[todd]

Thanks Glenn for hosting the last round.

Don't think we've done an IR filtered shot in this challenge before, so thought we could try it.. If we don't get enough interest, or you think I should ditch/switch it, please let me know... This one was done with a cheapo 720nm filter screwed on... Aside from the conversion, seems like there are plenty of additional challenges/options with the image. I never processed this one, so hoping you decide to give it a go and looking forward to your entries! Do whatever you want as many times as you want. Have fun!

Contest ends Tuesday June 26th, whenever I can get to it, probably late afternoon California time.

In case IR processing is totally new to you, I offer a googled article: How to Process Infrared Photographs - Photography Life

Download: ppchallenge262



******************************
A note to the winner: Please copy and post this info into the next challenge.

The mediafire website is: mediafire.com
The login name is: ppchallenge@tmphillips.com
The password is: postprocessing
******************************

---

Last edited by todd; 06-19-2018 at 03:35 PM. Reason: added contest end date

[LensBeginner]

Here is my interpretation:
Best regards.

[noelcmn]

I found the lost city of Atlantis

[JHfwp]

Great photo, Todd.

---

Last edited by JHfwp; 07-18-2018 at 10:14 PM.

[todd]

Nice entries so far. This isn't getting much attention so going to close it Monday morning and announce winner. Would close it tomorrow but won't have time.

Edit: Actually might have time tomorrow, Sunday evening California time to close it and pass the baton, so will if I can. So get your entries in!

[noelcmn]

One more

[johnhilvert]

Great challenging shot to process. This is my rough attempt which I learned a lot from, anyway.

[D1N0]

I wasn't getting anywhere with the tutorial so I just fiddled with it:

[todd]

LensBeginner - nice work! really like the tones
Noel - enjoyed all three of your entries. creative touches in each and like your third entry best thanks to the straightening
ansel - gave the d&b tool a great workout here!
JHfwp - nicely done
johnhilvert - thanks for giving it a go and glad you got something out of it. you definitely came up with something unique!
D1N0 - glad you broke out the fiddle for this one! you can plaY! really like the gritty finish on this one and great crop.

Thanks all for playing! Enjoyed all your entries. I was holding a secret judging card for this one, that being a weighted value for distortion correction, because the distortion really bugs me on this shot. I gave a very vague clue saying at the top that there are other challenges with the shot, aside from the IR conversion. So was hoping someone would take on the challenge of correcting the angles and Noel was the one who did that best with his third entry, thus making him the winner of this round.

Congrats Noel!

One more

[noelcmn]

Oh No! More stress!n I'll have a look through the archives and see what I can come up with.

[LensBeginner]

A well-deserved win indeed.

On the subject of verticals, I personally don't like correcting them too much, and I have a threshold (a number on the slider) I try not to cross.
That's because doing that in post is something "fake", that can't replicate the real thing, unlike white balance.
I'll try to explain (although you probably don't need any explanation): let's say we shoot a cube slightly from above: the verticals will be divaricated at the top, and we will see a bit from the top of the cube. If we correct the verticals, we still see the top of the cube, and we would not see it if the shot was taken level in the first place.

So, as far as I'm concerned, I do a slight correction, but rarely a full correction - unless distortion is minor, which wasn't the case here.
YMMV, IMHO, my 0.01$

[D1N0]

Congrats noelcm and thanks Todd for the challenging pic.

[todd]

h No! More stress!n I'll have a look through the archives and see what I can come up with.

You sure? I can pick the runner up if needed.

can't replicate the real thing,

I hear and appreciate that. It, like just about everything photography related afaict is such a subjective personal mix of artistic and technical preference and skill matter...

[LensBeginner]

*snip*

I hear and appreciate that. It, like just about everything photography related afaict is such a subjective personal mix of artistic and technical preference and skill matter...

Of course it is, I was just explaining my personal point of view on the matter, which is well-ingrained in my mind since it was a shocker to me when I first thought about that...

[todd]

Of course it is, I was just explaining my personal point of view on the matter, which is well-ingrained in my mind since it was a shocker to me when I first thought about that...

Yes, and your explanation was effective and influential. Personally, I usually lean on the artistic side. Sometimes I just want things as straight as possible, like in this shot, and I can't well explain why. It just looks right and more balanced to me (though this is a tough one because of the choices to be made over what gets cut and how, to the point that I'd probably go through some extra trickery to preserve/add back the edges). Other times I am inclined to keep it less unreal as you are suggesting.

Edit: I should add that looking back at your version, I really like what you did with corrections in light of what you've shared. Makes sense and works. Did you do any barrel distortion correction? Thinking maybe a bit of that to get the center vertical lines straighter (edge building line above aligning with brick line below) would persuade me to prefer it over all the aggressive straightening that I was imagining. It's minor but is part of what bugs me with the 'uncorrected' image.

p.s. I am sure my preference has also been influenced by my usage of the Laowa 12mm which has very low distortion. The distortion/curvature of the FA20 didn't get as much of my attention prior to that.. (Though edges still get very whacky at times with the Laowa haha)