[seventhdr]

Here's a few. Straight out of camera jpgs...













---------- Post added 01-06-19 at 09:08 PM ----------




All good, thanks for taking a look back. Your images look great, in what's a pretty tricky situation to get good results. Well done and thanks for sharing.

Great photos. Would love to know how you processed and added to these photos.

Great work.

Regards

Chris

[richandfleur]

Great photos. Would love to know how you processed and added to these photos.

Great work.

Regards

Chris

Short version:

Shoot on a tripod, clean scene and then kids on a step ladder.
In photoshop, overlay the kids on top of the clean scene and mask out the step ladder.
Potentially lift or rotate the kids, but probably ok if the ladder was positioned sensibly.
Download some lightning brushes, work out what colour the kids want their wands, and then pain on a different layer the brush.
Transform the lightning brush to fit the scene. Repeat for each colour.
Add additional brush shapes/colours for the collision type image, until it looks ok.
Finish in lightroom, add a heap of clarity to make it look gritty and some split toning to finish.

[NZ_Ross]

Short version:

Shoot on a tripod, clean scene and then kids on a step ladder.
In photoshop, overlay the kids on top of the clean scene and mask out the step ladder.
Potentially lift or rotate the kids, but probably ok if the ladder was positioned sensibly.
Download some lightning brushes, work out what colour the kids want their wands, and then pain on a different layer the brush.
Transform the lightning brush to fit the scene. Repeat for each colour.
Add additional brush shapes/colours for the collision type image, until it looks ok.
Finish in lightroom, add a heap of clarity to make it look gritty and some split toning to finish.

I think my lens pixey dust explanation is more plausible

[MarkJerling]

Short version:

Shoot on a tripod, clean scene and then kids on a step ladder.
In photoshop, overlay the kids on top of the clean scene and mask out the step ladder.
Potentially lift or rotate the kids, but probably ok if the ladder was positioned sensibly.
Download some lightning brushes, work out what colour the kids want their wands, and then pain on a different layer the brush.
Transform the lightning brush to fit the scene. Repeat for each colour.
Add additional brush shapes/colours for the collision type image, until it looks ok.
Finish in lightroom, add a heap of clarity to make it look gritty and some split toning to finish.

Here's a few. Straight out of camera jpgs...

You had me on the "straight out of camera jpgs.."
Clearly I'm too gullible!

[zkarj]

It's a different measuring system, it's looking at optical density rather than stops.

Have a look here;
Understanding Neutral Density Filter Names and Numbers

Yikes! I’ll stick to the stop numbers then. Thanks.

[microlight]

Hehe. Good job, Rich.

[Kiwizinho]

Here's a few. Straight out of camera jpgs...

Which reminds me, much as I love my Pentax DSLR, why a mirrorless might sometimes come in handy. How on earth are you supposed to focus on vampires, when your viewfinder depends on a mirror?
I'm seriously envious of all those Sony and Fujifilm users lurking around Wellington taking photos of Taika Waititi's mates.

[richandfleur]

Took some pictures at Whanganui Virginia Lake recently, and the DLSR is a right pain for any down low type shots. You have to switch to live view, or lie on the ground etc to see through the viewfinder.



I love the optical viewfinder, but there are times when I use the DSLR in 'mirrorless mode' that I wonder why I just don't have a mirrorless in the first place. Newer EVFs are supposed to be a lot better, and the tech will only continue to improve over time. Autofocus can be right across the frame too, so tracking AF in a mirrorless seems much better than what my K-3 can do. I guess just saying there are limitations either which way you go.

Not looking to change any time soon though, and finally have a setup I'm really happy with.

[sqrrl]

I don't know that I'd like to be lying down among geese.

Mirrorless has it's limitations too, I very rarely use the viewfinder on mine, I find the best of both worlds is to have both.

Awful cellphone shot, but this goose went rage-goose on me.

[richandfleur]

Mirrorless has it's limitations too, I very rarely use the viewfinder on mine,

Yeah I fully agree. Each has strengths and weaknesses. I think mirrorless from say Sony would do a better job at locking on to a geese/human face and tracking it as it comes towards the camera.

Anything tripod based I'm usually doing in mirrorless mode / live view on the DSLR. I use live view, focus peaking and digital zoom to help confirm and nail focus when using a tripod and static scenes. Have been caught out too many times with the DSLR focussing nicely on the hedge behind the group of people posing for a group portrait etc. In this configuration I don't think the DSLR adds anything over a mirrorless.

It's a funny situation really, where I like the DSLR because I feel very involved in the process, but I might get better end results focus wise with a mirrorless using eye tracking AF, even though I don't like EVFs.
Right now I'm staying with Pentax DSLR's and have a great combo with the K-3 and the lenses I want. Moving up to the K-3 line from the K-30 / K-S1 made a huge difference, as it gave me the tools I was craving and getting annoyed at not having in the lower lines. I'll see what Pentax brings out K-3 replacement wise, hopefully this year.

