Sparky...

[p51dplt]

Re: Sparky...

Great shots guys. Thanks for posting. We always like to see Sparky in the threads.

Keep them coming,

Brant Spaghetti

[wingman]

Re: Sparky...

You're welcome Brant -- and thanks for bringing the airplane to Reno every year ...

[wingman]

Re: Sparky...

Anthony -- I still find them a bit dark and a bit flat for my taste -- on my monitor at least. I do like stuff to have some "pop".

This is more how I would have done it (much the same set of operations as above):



I know you are sending me a file to play with, so we'll see what I can do with a full file (it may be a day or two -- got a bunch of stuff to do tomorrow).

I'd like some input from other viewers -- do you like the way I present this stuff? What of what we're seeing here looks best on your monitors? Thanks

Neal

[wingman]

Re: Sparky...

Oh, and I use a recent full (ridiculously expensive) version of Adobe Photoshop. An amazing program -- once you climb the learning curve. I feel like I've just skimmed the surface of its capabilities.

Adobe also markets "Photoshop Elements" which has much of the capability of the full program in, I think, a somewhat more user friendly format. I understand, however, that it does not have a tool called "curves" which I find absolutely indispensable. I seem to remember hearing that there may be an aftermarket plugin that will give you this tool in elements...

Neal

[Stevo]

Re: Sparky...

Neal, the only program I've ever used for any of my photos is Elements... now I know some bash it as a basic, beginners, version of the real Photoshop but for me it's worked just fine. AND one big player for me is that it's only a fraction of the cost of the full version. I do have a plug-in called SmartCurve that adds the curve function you mentioned and find it very helpful in getting the most out of my pictures.

Also, as for the wing tip comment... I once had a friend say to me after looking at a few of my pictures, "what, none of these airplanes have wingtips?" So, you're not the only one!

[nageditor]

Re: Sparky...

Neal you do a great job with your photos, I thought that they were great back when you were using film.
John

[sierra fox]

Re: Sparky...

Oh, and I use a recent full (ridiculously expensive) version of Adobe Photoshop. An amazing program -- once you climb the learning curve. I feel like I've just skimmed the surface of its capabilities.

Adobe also markets "Photoshop Elements" which has much of the capability of the full program in, I think, a somewhat more user friendly format. I understand, however, that it does not have a tool called "curves" which I find absolutely indispensable. I seem to remember hearing that there may be an aftermarket plugin that will give you this tool in elements...

Neal

I use Elements 5.0, cant afford the CS3, will look for the "curves" plug in.

Full size files on the way

The America Beauty shot is really nice, at first i think it's a too light but after looking at it and looking away, it looks great!

[T. Adams]

Re: Sparky...

I like Sparky at night.

[sierra fox]

Re: Sparky...

I like it too!!!!

[wingman]

Re: Sparky...

Tim -- I always like your stuff! Stevo -- Thanks for the info on the plugin. From what I've been told the curves tool is really the only important tool missing from Elements so I would highly recommend the plugin.

I'd still like some feedback from viewers about the lightness-darkness issue. I do seem to present my stuff lighter and with more details in the shadows than most other photographers here. This is demonstrated by Anthony's comment that at first he found my version a bit light. How do other folks here see the lightness-darkness issue on their monitors? What looks best to you??

Neal

[Funflyer]

Re: Sparky...

Neal, Your pic's always have and I hope always will (future ) look just the way you present them today. They have a certain draw to them that I cannot pinpoint but they do say "look at this" without you knowing it, if you get what I mean. Light or dark ? maybe a twinge on the light side, that could be the draw. I appreciate them as presented so please keep up the outstanding work. Rad

[ignomini]

Re: Sparky...

Neal,

Monitor gamma plays a big role in the apparent lightness/darkness of an image. I used to have terrible problems working on Macs because they have historicaly used a much lighter gamma setting than PC monitors. I was shocked the first time I saw one of my photos on a PC. Nowadays I use a compromise between Mac and PC gamma settings. To me, many of your photos appear a little light and washed out.

Different eyes, like different levels of saturation. A blue eyed co-worker and I used to fight over color saturation. One day he turned up an article suggesting blue and brown eyes may have different perceptions of color saturation. To his blue eyes, my work was over saturated. To my brown eyes, his work was flat.

We were only a sampling of two, so it could easily be coincidence. I've taken the liberty of "borrowing the Sparky test image" and made my own set of adjustments. See how it strikes you.

Robert

[wingman]

Re: Sparky...

Thanks for the feedback so far -- exactly what I've been curious about. Robert -- your version on my monitor still looks a bit darkish. Monitors make a huge difference -- as does personal taste obviously. I use a very highend, bright (and expensive! There's that word again...) graphics-oriented monitor that I'm sure influences how I present my stuff. And I know I'm somewhat unusual in liking lighter almost luminous-looking images. I spent a lot of time studying Ansel Adams books and images and printing black and white images in my early years and I think that greatly influenced my tastes. I try to have a good black point in the deepest shadows, but tend to bias towards lots of detail and contrast above that in the shadows, which I guess pushes the brightness range up in general. Obviously there is only a fixed amount of total tonal range available so I guess what one gains in the shadows one loses in the brighter areas...

Tim -- you are a very fine technician -- what do you think of the lightness-darkness issue in my work compared to others? Bucky -- you like darker and more saturated images -- any thoughts here??

Neal

[T. Adams]

Re: Sparky...

Thanks for the feedback so far -- exactly what I've been curious about. Robert -- your version on my monitor still looks a bit darkish. Monitors make a huge difference -- as does personal taste obviously. I use a very highend, bright (and expensive! There's that word again...) graphics-oriented monitor that I'm sure influences how I present my stuff. And I know I'm somewhat unusual in liking lighter almost luminous-looking images. I spent a lot of time studying Ansel Adams books and images and printing black and white images in my early years and I think that greatly influenced my tastes. I try to have a good black point in the deepest shadows, but tend to bias towards lots of detail and contrast above that in the shadows, which I guess pushes the brightness range up in general. Obviously there is only a fixed amount of total tonal range available so I guess what one gains in the shadows one loses in the brighter areas...

Tim -- you are a very fine technician -- what do you think of the lightness-darkness issue in my work compared to others? Bucky -- you like darker and more saturated images -- any thoughts here??

Neal

I can see color noise on some shots, from what looks like the shadow highlight tool use. I think my photos tend to the dark side (not Nikon!!).
My monitor at home is calibrated, but the luminace is higher than the Eye One calibator likes. Getting it to recommended levels leaves the monitor useless. Nobody has ever commented very often on whether my stuff is light or dark.

[T. Adams]

Re: Sparky...

This is my Sparky shot here, I don't like to crop if I don't have to. Thankfully I can still carry the big gun around, and maybe a bigger gun next year.