM	#33
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	I agree - a small reduction in saturation or vibrance (primarily in the green) and you're there. They look very good indeed. EDIT: I hope you don't mind, but I downloaded your original of #1 and did some quick adjustments in Lightroom: Whites (-5), Clarity (+12), Vibrance (+10), Tone Curve / Shadows (-5), Luminance (Yellow: -31, Green: -44, Blue: -11), Rotate (+1.6 to the right). Then a slight Crop to the left and bottom, and Spot Removal to get rid of the piece of white litter and what looked like a birds nest in one of the trees... EDIT 2: In hindsight, I might have overdone the rotation a little... +1.1 looks a bit better, but I won't post it again This, as you say, is all fun. You can go mad tweaking an image! Attached Images Last edited by BigMackCam; 01-06-2016 at 01:48 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How to test DA300 mm without other 300mm lens?	pukipuki	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	01-30-2016 03:14 AM
Landscape Test Photo New Lens	Janse	Post Your Photos!	8	07-03-2015 05:48 PM
B&H: How to Test Your Lens	interested_observer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	02-14-2015 11:36 AM
Macro New 100mm Macro Lens Test	Susinok	Post Your Photos!	2	04-11-2014 06:15 PM
lens test pic..	trog100	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	12-26-2006 04:33 PM

01-05-2016, 11:12 PM	#32
Wild Mark Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Newcastle Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,954	Very nice images. The enhancement was needed but I think you could wind it back just a tad. Perhaps reduce the saturation a little? Otherwise awesome - I like #1 - can you try a slight crop and take off a little of the left side leaving the stranded tree in the middle of the image?

01-06-2016, 01:55 AM	#34
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	No, I couldn't resist Here's one more quick edit. Settings as above, but I tweaked Luminance and Saturation of Blue to -27 and +11 respectively, Rotate +1.1, then cropped to a different aspect. Just an interpretation though, it's no better than your original - merely a different take on it In fact, what it gains by emphasising the length of the bridge, it loses by chopping away some of the wonderful cloud reflections in the water... Attached Images Last edited by BigMackCam; 01-06-2016 at 02:00 AM.

01-06-2016, 07:46 AM	#35
mhsp Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 58 Original Poster	Originally posted by BigMackCam I agree - a small reduction in saturation or vibrance (primarily in the green) and you're there. They look very good indeed. EDIT: I hope you don't mind, but I downloaded your original of #1 and did some quick adjustments in Lightroom: Whites (-5), Clarity (+12), Vibrance (+10), Tone Curve / Shadows (-5), Luminance (Yellow: -31, Green: -44, Blue: -11), Rotate (+1.6 to the right). Then a slight Crop to the left and bottom, and Spot Removal to get rid of the piece of white litter and what looked like a birds nest in one of the trees... EDIT 2: In hindsight, I might have overdone the rotation a little... +1.1 looks a bit better, but I won't post it again This, as you say, is all fun. You can go mad tweaking an image! Cool! ---------- Post added 01-06-16 at 08:47 AM ---------- Originally posted by BigMackCam No, I couldn't resist Here's one more quick edit. Settings as above, but I tweaked Luminance and Saturation of Blue to -27 and +11 respectively, Rotate +1.1, then cropped to a different aspect. Just an interpretation though, it's no better than your original - merely a different take on it In fact, what it gains by emphasising the length of the bridge, it loses by chopping away some of the wonderful cloud reflections in the water... Like it!

01-06-2016, 08:07 AM	#36
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision. I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that?

01-06-2016, 08:14 AM	#37
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	Originally posted by normhead Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision. I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that? @mhsp - I agree with Norm, and I certainly my comments didn't come across as criticism - they weren't intended that way. As I mentioned in my last post, my edit was just a personal interpretation & preference based on your original image; not a suggestion that my version is better in any way

01-06-2016, 01:34 PM	#38
mhsp Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 58 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision. I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that? I will always be true to what looks good to me and at the same time consider what others say. Sometimes what is said opens a door for me and if it doesn't I am glad to have had the opportunity to consider another view. Thanks normhead ---------- Post added 01-06-16 at 02:36 PM ---------- Originally posted by BigMackCam @mhsp - I agree with Norm, and I certainly my comments didn't come across as criticism - they weren't intended that way. As I mentioned in my last post, my edit was just a personal interpretation & preference based on your original image; not a suggestion that my version is better in any way No worry BigMackCam, I like to consider the views and ideas of others as I compare them to my own and I always learn something even if it is to continue as I have been or change, either way it is a win, win situation.

01-06-2016, 01:49 PM	#39
Wild Mark Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Newcastle Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,954	Originally posted by normhead Keep in mind when people criticize you use of colour and saturation, that there are people who make real good money selling those types of images. The fact that a few folks here don't appreciate that style doesn't make it less desirable. So even if you do decide to scale things back a bit, work to keep detail, but don't bail on your vision. I'm always amused by those claiming this or that is overdone or whatever. My advice to those making that type of comment, is "do a gallery tour sometime, see what people are getting for those images." I'm kind of jealous of those that work to the "overdone " standard. There are a lot of consumers who appreciate their work. A lot of them own their own galleries...what's not to like about that? Sorry norm I'm a little puzzled by your comments. I think people have only provide their opinions here on the images. Nothing else. The OP can take or leave those opinions. 'Criticisms' have been constructive I would have thought and the OP has taken it that way. Well done mishap!

01-06-2016, 01:53 PM	#40
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	Originally posted by Wild Mark Well done mishap! Ha ha. I love it

01-06-2016, 01:55 PM	#41
Wild Mark Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Newcastle Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,954	yeah - shocker. DOH - love the auto correct. I admit defeat - the computer is better than me! Sorry mhsp - you might get a bit of this.

01-06-2016, 07:56 PM	#42
mhsp Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 58 Original Poster	Well I hope everyone will understand why I am moving on from this thread. Thanks again for the help, I appreciate the effort to contribute to my better understand of this lens and camera and I hope everyone has a good new year.