Playing around with my new camera
The B&W is very nice.
The yellow ... so so. If our going to mess around with the lighting, try some of the photoshop lighting filter effects. You could make it very interesting
BTW, in the B&W, the tree is growing out of the boot again but at least its so foggy, it doesnt hurt the scene. Be careful of the backgrounds that detract. Another way around this is to take the shot wide open or with a long telephoto wide open so the lack of depth of fields throws the background out of focus.
The yellow ... so so. If our going to mess around with the lighting, try some of the photoshop lighting filter effects. You could make it very interesting

BTW, in the B&W, the tree is growing out of the boot again but at least its so foggy, it doesnt hurt the scene. Be careful of the backgrounds that detract. Another way around this is to take the shot wide open or with a long telephoto wide open so the lack of depth of fields throws the background out of focus.
Love the foggy day lake photo. I personally would have turned the front wheels in the opposite direction, but that's my tastes (show off the nice wheels
)
I think this is the same complaint I have with PS & jpeg files viewed in web browsers and it's a very different issue than what Dr. Phil describes. I'd love to hear others with more PS experience speak up here and describe what they do.
First off, my monitor is color calibrated and I've had printed a ton of photos that look exactly the same as on my monitor. However, if I run "save for the web" in PS, there is a noticeable color shift between the original and the target preview (2 up view). Skin tones are typically unaffected, but saturated reds, greens and blues all get shifted slightly, plus some of the gamma is lost with the shadows loosing dark details.
I shoot in RAW and use ACR to convert to sRGB color space when working on web output photos.
What I've found in my research is that PS is a color managed application, whereas all web browsers (except safari) ignore any color profile information inside an image. So your web browsers are all running in a non-color managed environment, hence the color shifts. PS at least acknowledges this when you run "save for web" and it shows the target preview in a non-color managed view which shows exactly what it will look like in a web browser.
I've got into the habit if I'm working on an image for web output to use "View -> Proof Setup -> Monitor RGB". You need to do this only once, then you can press ctrl + Y to switch on new images. Open an image with saturated reds, greens, or blues, then press ctrl + Y to see the color shift and levels change. You'll know you're in the monitor preview mode by the image window title that has "RGB/8/Monitor" in it.
I personally spend too much time fixing this color shift as I have yet to find a silver bullet to fix it. The darkening of the image is a simple levels adjustment fix however, typically adjust mid tone gamma to 1.1 or 1.15 from 1.0. Sometimes I can fix the color shift quickly with a Hue/Sat layer and adjust the Hue by +/- 5. Oftentimes though I have to use a layer mask and create multiple Hue/Sat adj layers to fix the colors in various parts of an image. I've also found using "photo filter" adj layers, specifically sepia to help on some shifts, but more often than not it warms up the image too much. Practice your masking skills.
Other suggestions for saving images when the target viewer is not color managed???
Also, if anyone doesn't see all the blocks in the image below, please adjust the brightness and contrast on your monitor. You're missing out on the photos we all post here.
)First off, my monitor is color calibrated and I've had printed a ton of photos that look exactly the same as on my monitor. However, if I run "save for the web" in PS, there is a noticeable color shift between the original and the target preview (2 up view). Skin tones are typically unaffected, but saturated reds, greens and blues all get shifted slightly, plus some of the gamma is lost with the shadows loosing dark details.
I shoot in RAW and use ACR to convert to sRGB color space when working on web output photos.
What I've found in my research is that PS is a color managed application, whereas all web browsers (except safari) ignore any color profile information inside an image. So your web browsers are all running in a non-color managed environment, hence the color shifts. PS at least acknowledges this when you run "save for web" and it shows the target preview in a non-color managed view which shows exactly what it will look like in a web browser.
I've got into the habit if I'm working on an image for web output to use "View -> Proof Setup -> Monitor RGB". You need to do this only once, then you can press ctrl + Y to switch on new images. Open an image with saturated reds, greens, or blues, then press ctrl + Y to see the color shift and levels change. You'll know you're in the monitor preview mode by the image window title that has "RGB/8/Monitor" in it.
I personally spend too much time fixing this color shift as I have yet to find a silver bullet to fix it. The darkening of the image is a simple levels adjustment fix however, typically adjust mid tone gamma to 1.1 or 1.15 from 1.0. Sometimes I can fix the color shift quickly with a Hue/Sat layer and adjust the Hue by +/- 5. Oftentimes though I have to use a layer mask and create multiple Hue/Sat adj layers to fix the colors in various parts of an image. I've also found using "photo filter" adj layers, specifically sepia to help on some shifts, but more often than not it warms up the image too much. Practice your masking skills.
Other suggestions for saving images when the target viewer is not color managed???
Also, if anyone doesn't see all the blocks in the image below, please adjust the brightness and contrast on your monitor. You're missing out on the photos we all post here.
My little dose of LITHIUM
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,435
Likes: 2
From: Albuquerque New Mexico
Thanks for posting this. And being able to discriminate each individual block is also gratifying. I'll reiterate, if you can't see each block distinctly, then adjust your monitor. Of course, realise this tells you nothing about color balance.
chows4us: Yes, embarrassedly I forgot your suggestions earlier when I take the photo
. I try to use above f8 to see if it effects the sharpness of the picture. I used tamron 28-75mm, if anyone have experienced with this lens, suggestions would be appreciated. Once again thanks for your suggestions.
Speednut: I just calibrated my monitor today and changed it 2.2 TV gamma rather than 1.8 Standard Gamma. So hopefully the color match for both MAC and PCs. I also try to convert my RAW file to sRBG, but I still lost dark colors when I try to convert it for web
. I found two solutions: use Nikon Capture and convert RAW to jpeg, then edit with PS or save the PS edit in tiff then convert the file to jpeg with iphoto. Cheers
. I try to use above f8 to see if it effects the sharpness of the picture. I used tamron 28-75mm, if anyone have experienced with this lens, suggestions would be appreciated. Once again thanks for your suggestions. Speednut: I just calibrated my monitor today and changed it 2.2 TV gamma rather than 1.8 Standard Gamma. So hopefully the color match for both MAC and PCs. I also try to convert my RAW file to sRBG, but I still lost dark colors when I try to convert it for web
. I found two solutions: use Nikon Capture and convert RAW to jpeg, then edit with PS or save the PS edit in tiff then convert the file to jpeg with iphoto. Cheers
I set up an action in Photoshop that converts the color profile to sRGB, then invokes Save for Web.
eurazn: I was looking at all your photos, and noticed they appear very high contrast on my computers. The blacks are completely lacking in detail. So I downloaded a photo and "took a deeper look" through the lens of the histogram. Here's what I found:

