DSLRUsers.com

I was down in Cowra yesterday, and with the rail closed for several years, I thought I would try a vanishing perspective.

LX5 balanced on the rail just in front of a switch point
OOC (with straightening - balancing on a rail line is NOT the way to use an RRS plate )


As above with 16:9 crop and Graduated filter applied I tried cropping tighter but found the pole leading out of the picture took my eye out too.


and finally BW in SilverEfexPro

To my mind the Antique effect seems to suit this picture.

Thoughts/Opinions

EDIT: When I uploaded the fourth photo (below) for some reason this one vanished. Hopefully they are all back now.

I like the third but think the vignette is a bit much - got one with it backed off a bit?

dviv : I like the third but think the vignette is a bit much - got one with it backed off a bit?

Just bring it back a little and I think it'd look great.

Here's my thoughts, I think your heading down the right track with the process, however as mentioned, dialling back the vignetting would improve it in my eyes.

My thoughts go more on the composition however, two trains of thought for me;

1) the current composition with the rail bisecting the image sends the viewer out of the frame (straight up the guts), do not stop to collect 200 on the sides! this works in good way to an extent, bear with me here.... the current composition actually works well with the concept of a railway track and a fast one at that, given teh way the person zips thru frame it compliments the overall frame, that said it irks me since i do not get to stop and look at the sides preference thing i guess.

2) Taking a step to the side (left) and using the rail to run diagonally in the frame and also have those sleepers as a nice repeating pattern would have been a better choice to convey the track and scene, however that is me.

I would actually like to have a crack at PPing this frame..i have a few ideas

dviv wrote:think the vignette is a bit much - got one with it backed off a bit?

NIK software is still new to me. I am just playing with presets at the moment
However, I just discovered you can set a preset, then play with it as I have done here.


Better?

biggerry wrote:heading down the right track

boom Boom!

biggerry wrote:Taking a step to the side (left) and using the rail to run diagonally in the frame

It's a long drive... I did try a few, but nothing that grabbed me. I only carried the LX 5 with me as I was indulging in one of my other activities at the time.
I also took a few similar down the road at Rankine Springs. Light was better, and had the D200 with me but I haven't got them out of the camera yet.

biggerry wrote:I would actually like to have a crack at PPing this frame..i have a few ideas

Don't let me stop you
You can find the original raw file here

Mr Darcy wrote:Better?

Much! Really like it now

 AAARRRRGH!!!!
FLICKR is playing silly buggers with my images.
I have moved one to my old system. Hope my friend who owns the website doesn't notice.

Mr Darcy wrote:FLICKR is playing silly buggers with my images.

Yep, Haven't been able to see any of them all day!

And one later in the day at Rankins Springs
Just before the car blew the alternator drive belt & I picked up sticks & returned home. Thank god for diesel.

I consider the 3rd and the last one the best.
I like that sepia treatment and I love that
shallow depth of field in the last one.

Mr Darcy wrote:And one later in the day at Rankins Springs

I like this one, even with the stuff in teh distance OOF it still appeals to me. I would mask the grad filter around the trees though.

This RAW file had alot of latitude. [bows to LX5]

biggerry wrote:I would mask the grad filter around the trees though

If I knew how I would. My attempt looked horribly artificial.

Suren
Love your treatment. Clues?

Greg, If you like, I can export a LR xmp and sent it to you. There were LOTS of steps and I broke Gerry's cardinal rule of 5 steps/minutes.

Send me your email Greg. I think I managed to export a catalog with the info so you can see the steps exactly.

Mr Darcy wrote:If I knew how I would.

Maybe use a masking brush. Are you using LR? IF so you coulld paint the effect that you want with the brush. I still find it's quite difficult to avoid halos in this situation [regardless of real or post process filter].

surenj wrote:Are you using LR? IF so you coulld paint the effect that you want with the brush.

Yes and that's what I tried. Result was painful. Believe me the image I showed is far superior.

I didn't try painting the trees to reverse the effect of the Grad Filter on them though. Will try that tomorrow.

