Jump to content

Visit to United Kingdom


kyoleung

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone. I made a visit to the United Kingdom in April, 2015. The trip lasted 14 days.

 

Photos taken with X-E2 and 18-55mm lens, processed with LR 6.  This " kit " lens is a great work-around gem !

 

Re-evaluate all the photos recently, I found a lot of room for improvement. Picked some photos and share on Flickr.

 

Thanks for watching!

 

.

 
*** Edinburgh  ***
 
 
 
 
34360531095_f70ea966c2_h.jpgEdinburgh by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr
 
 
 
34319255526_d9e7f488ac_h.jpgEdinburgh by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr
 
 
 
34360530635_7a12acfaa6_b.jpgEdinburgh by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr
 
 
 
34319254566_3b1482593e_b.jpgEdinburgh by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr
 
 
 
 
 
**** York ******
 
 
 
 
34322424956_cced929e18_b.jpgYork by Ja
ck Lee, 於 Flickr
 
 
ee, 於 Flickr
 
 
33521764554_852be5ec2a_b.jpgYork by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr
 
 
 
 
 
Link to post
Share on other sites

*** Cotswolds in Central England ***

 

33994433580_2096961c7f_b.jpgBibury by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr

 

33994433340_1281f96033_h.jpgBibury by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr

 


 


 


 


 

33994432200_b1e0c44efb_h.jpgChipping Campden by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr

 

33537080564_924a660ac0_h.jpgChipping Campden by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr

 

 

*** Manchester ***

 


 

Edited by kyoleung
Link to post
Share on other sites

***  London   ***

 


 


 

33543984124_e980622839_b.jpgBuckingham Palace by Jack Lee, 於 Flickr

 


 

 

** The National Gallery, Lots of great paintings **

 


 

 

***  On the plane  ***

 


 

 

Looks like a nuclear bomb  XD

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Indeed a few pictures are HDR processed in Photomatix first and then further edited in LR.

 

2) the sequence of the 14-day trip ,  in London > Birminham > Manchester > Edinburgh ( Scotland ) > York > Oxford and Cotswold > London. All by trains.

Link to post
Share on other sites

nice pics but quite a few show very “ light” on my monitor, a bit less brightness would saturate colors and give more presence.

 

If you don’t mind I made some quick and dirty adjustments to show what I mean.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

nice pics but quite a few show very “ light” on my monitor, a bit less brightness would saturate colors and give more presence.

 

If you don’t mind I made some quick and dirty adjustments to show what I mean.

 

I like your adjustments!  Those were processed with HDR, which was quite new to me in the year 2015.

 

Welcome anyone to leave comments~ Exchanging ideas is a great thing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, I simply readjusted the levels. 

 

Several of your captures are, in my opinion, simply too pale, but maybe this might also depend upon your monitor or your taste for a more “ pastel” rendition. If you were ever to print those pictures you would see that they would flatten even more.

 

But these things are not set in stone. Sometimes I see people with pics where there are only super saturated colors and images supposed to be in black and white which are sot in grey and grey-er.

 

Nice compositions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, I simply readjusted the levels. 

 

Several of your captures are, in my opinion, simply too pale, but maybe this might also depend upon your monitor or your taste for a more “ pastel” rendition. If you were ever to print those pictures you would see that they would flatten even more.

 

But these things are not set in stone. Sometimes I see people with pics where there are only super saturated colors and images supposed to be in black and white which are sot in grey and grey-er.

 

Nice compositions.

 

Heard that printing help finding the "defects" of the photo, from someone else as well.

 

You have a printer at home and print often ?

 

I rarely print them out, if I do, just go to some local store to print at 3R or 4R size, at  0.2 USD dollar each. But I am planning to print some of my picks at large size , eg at A4 or A3 size. Then hang up in my house :)

 

Btw, I am from Hong Kong, Asia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t print often, in fact one of my arguments against the race towards the ever increasing higher pixel count is that I can have my X-T1 files printed 2 x 3 m as it is (and I don’t do much of it) and don’t need more pixels (and for my type of photography faster autofocus is pointless) than what I have. There might be other things beneficial but I am happy with what I have and will only upgrade when my camera stops working or something really revolutionary will appear without breaking the bank.

 

Unless you have a very good printer (and print a lot) I think that home printing is not the best way to go. In general you will spend a lot of money trying to get what a good shop, with better equipment, will do for you. If you have something that you are particularly proud of you can have it printed on glass (or perspex).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with you on the stop increasing of pixel count issue. For people cropping a lot and print really big, that really helps. But for most folks, 24 mpixels are well enough for most purposes, can print big up to A3+.