[sqrrl]

Face detection is very definitely useful, but I generally try to use manual focus in cluttered environments, especially with moving subjects, I've found that even the best cameras out there will show momentary correction stops when tracking in video. It's less noticeable with smaller sensors, which is one reason I use M43 and even cellphones pretty often. Then again, I seldom shoot portraits or action. More landscape & video.

Some of the modern evf's are very good. As an aside I'm tempted right now to see if I can register a goose for face detection in my Panasonic

---------- Post added 01-07-19 at 05:37 PM ----------

Turns out I can't register non-human faces on my panasonic. I tried geese, then bears, then chimps. No dice. I can register human faces off my computer screen though.

Makes me faintly glad that the selfie I took for that purpose qualified as human on the first try

[Kiwi645hauler]

Face detection is very definitely useful, but I generally try to use manual focus in cluttered environments, especially with moving subjects, I've found that even the best cameras out there will show momentary correction stops when tracking in video. It's less noticeable with smaller sensors, which is one reason I use M43 and even cellphones pretty often. Then again, I seldom shoot portraits or action. More landscape & video.

Some of the modern evf's are very good. As an aside I'm tempted right now to see if I can register a goose for face detection in my Panasonic

---------- Post added 01-07-19 at 05:37 PM ----------

Turns out I can't register non-human faces on my panasonic. I tried geese, then bears, then chimps. No dice. I can register human faces off my computer screen though.

Makes me faintly glad that the selfie I took for that purpose qualified as human on the first try

Never tried birds... but my Olympus has by accident picked out a dog, and some of the company that took over Konica Minolta will recognize animals...

[richandfleur]

Face detection is very definitely useful, but I generally try to use manual focus in cluttered environments, especially with moving subjects,

I've been genuinely impressed with some of the latest tech in this area. Sony's latest will allow you to pick a face in the crowd and track that over time, and they also have the eye AF going on.
Some go as far as allowing you to pick which eye to track, and I have to say that excites me. I personally don't find the APS-C optical viewfinder big enough to accurately focus with a very fine depth of field, so I'd be ok to hand those duties to a machine, so I could 'focus' (photo pun) on composition etc.

[zkarj]

Have been caught out too many times with the DSLR focussing nicely on the hedge behind the group of people posing for a group portrait etc. In this configuration I don't think the DSLR adds anything over a mirrorless.

This is why I almost always use centre focus, even if I have to lock and then recompose. It's rare I'll get focus on the wrong plane unless it's something that just doesn't give me time, like trying to track a bird in flight.

Sony's latest will allow you to pick a face in the crowd and track that over time, and they also have the eye AF going on.
Some go as far as allowing you to pick which eye to track, and I have to say that excites me. I personally don't find the APS-C optical viewfinder big enough to accurately focus with a very fine depth of field, so I'd be ok to hand those duties to a machine, so I could 'focus' (photo pun) on composition etc.

Is this progress, or is it taking the enjoyment out of it? My father never even had auto-focus and I'm still in the midst of scanning his thousands of images, the vast majority of which are focused reasonably well if not very well. I rely heavily on auto-focus, and curse it when it doesn't do what I want. If the camera wants me to pick a face in a crowd then am I being relegated to the role of computer operator? What's the next step? Put the camera on a gimbal and then it'll track the composition as well? Further – if I give it my face recognition data from a photo service (Apple, Google), will it seek out the person of interest all by itself and start taking the photos?

I guess it's all progress of some sort, but from where I'm standing I'm in no rush to let computers take over anything other than focusing (because I've proven to be consistently bad at it) and solving the exposure triangle with some input from me.

I think Dad's camera had a light meter in it. Everything else was manual...

[richandfleur]

I use centre focus almost 100% of the time too, and I don’t personally see a huge loss by handing more of the AF duties to the camera if it can do a better job of it. My Pentax struggles though if I have it set to continuous auto focus/‘tracking’ and then recompose that centre point too far off centre, or recompose too fast.

In the case of geese/kids advancing towards you single point focus is always going to be behind the subject by the time the photo is taken.

I hear you on taking the fun out of it, but equally getting home to find a lot of missed focus shots isn’t fun either. I enjoy sharing the final result with friends and family, so my fun isn’t limited to the taking period only.

I’m able to argue this point either way, but do accept that there are strengths and weaknesses in the gear I have right now. The K-3 is perfect for a lot of what I do, as I’m sure the K-P or K-1 etc is similar for others. I am keen so see what improvement Pentax may bring to future cameras though, and hope it fits some of my requirements.