Clicky

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Watercolour??


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#41 Hermelin

Hermelin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts

Posted 03 February 2017 - 12:52 PM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

So you're basically screwed if you only shot JPEG?



#42 Isaac Hilman

Isaac Hilman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • LocationVictoria, BC, Canada

Posted 03 February 2017 - 05:24 PM

So you're basically screwed if you only shot JPEG?

Not entirely. I love the look of lot's of the SOOC Jpegs I see coming out of Fuji Cameras. I would suggest turning your Noise Reduction in Camera down though, at least -1, and maybe even your sharpness down to -1. (I usually have mine set at -2 LR, and -1 Sharpness). 

 

A Good test for you might be;

 

Find a scene that you can easily mimic the watercolor paint-like effect when photographed. (Thick trees, foliage, bushes, and grass can do this). Then set your camera on a tripod. Take photos with your settings Defaulted, then + and - your Sharpness / Noise Reduction one point each photo between each shot, and review on your LCD each time. You'll probably come across a setting that reduces the look of the wormy artifacts eventually, and then keep it there.

 

First Photo: NR: 0, SH: 0,

Second photo: NR: -1, SH: 0

Third photo: NR: -2, SH: 0

 

Then try the NR 0, and SH -1, or -2, or -2 NR and +1 or 2 sharpening.

 

I'm thinking that you'll find a setting that reduces the appearance of the artifacts.

 

I think one thing that would help this, is if Fuji also added a menu option for "Film Grain" that could be set just like the other +/- variables. I would love to see that, especially for JPEG shooters.


Edited by Isaac Hilman, 03 February 2017 - 05:25 PM.


#43 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 157 posts

Posted 03 February 2017 - 06:23 PM

Not entirely. I love the look of lot's of the SOOC Jpegs I see coming out of Fuji Cameras. I would suggest turning your Noise Reduction in Camera down though, at least -1, and maybe even your sharpness down to -1. (I usually have mine set at -2 LR, and -1 Sharpness). 

 

A Good test for you might be;

 

Find a scene that you can easily mimic the watercolor paint-like effect when photographed. (Thick trees, foliage, bushes, and grass can do this). Then set your camera on a tripod. Take photos with your settings Defaulted, then + and - your Sharpness / Noise Reduction one point each photo between each shot, and review on your LCD each time. You'll probably come across a setting that reduces the look of the wormy artifacts eventually, and then keep it there.

 

First Photo: NR: 0, SH: 0,

Second photo: NR: -1, SH: 0

Third photo: NR: -2, SH: 0

 

Then try the NR 0, and SH -1, or -2, or -2 NR and +1 or 2 sharpening.

 

I'm thinking that you'll find a setting that reduces the appearance of the artifacts.

 

I think one thing that would help this, is if Fuji also added a menu option for "Film Grain" that could be set just like the other +/- variables. I would love to see that, especially for JPEG shooters.

 

The X-Pro2/X-T2 do have a grain option (called "Grain Effect") with three levels, Off, Weak and Strong. I've found that with high ISO images, NR +4 and Grain Effect Strong sometimes looks better than just NR -4. You don't have to take multiple shots, BTW, you can just shoot one image and develop it into multiple JPEGs using the in-camera RAW developer (if you shoot RAW or RAW+JPEG.)



#44 DerKnipser

DerKnipser

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts

Posted 03 February 2017 - 06:46 PM

@kimcarsons: What software you are talking about?

Gesendet von meinem SM-P600 mit Tapatalk

#45 Isaac Hilman

Isaac Hilman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • LocationVictoria, BC, Canada

Posted 03 February 2017 - 06:53 PM

The X-Pro2/X-T2 do have a grain option (called "Grain Effect") with three levels, Off, Weak and Strong. I've found that with high ISO images, NR +4 and Grain Effect Strong sometimes looks better than just NR -4. You don't have to take multiple shots, BTW, you can just shoot one image and develop it into multiple JPEGs using the in-camera RAW developer (if you shoot RAW or RAW+JPEG.)

Ahh, that's awesome! With every new model or update, Fuji steps up their game. I've only got the XT-1 right now, so I didn't know this had been implemented. Still waiting on my XT-2 to arrive in the mail, should be here next week!


Edited by Isaac Hilman, 03 February 2017 - 08:31 PM.


#46 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 157 posts

Posted 03 February 2017 - 07:00 PM

Ahh, that's awesome! With ever new model, Fuji steps up their game. I've only got the XT-1 right now, so I didn't know this had been implemented. Still waiting on my XT-2 to arrive in the mail, should be here next week!

 

I think you're going to like it :-)



#47 Torturro

Torturro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 13 February 2017 - 07:05 PM

Any suggestions for Mac users?

Im totally dissappointed with the results from Adobe Camera Raw latest version...



#48 Torturro

Torturro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 14 February 2017 - 12:53 PM

I tried Irident - ant its great on results. But the work flow is terrible - and Im really missing those incredibile Adobe Camera Raw - spot tools - that can add/remove noise/exposure stc at chosen spots - like painting over the image instead of applying to whole image.



#49 Torturro

Torturro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 15 February 2017 - 06:02 PM

Just installed free trial of ON1 - it does a good job, not as good as Irident. 

No camera profiles after I left Adobe.

Will have to learn - and look for my own profiles. 

Downside - although I have 8gb ram - the program works slowish.

 

Attached Files



#50 Adam Woodhouse

Adam Woodhouse

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 272 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 16 February 2017 - 04:13 PM

I think your comparison between LR and ON1 is quite obvious and striking.  

 

Between ON1 and Iridient ... they look like they are so close that only those interested in over-the-top pixel peeping would probably care.


Edited by Adam Woodhouse, 16 February 2017 - 04:15 PM.

Adam Woodhouse
Ontario, Canada
www.woodhousephotography.com

X-T2 and X-T1
Fuji 16mm/1.4, 35mm/1.4, 10-24mm/4, 16-55mm/2.8, 50-140/2,8, 18-135mm and Rokinon 8mm/2.8

Fuji X500 Flash, iNissin i40 and two Yongnou 565's


#51 Torturro

Torturro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 16 February 2017 - 09:23 PM

Amazing - that Adobe released profiles for XT2  that can do....... nothing.



#52 Hermelin

Hermelin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts

Posted 17 February 2017 - 08:59 AM

Well since Irident only exist for Mac, ON1 is probably the best choice for us Windows users, correct?



#53 Torturro

Torturro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 17 February 2017 - 02:37 PM

There is e new beta version of Irident x developer - transforms raf files to dng - the best way for windows users I think (set all to defoult and sharpening to zero and convert to dng to be opened in PS or Lightroom.

I'll wait for Mac version - and stick to PS .


Edited by Torturro, 17 February 2017 - 09:42 PM.


#54 voodooless

voodooless

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 17 February 2017 - 09:05 PM

ON1 can still have strange artifacts, and there is no automatic lens and aberration correction. I think they need a few more iterations before being really useful. At least they make progress, the others aren't doing that much.
  • Adam Woodhouse likes this

Do diamonds shine on the dark side of the moon?