hrafna
Well-Known Member
that is a whole different kind of herping!Wrightpython tree python?
that is a whole different kind of herping!Wrightpython tree python?
decent HDR(High Def Rendering)
if you want an accurate non manipulated shot ask for a raw image file.
Nato
my understanding was that HDR stood for High Dynamic Range which means capturing an image several times at different exposures; underexposed(to get all the highlight detail), overexposed to get a lot of shodow detail and a couple of different exposures in between. If the subject is not moving and the camera was on a tripod, then all these images can be combined together to give an image with a much broader range of tone and detail than would be possible in a single exposure.
if you want an accurate non manipulated shot ask for a raw image file.
The effect is called HDR.... I'll see if I can demonstrate a better example... with my dream car
View attachment 236570
Haven't seen reptilesaustralia but in one of the other herp mags the colour printing(most likely prepress) is pretty terrible with lots of very flat lifeless images. I feel sorry for the photographers because it's not showcasing their images in the best light.
Without knowing just what is happening in the pre-press it is hard to pass judgement. If the files are supplied as PDF's what are you expecting the pre-press to do? It is up to the publisher / photographer to embed the correct ICC profile, check the separation (CMYK) colour shift.Haven't seen reptilesaustralia but in one of the other herp mags the colour printing(most likely prepress) is pretty terrible with lots of very flat lifeless images. I feel sorry for the photographers because it's not showcasing their images in the best light.
I take your point but how accurate a RAW image is going to be in relation to the live snake? Some good, some not so good in case of the latter, the buyer will shy away. Also, how many people have the gear to shoot in RAW? I see a lot of images in ads taken with a phone ...... no further comments. LOL
Even if everybody had the capability to shoot and read RAW files, it would not guarantee image "integrity" as those of us who are remnants from the days of film can manipulate filters to enhance and render colour changes at the shooting stage.
Spot on!Sorry I didn't mean pre-press with the printers or other professionals. The trouble nowadays is everyone has a camera capable of taking great images and everyone's a graphic designer and it's "easy" to make a pdf and send it off to a printer. The days of the professional prepress house are pretty well finished and prepress on images just doesn't get done unless it's through a professional and many are reluctant to pay for that because they have no idea what a difference it can make. Apart from the poor colour reproductions, just look at the number of low res images that get printed now where you see all the pixelation!
I think many photographers fail to do even the most basic things like setting black and white points for decent prints, and CMYK conversions is beyond most...of course you can just go to the menu in PS "convert to CMYK". I think a photographer should be able to do colour correction etc in RGB files and make them look their best but working with CMYK is a whole new ball game!
Do digital photographers even bother with filters these days when PS makes it so easy to add the effects later?
But the problem is off the bat the camera usually misrepresents the colours etc , what I try to do is then manipulate the saturation brightness etc till I get the closest representation to real life. But if what Michael says about different monitors all showing different results then that makes it almost impossible???When sending pictures to prospective buyers who you may have never met, it only takes half an hour to snap 100 or more pictures indoors, outdoors, on white paper, on newspaper etc, save and send without any editing at all so the buyer get's to see the true colours of the specimen(s) in question in the different lights or settings.
Very easy to do and saves any disappointment, exaggeration or mis-representation.
But the problem is off the bat the camera usually misrepresents the colours etc , what I try to do is then manipulate the saturation brightness etc till I get the closest representation to real life. But if what Michael says about different monitors all showing different results then that makes it almost impossible???
Enter your email address to join: