Jump to content

Rudy Umans

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    637

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Rudy Umans

    Monitor recommendation below $1000 for photo editing

    in Hardware & Gear

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Taras Kushnir said:

    Not mainly video, but also video included.

    Why 4K is not recommended for stills?

    The resolution is too high, which makes it hard to find little flaws etc, They are too small with 4K and so will be any text. So, post processing will be  harder. Also the images you already edited on a non 4K monitor might not look sharp anymore on 4K monitor.

    Keep in mind though that I might be alone in my opinion. (wouldn't be the first time lol)

    I just do stills and I use this one (I sell 60 - 72 inch prints): https://www.benq.com/en-us/monitor/photographer/sw2700pt.html

    The 4K version would be this one: https://www.benq.com/en-us/monitor/photographer/sw271.html  

    1

    File size

    in Contributor Experience

    Posted

    On 9/30/2020 at 12:14 PM, HodagMedia said:

    I don't understand why people shoot RAW, edit in 32 bit, use calibrated huge monitors with exceptional extended memory graphics cards, and then change the files to 8 bit JPEGs sRGB to upload. I mean, we are trying to put 10 pounds of color and resolution, into a 3 pound bag. Why not shoot JPG, edit and upload? How much effort does anyone need to make for 10¢ ?

    Why? Greater leeway in editing and better control and/or prevention of blown out skies, banding, noise, sharpness, degenerated pixels. etc. etc. None of that is lost when you edit in 16bit uncompressed Tiff and save the end result as  JPeg, but it will be lost if the image information wasn't there in the first place. (32bit and "extended memory graphics cards" is a little much)

    There are many people, like the OP, who buy cameras they had to work hard for and if we can help them to get the best out of their equipment, we should. The cell phone crowd might not be al that interested in any of this, but even cell phone cameras are getting better and better. Some do RAW now I understand. (I could be wrong)

    For people who just upload to microstock, especially editorial pictures, sure, who cares? But the photography world is bigger than that and with the way microstock is going, I assume that more and more microstock submitters realize that and are looking for other outlets, of which some do require the higher standards. Even if they don't, maintaining a higher standard would be an advantage for the photographer either way I would think. 

    Feel free to disagree

    Personally it doesn't matter all that much anymore, I am blowing this pop stand and going back to film. Already have for 80% on medium format and I might dust off my trusty F3 35mm with motordrive for color action shots as well. Why? Because I can. The drawback is that I am turning your 3 pound back into your 10 pound back lol

    0

    File size

    in Contributor Experience

    Posted

    1 hour ago, HodagMedia said:

    And DPI doesn't matter for stock uploads, only for printing. Since we upload sRGB for stock sites, there aren't any 16 bit files to be concerned with. (and yes you did throw it in... LOL) That does make me wonder about POD sites and DPI because everything comes out of my camera at 72 and they print just fine.

    Now what about pixel pitch and how a 61MP photo on a phone isn't the same as a 61MP photo from Heide's Sony? Hmmm?

     

    I know that many PoD sites print art prints in 100-150 DPI and they look just fine. Recently I sold four 60 inch prints to a hotel and they were all printed at that DPI and they look just fine. Book and calendar printers prefer 300 DPI and for magazines it depends.

    sRGB or any RGB has nothing to do with 8 or 16 bit.  (any) RGB determines what colors within the color gamut are covered.  Adobe RGB for example covers a greater range of colors than sRGB. (Adobe cover more in the green areas.) That's why images look more dull when edited and saved in  Adobe RGB, but converted to sRGB later on. RGB is not related to the number of colors, which can be the same for any RGB. With Adobe and Prophoto RGB for example, a larger number of shades within one color goes at the expense of fewer shades in another color.

    8 or 16 bit (or 32) is about the color density, meaning the number of colors within a particular color space. 8 bit shows 16 million colors and 16 bit 280 trillion colors.  It doesn't matter what particular colors are covered or not, That is what RGB gamut is for. The number of bits, and therefor colors, determines how smooth one color flows into another. 16 bit images have usually more leeway with editing than 8 bit images and things like banding etc. are less likely to occur with 16 bit. For that reason, everybody should make it a habit to work in 16 bit. especially for stock or any other curated site.

    The only thing is that JPG images are not capable of showing that number of colors, so if you want to work in 16 bit (and you should) , you have to work in RAW of TIFF (converted from RAW). So, shoot RAW, Convert to 16 bit TIFF and work in sRGB. At least that's what I do when I work in color. 

     

    I am gonna stop now, Don't want to give Debbie a hangover.

    2

    File size

    in Contributor Experience

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Studio 2 said:

    That's a bloody good idea actually. A large G&T might help me to care less WTF everyone is talking about. Cheers 🥂

    Actually, don't mean to be frank, but if you care about photography and you want to upload your images to stock sites or PoD sites, you should care because sooner or later you will run into this issue and it would be good then if you know the difference between MB, MP, and DPI. (I threw in DPI to make it more interesting and I could throw in 8bit and 16bit, but I won't. lol)

    1

    File size

    in Contributor Experience

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, Studio 2 said:

    I've lost interest in my novel. My cat's abandoned me. So I'm reading this thread without really understanding or even caring. It's a last resort 🙁

    As long as you don't go for the bottle, you will be fine. 

    1

    A dog's name is sensitive information?

    in Contributor Experience

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Studio 2 said:

    That's my cat's name. Your dog can't have the same name as my cat. That's just wrong. Can you change your dog's name please to something more doggy. 'Rover' would do. 

    No can't do! She is named after Coco Chanel and she has the  attitude that goes with the name.  Also, I better not tell her there is a cat out there with the same name..... we have a cat named Joe (a proper name for a cat don't you agree?) Who is twice the size of Coco and with nails and teeth longer my vet has ever seen (or so he says) and Coco doesn't care. She is after that cat all the time. Just saying....

    Besides, she is 6 pounds, a biker chick, and I am afraid of her! (not really, I love her to death!)

    1

    The Hummer Thread Vol.2!!!

    in Contributor Experience

    Posted

    Clyde Butcher doesn't live in Big Cypress anymore. He moved to Tampa some time ago where he has his darkroom and a gallery. Tampa is about 150 miles north on the Gulf of Mexico. 

    Thank you very much for the compliment Patrick! That one was done with my 6 x 17 ("The Beast") pinhole camera. That camera has a 140 something  degree angle of view, which is about a 6 mm focal length on a Full Frame. It has a curved film plane with a radius of 70mm (Focal length) and f/233. I got his thing a few month before Covid 19 so I haven't used it as often as I would like, The Everglades was closed for a couple of months. I did use it a good number of times though and it still takes me 5-10 minutes to load the film. It's a pain in the rear tootsie, but one with great rewards. It's my second favorite camera

    Here is a BTS picture. Not the same location, but the set up is the same

     

    20200520_185403rz.jpg

    0
×
×
  • Create New...