The histogram tells the story! It doesn't matter what monitor you're using, whether it's calibrated or not, the histogram always remains the same. It's the graphical tale of your image, and this one says to me: too much contrast, and no details in the shadows.
You get a nice "high key" image, but I keep wanting to adjust my monitor...which would be silly 'coz there's nothing wrong with its calibration.
Anyway, just thought I'd share.
cheers,

The histogram tells the story! It doesn't matter what monitor you're using, whether it's calibrated or not, the histogram always remains the same. It's the graphical tale of your image, and this one says to me: too much contrast, and no details in the shadows.
You get a nice "high key" image, but I keep wanting to adjust my monitor...which would be silly 'coz there's nothing wrong with its calibration.
Anyway, just thought I'd share.
cheers,
There are a couple ways to deal with this. Nikon Capture NX has a D-Lighting feature that will help recover shadow detail from a RAW image. However, it can only go so far, and you will get some noise (grain) in the shadows.
Another is to shoot on a tripod and take several shots at different exposures. Shoot one for the shadows, one for the middle range, and one for the highlights. Take more if necessary. Watch the histogram on the camera for each shot to see what you are getting.
Then load all the exposures into Photoshop and use Duplicate Layer to copy each image into one document, as layers. Then you can blend or mask to bring shadow detail into, and/or recover highlights, in the image.
If you search the Nikon D2 forum on dpreview.com for HDR you will find different methods that people use for doing this.
Thanks, lucky shot, didn't even use a tripod, but my knee worked.
My PhotoImpact program has something like those histograms, maybe I should read that manual too.
My PhotoImpact program has something like those histograms, maybe I should read that manual too.
Hi Robin, thanks for your advice, everything works now. I've been trying to experiment with HDR but the result is not that great. I still have to play around with the curve. I was lucky enough to grab my hands on a new Nikon 18-200mm VR and it's coming soon. So, I will play some more during Easter break next week. Cheers
What was the best place you found for the 18-200mm VR lens? Most of the places I've looked are either out-of-stock or ridiculously overpriced. The local Navy Exchange had one for $799 last week (and no tax), but when I went back for it, it had sold and they don't know when they're getting any more in.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
IQRaceworks
R50/R53 :: Hatch Talk (2002-2006)
53
Jun 28, 2024 07:29 AM
Navigation & Audio USB stick keeps repeating same folder
Wombat Pie
Navigation/Audio
7
Oct 5, 2015 08:00 PM
dutchhome
Stock Problems/Issues
15
Sep 30, 2015 07:17 AM







