rocks in stream

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Nature Photography Image Critique : One Thread

Shot in a stream in southern Sweden in January 1999. Kodakchrome 25, 24mm, very late afternoon and no filters used. The scan looks a lot brighter in Photoshop, but for some reason it gets quite dark in the browser. A larger version (900x600, 100k) can be found here.



-- Magnus Wahlkvist (magnus@sparta.lu.se), October 11, 1999

Answers

You may want to check your gamma. For a PC it should be 2.2. To check: File> Color settings> Monitor setup> set gamma 2.2. As for this image, I like the idea, but color and exposure need work.

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), October 11, 1999.

Regarding the color: it doesn't have the Kodachrome look, to me. I used to shoot lots of KM and KR and I still would, if it weren't so difficult to get processing BECAUSE it didn't go inky blue in the shade like this image does. This looks like a typical Kodak E-6 film or Provia, but not Velvia. I wonder if you got this color bias in scanning or put it in deliberately.

Frank

-- Frank Kolwicz (bb389@lafn.org), October 11, 1999.


"put it in deliberately",.. bah!

Actually, the slide is very very blue,.. how it got there I do not know, maybe something to do with the fact that the shutter speed was around 30 seconds? As I said, it was very late in the day,. and the location is in between a lot of trees making it even more dark. My guess is that the shutter speed in combination with the time of day and light conditions made for an image like this. The image is actually a lot like the slide, although a bit darker.

-- Magnus Wahlkvist (magnus@sparta.lu.se), October 11, 1999.


Ah, KM at 30 seconds! As Kodak says, "out of range", meaning reciprocity goes all to hell and colors shift like mad.

You could put the colors back to more nearly normal in your digital file by consulting the color shift correction chart Kodak has for long exposures on KM, although I don't think it goes to 30 seconds.

Frank

-- Frank Kolwicz (bb389@lafn.org), October 11, 1999.


What is it that sets this cottoncandy water flow apart from a thousand other photo's just like it? Other than the fact that it is yours. The color's are screwed up and nothing that I can see is realy sharp, perhaps you can tell us what it is we should be looking for/at. Pat

-- pat j. krentz (krentz@cci-29palms.com), October 12, 1999.


Magnus,

First of all, if you are using monitor compensation in Photshop 5.02 or later, turn it OFF.

Second, you can create a contrast mask very easily in Photoshop to control contrast, and use a curves layer to color correct. This one can be fixed with one click and some slight tweaking of the red channel.

It's also important to look at the individual color channels in your scanner software before you commit to the final scan. For example the Nikon LS-2000 requires that the "black point" of the blue channel be set to a value of about "8" for proper blue/cyan density.

You may wish to pick up a copy of "Professional Photoshop 5" by Dan Margulis - it's devoted almost exclusively to color correction.

This is increasingly becoming a critical issue for photographers. Those who don't or can't embrace and perfect their digital darkroom skills will not be able to compete (strictly talking about dodging/burning/color-correcting).

Cheers,

Keith

http://www.clarkphoto.com

-- Keith Clark (clarkphotography@spiritone.com), October 12, 1999.


You don't need to go 30 sec. to get the water to soften to its max -- I've found 8 sec. to be just right (it was a setting on my F3); 4 sec. not quite enough, but still a good effect. Your foreground rocks went out of focus because of the water pouring over them. You can find similar situations with dry rocks; splash water on the rocks to darken them, then shoot, and they'll stay sharp. But first try 8 sec. and see if that helps. Try b&w, too, like AgfaPan 25, and colorshift no more....

--John

-- John Wall (jwall@earthjustice.org), October 14, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