OK, I went back to the original and tried ColourEfexPro to add the graduated sky in the Rankins Springs photo. This was after many failed attempts to get the masking right in both LR and CS5. Using control points I was able to quickly and easily add a blue wash to the sky without unduly affecting the rest of the picture. This is my kind of tool
Along the way, I lost the crop but at this stage it is a learning exercise rather than an attempt at the perfect picture. Tomorrow maybe.

Opinions welcome. PS I probably should have split this photo out into a second thread but I'm lazy.

Hi Greg,
That's a nice job on the masking.

I really dislike this combination of colors because it looks artificial (blue unnatural) and discordant with the relatively warm (slightly washed out) foreground.

It reminds me of the cokin blue filter and it's awful effect on the sky.

Just a preference on my part and YMMV.

Compo wise, you need to emphasise your subjects more. Perhaps a pano crop to get those rails and the buildings into view. Just be aware that I am biased with the color thing so naturally want to crop it out.

Lastly I was a little concerned about the CA in this picture. It became apparent when I was running some extreme processing on it so perhaps that's the cause. Still, at f8, it's a worry.

surenj wrote:CA in this picture. It became apparent when I was running some extreme processing on it so perhaps that's the cause. Still, at f8, it's a worry.

Taken at f1.8 using the 85 1.4 Or do you mean the LX5 photo earlier? It's a Clayton's camera so I am not really worried about such issues. (see comment later about colour blindness)

surenj wrote:I really dislike this combination of colors because it looks artificial (blue unnatural) and discordant with the relatively warm (slightly washed out) foreground.

Fair cop. I am colour blind and regularly make weird colour choices when replacing them. That's one of the reasons I usually avoid sky replacements. In this case, the sky was an unremitting grey that did nothing at all for the photo even when cropped. I had intended cropping it back out as before, but forgot when reposting. In the field I had taken a bracketed shot as I was thinking HDR & even 3 stops under the sky was an unrelieved grey so I took the best of the foregrounds and then went the replacement route. Will try a warmer blue or maybe wander into the oranges or browns. I don't have any stock skies I can drop in.

surenj wrote:That's a nice job on the masking

Thanks, except it is not masking as you know it. NIK software uses a concept of control points. Drop one on an area you want to change, then another on an area that changed that you didn't want to. Then continue refining the process. This one used about a dozen control points - six in the sky, then one on each of the buildings and a few in the trees to bring them back to the original colour. I find it a lot easier than trying to mask an area. I have never got my head around refining an edge to the point where the end result is realistic. I invariably end up with a fat line that looks like an obvious cut n' paste job.

Greg, with regard to CA, yes I meant the first photo.

Sorry, I didn't realise about the color blind issue. In this picture, I think the color of the sky may not be a main factor which means you could leave it alone. Again this depends on the final composition. Again this is very subjective and YMMV.

Control points are an automated way of masking. Same thing different and cool implementation.

Let me know whether you received the edit as well. I didn't know how to write XMP files but sent you a DNG and a seperate catalog.

surenj wrote:Lastly I was a little concerned about the CA in this picture. It became apparent when I was running some extreme processing on it so perhaps that's the cause. Still, at f8, it's a worry.

Suren,
I have now had a bit of a play with the LR file you sent me of your adjustments. You actually added the CA in. It is not visible to me until you applied a Canon Lens adjustment ( for a Panasonic PHD!!!). You then exacerbated it by playing explicitly the with the CA slider. It never went away again. Not sure why you did this, but I do like the overall effect you created. Over the next few days i will play with your adjustments & try to work out just what makes the image sing for me. It will be ironic if it IS the CA that makes it work.

Thanks for taking the time over this. PS here are some extreme pixel peepers of the top left corner of the image:
1: After rotating, but no other adjustments:


2: After adding Lens correction for Canon EF-S 10-20mm


3. After changing CA slider to +191


4 And final image as at publish

Mr Darcy wrote:You actually added the CA in. It is not visible to me until you applied a Canon Lens adjustment ( for a Panasonic PHD!!!).

Oops. I am not used to editing pics from other cameras! Perhaps it's in my automatic import settings?

Mr Darcy wrote:You then exacerbated it by playing explicitly the with the CA slider.

Mr Darcy wrote:Thanks for taking the time over this.

You are welcome!