Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Fri 19/04/24 22:33:13 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 60850.4.1

Subject: Re:Technical question to producers

Date: Mon 17/03/14 22:36:06 GMT

Name: waterman

Email:

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

Hi "justauser".

In many cases JPG would be more than enough. At more than 20 megapixels the images are so big and good, that you will only find JPG artefacts in postersize watched at 500 percent enlargement. Nobody looks at an image under these circumstances.

Of course RAW is the pros choice. Cos he can do much more with the file afterwards which he cannot with a JPG. But 90 percent of what a pro does, amateurs or average producers never need.

OTOH: Its not the flashg cards, its mass storage, harddrives, which are the problem afterwards. As long as you don't have a strict promptly eliminating workflow, the work will quickly flow over ;)

In reply to Message (60850.4)

Re:Technical question to producers

By justauser - Mon 17/03/14 02:08:36 GMT

Website:

I´m no producer, I don´t even do any wetlook shots.

But I do some hobby photographing.

Even for me RAW is the choice, as it is pretty much lossless and does not interpret anything.

In a photoforum I once compared the jpeg from the camera with the "developed" jpeg from some different post-processing tools (one from the camera manufacturer), all set to non-altering parameters.

There were quite noticeable differences.

Jpeg has another problem, it is not lossless, which may lead to effects around edges.

File sizes are an issue, right.

But flash cards get cheaper and cheaper and on an affordable one I get enough photos to empty out two batteries (>500pics).

If you spend two grand on a pretty good camera body and the same on lenses and equipment, why should fast flash cards be an issue?

One thing about burned-out areas:

Digital cameras are very good at dark areas, so when shooting, dial down to -.3 or -.7EV.

Doesn´t hurt dark spots too much, but saves you from overexposed spots.

In reply to Message (60850)

Technical question to producers

By GeorgeSK - Sun 16/03/14 13:49:44 GMT

Website:

A question to producers: Do you do post processing to your pictures or upload as they come out of the camera?

I am just asking because I like to use wetlook pics from my favourite producer (Wetfoto) as a desktop background and I noticed lately that many of the pics, especially the ones taken in bright sunlight, seem to be a bit "washed out" and overexposed.

When I do my image processing magic, they look like a totally different picture without them looking unnatural - adjusting levels and curves to get more contrast and as a finishing touch, I have a new weapon in my arsenal - Topaz Adjust 5, which gives them the required punch - nicer colours and more detail.

This was not meant as a criticism, just a question. I realise that it would be time consuming, but the basic levels and curves could be automated by finding a generic "good value" and use a Photoshop action to batch convert the images.

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)