* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #860 / Revived #080 on 2024 10 09 *

That's all well and good but I'm just posting on how I see the images and why.

No worries Dan. Though I have to say that your opinion seems quite static as in you don't even seem to attempt to see that of others. Even in your reply above you have cut everything but your opinion. In my experience a static opinion is one that also stops learning and so has a shelf life amongst those that move on.

Your opinion is static as well.

You're not giving me any reason to consider changing my oponion.

Absolutely you can edit. I posted some of the raw files earlier, please have a go if you want, I'd be interested. There is are an number of problems with photographing the Aroura which I'd like to try and get an angle on. One is it is huge, and deceptive as you only have one viewpoint and no accurate frame of reference. It is a ring that forms round a latitude dependent on strength. When right overhead it looks like shot 2, Look along it toward the NE and the ribbons tower up into the upper atmosphere (200 miles up). It also moves, so any photo is blurred compared to reality and the closer you are to the action/the more active it is the blur is quite apparent and hides the shape further reducing any reference points. Another is that although it is fairly low light the red is clearly visible so probably not so dim that our vision vision has shifted towards blue/green and luminosity as it does in low light. All photos are abstracted.

With the shot you edited, my wide angle is a 35mm lens on a Z5 so I have to be close to the house to be able to tilt the camera far enough up. If I did actually have a wider angled lens it may help. But it's a perspective problem when it's overhead, it may appear to fill the sky but try conveying that in a single photo, the wider you go the smaller it may look. You need to be standing back from it to get that fill the frame look, see Photo 1 which is exactly that. My neighbor took some shots earlier in the evening with a wider lens that I'm eager to see.

The colour is the other problem. Below is a far more accurate depiction of how it looks to the human eye, with the correct W/B (you need to see it full screen, the thumbnail against the white of the web page is like viewing with a light on). It's not as luminous green to saturated yellow as I've seen in some photos. But hey, when vying for attention on social media that yellow/blue contrast and those reds that a warmer colour balance and pushed vibrance/contrast sliders give... Who can compete?

I'd hazard a guess that almost all photos of auroras are time exposures taken on tripods. Longer exposures are needed to see the colour range. Nope. I'm not going to open the can of worms about what is and isn't "natural" in these cases. Or other cases.

Yes, between 2 and 3 secs at ISO1600. The problem is not about reality, that's long out of the window. It's about finding a level of WOW that's different but still relates to the actual Aroura. The colours in most photos are the result of heavy contrast and saturation adjustments on top of a far too warm W/B because that produces the biggest WOW colours, they are the result of what the software will always do when you use the global sliders in the most common way, and as such they have become the common standard of what Aroura photos are expected to look like. If you see what I mean. I'm trying to find something different.

I certainly see what you mean.
A couple of months ago I was in central Australia and saw some shots taken during the last big burst of auroras around the globe. The photographer thought he was taking shots of stars above Uluru and had set exposure for around 20 seconds, iso 1600 and about F2. He was stunned when he looked at the image and found he had a green curtain aurora behind Uluru - way too far north to see an aurora australis, you would have thought. He hadn't seen anything in the sky as he took the shot. It needed the time exposure to show what was lurking.

This photo plays some tricks on me until I properly look at it full screen and allow the other cues to put things right. The vertical lines of the reflections to the right of the tree dominate the horizontal lines of the water ripples and the other elements and I get the impression I am looking at an image rotated to the left 90 degrees.
I like the subdued tones. They are what we would expect in a dark murky swamp with creatures we may not want to be too personal with - although the turtles are a wonderful catch along with one eye - lost in an argument or maybe blinking? Viewed up close his claws look quite metallic, alien. I wonder if that's a play of the light or result of Topaz or a bit of both?
Very nice image that I imagine would have been a hard one to get right under the conditions.

Your scenery shots of the hills / valleys, fields / forests are always captivating. I read people saying certain lenses render very well and cameras capturing colours a certain way. I can't know but I guess you may have what they are talking about. The yellows of the sunlit field in the second are quite surreal.

Hi Bryan
Thanks, glad you like them 😊

You can usually see the equipment I’m using in the EXIF.
Recently, it is nearly always been the Nikon Z7 + the lenses I have with me.
My current favourite lens is the Nikon Z 24-120 /F4. It is a sharp “S-grade” lens with a versatile focal range and plenty fast enough for landscape work.
It has some really nice optical properties. And works often as a one-lens solution for hiking. Both of these images came through that lens.

