G1X: Rural Life Museum

The Rural Life Museum is one of my favorite places to try out new cameras, photo equipment and techniques.  Today, while practicing with the G1X, I received an added bonus:  No Senior Citizens discount!  In fact, I was not even asked!  That dollar seemed insignificant to me as I decided to pay the full fee and feel years younger.

I shot with the G1X naked (no, not me, the camera!) meaning without a tripod, flash, filters, no RAW mode, no editing, no post processing.  This forced me to use high ISO settings along with whatever the G1X had to offer.  Unlike some of my first G1X attempts however, I did change take multiple shots and varied exposure and other settings in my attempts to get the picture that I wanted.  So the pictures in this post are Straight-Out-Of-Camera (SOOC) – even if I took several at various settings and discarded all but the one posted.

Instead of cropping, I sometimes changed the aspect ratio in-camera.  In practice, I believe in cropping.

I have a definite tendency to shoot vertical (portrait) pictures. In fact, my favorite shot of the day is a vertical, shown below.

This exercise (JPEG only, no editing) was a good one.  I still plan to (mostly) shoot in RAW and post-process to taste but SOOC definitely has its place.

Still More Variations on Bright Sky Processing

.
In what could easily become a never-ending presentation on variations in post processing, I’ll call it quits after this one. Previously, the scenario was that only one auto-exposure shot was taken of a scene with bright sky but dark foreground. The challenge was to get the best final image from either JPEG or RAW with simple post processing. Next, let’s consider a bit more involved post processing.



Show above are comparisons of the images made with a graduated neutral density filter (Image 4) from the first posting, a Photoshop simulation of a graduated neutral density filter (Image 11) and a Photoshop blend of two “exposures” (Image 12). Images 11 and 12 were made from the same raw file – only one real exposure – but processed twice in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR).

Image 11 was made from a raw file processed first with -1/2 stop of “exposure” (for the best sky) and then again with +1 stop of exposure (for the best tree/ground); this created two image files. In Photoshop CS3, the sky exposure (-1/2) was placed as a layer on top of the ground exposure (+1). The sky layer was then blended into the ground layer by using a graduated layer mask. There are many references and tutorials on this technique. Here are some links:

Sharon Lowe
Digital Camera Magazine
Luminous Landscape

A more involved variation on these ideas is shown on the Luminous Landscape – one of my favorite photo sites. Image 12 above was made with that blending process but simplified by using Fred Miranda’s DRI Pro plugin for Photoshop. First, using ACR, two variations on exposure, + ½ stop and – ½ stop, were made from the same raw file and then saved. These two variations were loaded into DRI Pro.

Of course, you can use two or more real exposures instead of simulating exposure variations in Photoshop. Image 13, below, was made from two real exposures, +1 and -1, using DRI Pro. And then, there’s High Dynamic Range (HDR) …




High Dynamic Range is a computer based method of combining several exposures to increase the tonal range. Some like HDR and some do not; in fact, sometimes I like HDR and sometimes not. HDR images can be a bit over-the-top according to the final processing -- the “tone mapping”. There are a number of HDR software packages available. I usually use Photomatix and/or the HDR features contained in Photoshop CS3. Some of my favorite images are HDR based.

Both Image 14 and 15 above were made from three exposures at -1, 0, +1 using Photomatix. For Image 14, tone mapping was done using the default settings – a somewhat gentle and conservative approach. Image 15 was done using a more aggressive tone mapping approach.

Of the infinite possibilities, I’ve shown 13 variations on the theme of photographing and processing images for scenes having a bright sky but dark foreground. The interesting aspect of all this is that each of these methods has a place and that someone – but not everyone – will prefer one method instead of the others. But then, that’s photography and photographers!
.

More Variations of Bright Sky Processing

.
Returning to tips and tricks about photographing scenes with bright sky but dark foreground after a bit of PowerShot news, here are more variations on processing. The scenario is that only one shot was taken and it was based on the G9 autoexposure setting for the full composition.