 

I really hope sensor companies like Sony can put more emphasis on the areas of  wider dynamic range, higher color reproduction quality, fewer noise etc

 

For camera companies, make cameras more customizable, eg allow us to customize the curve for jpg,  file name with customized template instead of just img_xxxx

 

I never knew printing can be done on glass, just knew in the old time, people painted on it. Will google to know more about the details. Thanks for the recommendation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I saw the original pictures first I also had the impresseion they are slightly overexposed but also that they remind me of water colour pictures of the 18th and 19th century. Milandro's adjustments make them look more like normal photos but also more ordinary. (No offence to Milandro intented.) So the original version has a good quality on its own.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Edit: Apology to Milandro included.

Edited by Jürgen Heger
Link to post
Share on other sites

I could do the same HDR treatment an give them more depth too ( less “ normal) and more “ drawing"

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that there are many ways to skin a cat but my point was it is not the looks as in the aesthetics of the image but the objective lack of saturation which on my monitor, and on prints, would make the original by OP look too desaturated. The amount of saturation is of course debatable and arbitrary. I merely suggested to him an alternative possible interpretation, never did it cross my mind that I was making a better picture from te aesthetic point of view.

 

As for skills, thanks for your appreciation but I just pushed a button  ;)  :D ( and you can see it from the creation of artifacts in the image). This was a quick and dirty suggestion, just to see how it goes.

 

But of course , anything goes as one wishes.

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

I welcome whatever comment, advice or critics, they stimulate me to  think, re-evaluate, experiment new things and understand how other people are.

 

If everyone has the same taste, same thought, same vision, etc, the world would be so boring  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • It is really easy to find out if the wifi is on. Your computer or tablet or cell phone will have a network settings dealing with wifi, bluetooth, ethernet or “other”. Open that up and go into the section for wifi, and take note of which networks are listed. Turn on the camera and keep watching the list of networks. If your camera’s wifi is turned on, a new network should suddenly show up in your computer/tablet/phone’s network listings. Now go into the camera’s menus and start a wireless connection (the x-app or camera remote app can help you with this). You should see a network show up now. It is not hidden because it has to be visible so that your computer/tablet/phone can join the camera’s network to transfer images. Turn the camera off and that network should disappear. Turn the camera back on and see what happens.
    • Sweet Creek Falls, Oregon. X-H1, Viltrox 13mm F1.4, Acros.

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

    • I think my Fuji 150-600 F8 is a brilliant wildlife lens in terms of sharpness, portability and value but the small aperture does cause issues at the start and end of the day - even pushing the ISO as far as I dare, I can see shutter speed down to 1/25s - stabilisation isn't an issue but asking a deer to stand still for that is too much! In the same situation, an F4 would give 1/100s so the difference to the success rate would be phenomenal... and that's without the other improvements like shallower depth of field. I also find that the Fuji's subject detect AF gets pretty iffy in low light - I keep updating to the latest firmware but it doesn't seem to get any better. I was originally looking at the Nikon 500mm F4 E but good examples secondhand are still reasonably expensive but like-for-like Sigma lenses are around half the price. Reviews I have read suggest that they are as good optically, AF performance and IS-wise but you gain a few hundred grams of weight (but less than the older Nikon model). For a couple of grand, I can live with that. Does anyone have any experience mounting one on an XH2S? What about with the 1.4 teleconverter? It feels like that is pushing it anyway - hefty lens + TC + Fringer all sounds a bit...wobbly? It is on the Fringer approved list but I am wary about AF speed in particular. I had also considered looking for a used Nikon 400mm F2.8, which would be even faster (and heavier) and could couple with a TC to give 560mm F4 but again, it is that lens+TC+Fringer combination that worries me as being just too many links in the chain. Of course, what I really want is a native Fuji prime but that doesn't seem to be on the horizon - and if you look at what Nikon and Sony are doing, if Fuji do ever bring out a 500mm prime, it will probably be a small, light and cheapish F5.6, which is only 2/3 stop better than my zoom at the same focal length. Any thoughts anyone?
    • The Amazon link is an annoying feature of this forum - its automatic and is applied to every post for advertising purposes. My question was - how do you know the camera wi-fi is on and requires turning off? I would have thought this would just use up the battery for no purpose if you aren't specifically using a function that requires wi-fi.
    • I've made a point to push Angelbird memory products as they are the best performance cards you can get, The sustained write speed is important.
×
×
  • Create New...