For wider angle shots I usually take the Nikon Z 14-30 /F4. It’s also a very good quality “S-grade” lens, reasonably small with a flexible range of focal lengths

Recently I bought the new Viltrox 16mm /F1.8 which seems to be even better in terms of sharpness all the way out to the edge.

I think when people talk about “the nice colours” that one particular camera shows vs. another, they are usually talking about JPG images “straight out of the camera”.
But I never use that method and only process from RAW.
When using RAW and developing yourself, the resulting colours you’ll get in the final image are more or less “up to you”.
I try and keep them sort of realistic and similar to what I experienced at the scene. Which is not necessarily the same as what the camera will record!
I will modify the WB and increase the saturation and/or brightness of the different colours accordingly. I’ll change the tone curve values for the whole image and also for particular areas of the image to achieve that “reality” and a pleasing image.
But I think the main factor that effects the final image is looking for scenes where the natural light is good and interesting to start with 😊

Thank you minnie.

My DxO free trial finished a week or so ago so I am without access to a tool I am happy to raise shadows with. It is quite expensive but I believe they have good black Friday deals and not too long to wait.

Thanks Chris,
not the largest raptor but he has all the attributes.

In times like this I may switch back to single point focus and single shot to get a few sharper images but quickly revert to burst settings in case he takes off. Always a dilemma because I don't want to miss in flight if it presents.

Thanks Fireplace,

I have to say I didn't specifically acquire my kit for birding nor wildlife although they have to be my favourite subjects. My Panasonic G9 m43 was the next step up from my little FZ300 and the PL 100-400mm a budget breaking jump (even though 2nd hand) to a lens fit for the task. It is interesting to note that a lot of the passionate birders mostly use m43 OM 1s as they are the best camera for moving and or distant wildlife. The point is that 20MP is enough for good IQ (if not the best) and the smaller sensor allows faster readout therefore higher % of action shot keepers and also for smaller, lighter, less expensive lenses for equivalent reach. One day I may venture into FF for better scenery shots etc, but I doubt I would buy the necessary lenses for wildlife. My 100-400mm weighs ~ 1Kg and gives 800mm equivalent. Lower quality 600mm FF lenses start about 2Kg and the better they are the heavier they get. That's a lot to hold still for any length of time.

That's certainly not my experience.

Personally, I wouldn't use smaller than APS-C.

Swamps like this are a distant world for me, and flooded woods in Spring are as close as we get around here. And there are no alligators - the frogs just don't have quite the same fear factor! You have found a great one-eyed character to star in your photo and he takes the main position in your composition.
I too use Topaz regularly and agree it does a good job, but is a bit of a precocious talent, which often needs to be reigned in. The smaller version of the photo looks good, but when looking at the large version, the turtles in particular look a bit over-processed. They jar slightly, because they are a second area of sharpness beyond the main subject, but mainly because their bright yellow stripes draws too much attention away from the alligator. I think slightly less contrast / sharpness would be better.
Now that all sounds far too negative, which is a shame, because I like it!

This is a very enjoyable series, and you did well to get so close, in fact 4 is maybe a bit too close for the pose, but 3 is great. Similarly it is taken from almost underneath, but the open beak and view inside and a raised foot makes a very unusual and eye-catching pose.

I agree, if you have the tools. then raising the shadows would be worth playing with, but it is really a matter of taste, and the dark shadows have something attractive about them too. I think 5 is the only one where I definitely tink raised shadows would be a definite improvement.

These are two delightful landscapes. As Mike pointed out, the first uses lines and the second brightness and colour to draw the eye into the image, and both work very well. I think you have processed them well, and made them your landscapes, rather than a forensic copy of what was captured, which is good.

I agree. Leave the worms in their can and process them as you see fit, and if it is too much or too little for others, well who cares, they are your works and you are the artist. For what its worth, I think they are superb. I am also jealous, as I have been reading articles about the current likelihood of a rare chance to see Northern Lights in our latitudes and how to find the comet, which is at its brightest at the moment. Unfortunately they forgot to mention the thick clouds....

Agreed. The interesting thing is that this image screams Autumn, but it does so without the traditional hook of brightly coloured leaves. Instead the appropriate colours come from the sun-shades and the season implied by the people still happy to sit outside, albeit with warm clothing. Clever.

LOL, the Aroura does tend to happen in the latitude that has the most weather! :-)