In the above comparison, Photos 3 and 7 are repeated from the previous posting. Photo 8 is similar to Photo 6 from the previous posting except that it was given additional recovery, saturation sharpening. I made Photo 8 because, after reviewing the previous posting, it seemed that there was an incorrect impression given about processing from raw. Therefore, Photo 8 is intentionally somewhat overdone with respect to saturation and sharpening.

Of course, the in-camera jpg can be processed in Photoshop. That is, suppose you took Photo 3 as an in-camera jpg only. On reviewing the photos later, you realize that there is little detail in the sky and that the trees are dark. You’d want to improve the photo and this is certainly possible, as shown below.



Photo 10 was made from Photo 3 with post processing in Photoshop CS3. Only two processes were applied: 1) “Exposure” was reduced by ¼ stop and 2) Shadow/Highlight recovery was applied rather heavily. These are both simple image adjustment settings in CS3 and took only a few minutes of tinkering. These adjustments were made to the original file which was then downsized and sharpened for web viewing. No other adjustments were made to get this nice “save” with Photoshop.

Although I almost always use Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), there are other programs for converting from raw to jpg. I regularly use BreezeBrowser to view and select images. BreezeBrowser also can do some editing and can now process G9 raw images. My understanding is that BreezeBrowser uses the DCRaw program for raw conversions. Photo 9 was converted, downsized and sharpened entirely in BreezeBrowser.

My favorite is still raw plus a polarizing filter and processed in ACR but I’ll grant that the differences are not so apparent in these web sized images. Also, it is important to realize that saturation, contrast and sharpening can be further fine-tuned for any of the photos shown.

All images shown so far have been shot and processed as “single shots” with no dual processing. Next, multiple exposures will be merged.
.

G9: In the Raw and/or JPEG

.
Shortly after pressing that shutter button, the internal computer chip in your digital camera begins to process the data collected by the sensor and then saves that data as a “picture” in the form of a data file on the memory card. Most likely, that data file is either a JPEG or a raw file format. JPEG is an acronym for Joint Photograpic Experts Group . JPEG files have “jpg” as the filename extension; for example, myfile.jpg is the filename of a JPEG image. Whereas JPEG files follow international standards, a raw file is proprietary to the particular camera manufacturer according to their needs. Therefore, many devices have software to read and process JPEG images but few can deal with raw images because all the raw image files are different.

In the case of the Canon G9, the raw image files have the filename extension cr2; for example, myfile.cr2 is (probably) a Canon raw image file. However, just because the filename has the .cr2 extension does not necessarily mean that it came from a Canon G9 camera because all the current Canon cameras having raw capability save their raw images with a cr2 filename extension. My G3 used a crw filename extension.

So, what’s the difference between JPEG and raw and why worry about it? Well, there is – or can be – a lot of difference but you don’t have to worry about it unless you want to. On the other hand, if you are concerned about maximizing image quality, developing a personal or customized look and generally pushing the limits of photography, then you should learn to process raw image files. The raw image file is sometimes described as the digital version of a (film) negative whereas the JPEG image coming straight out of the camera is more like a machine processed print from that negative. Although debatable and not strictly true, this description and comparison is easily understood. This picture is a 100% crop (click for larger view) from the raw file of a previously used scene; it has had no (as far as I can tell) post processing. Kind of ugly, fuzzy and noisy, isn't it?

It is very important to realize that your camera makes its JPEG from the raw data in about a second or so. I call this image the "in-camera" JPEG. You can make your own JPEG from the raw file by using any editor that can read the proprietary raw file. This is what I do; of course, it takes me quite a bit longer than one second. So, most of the time, my final product is a JPEG file and, for my best efforts, a print made from that JPEG file.

One advantage of learning about raw image processing is that you are then entitled to participate in the endless debates about whether raw or JPEG is “best” or, for that matter, even worthwhile. In the great raw vs JPEG debate, when someone states that they've thoroughly investigated, studied and tested to come to the conclusion that JPEG is "good enough" or that their own JPEGs are "as good as" their own raw post processed images then I believe them. When someone states that they get better results using raw and post processing (my own experience) then I believe them as well.



(This is another post that will be continued and also used as a reference and link).
.