The Photography Thread !
- Thread starter Shripad
- Start date
delirious?
Disciple
ANP !!! said:
Wow congrats dude!!! Do you mind explaining how they 'found' your photo? Flickr??
Payne, your recent snaps have been mind-blowing!-D.Payne- said:It's been soo long since I posted here that I don't even know what to post now.So here's a mixture of shots from my stream
Another landscape with my 50mm.
No editing done.
ANP !!!
Skilled
Experienced the most beautiful sunset of this season, unfortunately I was out of town, so cant go to my fav sunset site, I got this in the middle of the highway, the coconut trees helped a lot in creating a perfect frame . It was like Heaven was touching Earth, it was so spectacular. This picture doesnt do justice
Its SOOC.
. It was like Heaven was touching Earth, it was so spectacular. This picture doesnt do justiceIts SOOC.
@ANP: Are you sure that shot is SOOC? I could be wrong, but I see some very big reasons why it cannot be:
1. The heavy, heavy vignetting is not possible with modern-day lenses unless you're using some kind of an ancient lens. This is the kind of vignetting that both of us normally add in PP.
2. Assuming you were shooting in JPEG (can't see why), the blacks and contrast are just too good to be true! Most camera engines accomodate for nearly a 18% grey in the shot and that's why most SOOC images look a tad-flat unless you've really boosted the contrast and saturation in-camera. This is why I assume you were shooting JPEG. But if this is RAW, then no RAW file is strictly SOOC is it?
Make no mistake about it, I LOVE this shot. The fire in the skies and the overall mood is fantastic. I can see you've under-exposed it quite a bit for the effect, great job!
I could be wrong, but I see some very big reasons why it cannot be:1. The heavy, heavy vignetting is not possible with modern-day lenses unless you're using some kind of an ancient lens. This is the kind of vignetting that both of us normally add in PP.
2. Assuming you were shooting in JPEG (can't see why), the blacks and contrast are just too good to be true! Most camera engines accomodate for nearly a 18% grey in the shot and that's why most SOOC images look a tad-flat unless you've really boosted the contrast and saturation in-camera. This is why I assume you were shooting JPEG. But if this is RAW, then no RAW file is strictly SOOC is it?
Make no mistake about it, I LOVE this shot. The fire in the skies and the overall mood is fantastic. I can see you've under-exposed it quite a bit for the effect, great job!
ANP !!!
Skilled
Thanks VB, ArZuNeOs and Payne.
Well I just added in the Vignette, for a reason, there was a annoying tree on the upper left corner that was ruining the shot, apart from that no processing, and I shot it in RAW.
What I wanna convey with SOOC is that, I kept the color, clarity, saturation, contrast, black levels, etc all the same. Plus I shoot in P mode, where I have played with the sharpness and saturation a bit, and that is added into every shot I shoot.
I didnt knew RAW cannot be considered as SOOC.
Well I just added in the Vignette, for a reason, there was a annoying tree on the upper left corner that was ruining the shot, apart from that no processing, and I shot it in RAW.
What I wanna convey with SOOC is that, I kept the color, clarity, saturation, contrast, black levels, etc all the same. Plus I shoot in P mode, where I have played with the sharpness and saturation a bit, and that is added into every shot I shoot.
I didnt knew RAW cannot be considered as SOOC
.ANP !!! said:Thanks VB, ArZuNeOs and Payne.
Well I just added in the Vignette, for a reason, there was a annoying tree on the upper left corner that was ruining the shot, apart from that no processing, and I shot it in RAW.
What I wanna convey with SOOC is that, I kept the color, clarity, saturation, contrast, black levels, etc all the same. Plus I shoot in P mode, where I have played with the sharpness and saturation a bit, and that is added into every shot I shoot.
I didnt knew RAW cannot be considered as SOOC
Well, I don't think RAW should ever be considered SOOC.
The whole concept of SOOC is a straight-out-of-camera and into-the-web shot. A RAW shot can have sooo many interpretations! A simple vignette immediately removes the SOOC bit. An unedited JPEG is SOOC, but I would never call a RAW SOOC!For the record, I don't believe in the concept of SOOC. I think it neither adds to the "greatness" or "originality" of the shot, nor does it compliment the photographer (oh look, he got it right in the camera itself, yay!).
IMO, photographs tell stories, stories you are narrating to your audience - about a place, a moment, a person, or even a random beautiful scene. Stories are not made by chance but by painstakingly tweaking each bit of the narrative till you get it right. So a SOOC file is just another story by a person who is too lazy to tell a personalized story or someone who just likes the story which came straight-out-of-the-camera - no more editing required.
Too much talk, time for a photo.
Colors of India
Shot on the way to UP from Rajasthan.
Cheers!
Payne
delirious?
Disciple
20 sec exposure. That means I had to crouch still for 20 sec!! Obviously I am not too sharp, but oh well!
HDR from a single RAW file.
Obviously I am not too sharp, but oh well! HDR from a single RAW file.
thetoxicmind
ex-Mod
delirious? said:20 sec exposure. That means I had to crouch still for 20 sec!!
HDR from a single RAW file.
EDIT. :ashamed:
10char
delirious?
Disciple
Obviously!thetoxicmind said:Use a Tripod.
I meant that the person in the pic (me) is not sharp! Stuge said:
I think I explained myself in quite a detailed manner that IMO RAW cannot be SOOC. Unless SOOC here means "some data which came out of camera". RAW is interpreted differently by so many viewers and the fact that you have to change settings (in this case vignetting) before outputting to jpeg means the "ethos" of SOOC is lost.
Again, I don't give a rats posterior whether it is SOOC or not.
I like the shot. Period.Here's a shot for the thread.
Blaze of glory
Cheers!
Payne
