Official BeyondUnreal Photography Thread
- Thread starter BillyBadAss
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
HDR blended with one of the original shots. Its a 40% blend with a bunch of other layers of the original images. I don't like the super soft fake look of normal HDR thus the blending technique. Looks almost like a realistic painting.
If an image is only 40% HDR.. is it still an HDR photo?
If an image is only 40% HDR.. is it still an HDR photo?
Working on a few new kind of B&W processing. Its fun to experiment. I find B&W more challenging than color because not every photo looks good as B&W. B&W is less forgiving about lighting issues but more forgiving about out of focus issues.
I had Meghann in the studio for some experimentation lighting shots. Nothing ground breaking.. but I did find out a few set ups that not work. I have to admit.. I'm not a fan of having one side of the face a lot brighter than the other.. or having a lot of shadows on the face.
Good times!
I had Meghann in the studio for some experimentation lighting shots. Nothing ground breaking.. but I did find out a few set ups that not work. I have to admit.. I'm not a fan of having one side of the face a lot brighter than the other.. or having a lot of shadows on the face.
Good times!
Do you just desaturate the photoes in Photoshop? I once read a tutorial, that claimed that simply desaturating a picture wouldn't give the same B&W effect that we're used to see on actual B&W film. I'm not sure if there is any truth to it though. What do you think?
Depends on the film. In the film days there was no "best" or "right" film to use. Each film had its own behaviors or way to treating light and colors.
Simply applying desaturation is one way to make an image black and white.. but it looks rather flat. A better way is to use the channel mixer. This way you can give priority over one color channel. Red generally makes the image soft and glowing. Blue makes it very gritty and sharp. Green is somewhere in between.
There are plenty of other methods such as using the "convert to greyscale" feature in ACR and then adjusting the color channel sliders below for a unique affect. Combine this with your color temperature slider and you can achieve a rather unique look for your B&W photos.
when I shoot black and white, I use actual BnW film in an older, analog SLR camera and manually develop the pictures in my universities dark room. it seems that actual BnW film produces a greater range of depth in the high/low values than simply desaturating a color photo.
but I don't know if this difference is merely caused by the film process versus the digital process, or the fact that I do my own developing.
but I don't know if this difference is merely caused by the film process versus the digital process, or the fact that I do my own developing.
Last edited:
Depends on what your client wants. B&W photography is generally considered to provoke more emotion. B&W photography still has a place in todays market. Some companies such as Abercrombie & Fitch use B&W photography exclusively for their marketing.
Going back a few posts, I disagree. It's much more difficult to have a decent looking colour photo. If all else fails.. b&w that son of a gun.
I don't believe B&W should be a scapegoat when the color in your photos go wrong. I think you should either do it intentionally or give your clients the option because you already have a similar photo in color. Every color photo that is worth keeping can be processed in a way that makes the colors work for you. I know because i've shot in difficult places like Bars/Pubs which have all kinds of lighting. Sometimes you have to process your subject with a different color temperature than your background. With that being said, the benefits have to outweigh the work involved.
One last one of Meghann from last week. There will be another shoot later this week. Weather pending of course.
One last one of Meghann from last week. There will be another shoot later this week. Weather pending of course.
Last edited:
A question to the Nikon users here: which program do you prefer to use to post-process .nef files and do you require special plug-ins and/or converters? I'm considering getting Adobe Lightroom (since it costs half for me as a student, but I'll have a go at the trial first), does any of you use it as a primary tool and are you satisfied with it?
My wedding biz partner uses Nikon and shoots in RAW exclusively. He edits all of his photos in Lightroom and finalizes them in photoshop. There are some occasions where he has to use Capture NX. This is usually the case when he isn't getting accurate colors, sharpness, or noise reduction from Lightroom.
Lightroom and Photoshop have recently been updated and so has ACR. The quality levels are much higher now.
There are other RAW processors out there like DCRAW which offer superior image quality to every tool out there. What these raw processors lack are extensive editing features. I am willing to take a little hit in image quality if it means a faster work flow.
Lightroom and Photoshop have recently been updated and so has ACR. The quality levels are much higher now.
There are other RAW processors out there like DCRAW which offer superior image quality to every tool out there. What these raw processors lack are extensive editing features. I am willing to take a little hit in image quality if it means a faster work flow.