[MIL] Volkel EHVK 23-02-2012

[Nebbor]

No morning wave and no demo training due to fog. Afternoon wave did take-off but the demo training was cancelled again, this time due to low cloudbase. Here is an impression of what did fly during the day:

J-514


J-199


J-014


J-630


J-642


J-008


L-09


J-514


J-199


J-014


J-630


J-642


J-008

[Leeuwarden]

Nice pics. But they could be a lot better. Please have a look at your histogram...

[Nebbor]

Thanks but what do you think is wrong with the histogram? Please enlighten me.

[Leeuwarden]

Do you know where to find your histogram when you post-process your pics?

[Leeuwarden]

Your Histogram.

[Leeuwarden]

And my histogram. I marked the outer arrows. Do you see the difference. This adjustment is the second thing you do with a picture: adjust the histogram so exposure is right. The first thing you do is to make sure you do the exposure right when you take the picture. (I think that is a lot more difficult than adjustment after you have taken the picture) Have a look on the internet, there is a lot to read about the subject.

And just to be sure: I do like your pictures. But I also think you can make them a lot better with very little effort.

[Nebbor]

I understand the principle of adjusting levels but I am sorry to say I disagree. You adjust the photo so it is pleasing to your eyes. That opinion is not necessarily shared by others, just like my version is not liked by all who look at it. Post-processing is to a certain extend a matter of personal taste. What I try and do is to get the final image as close as possible to the (percieved) actual conditions. In this case foggy and dull lighting conditions. Your version is more like a bright day in comparison. By adjusting the levels like you do you create blacks that in reality are not really black. Same for the whites. Some people like it like that, some don't. If the subject had pure black and white in them your histogram is a correct representation, reality is that it isn't the case. In my version I feel I might have overdone the post-processing already, your version for me is a step too far.

[Leeuwarden]

So be it.

[CoHaBa]

I understand the principle of adjusting levels but I am sorry to say I disagree. You adjust the photo so it is pleasing to your eyes. That opinion is not necessarily shared by others, just like my version is not liked by all who look at it. Post-processing is to a certain extend a matter of personal taste. What I try and do is to get the final image as close as possible to the (percieved) actual conditions. In this case foggy and dull lighting conditions. Your version is more like a bright day in comparison. By adjusting the levels like you do you create blacks that in reality are not really black. Same for the whites. Some people like it like that, some don't. If the subject had pure black and white in them your histogram is a correct representation, reality is that it isn't the case. In my version I feel I might have overdone the post-processing already, your version for me is a step too far.

Too bad, i've learned a lot from the tips from "Leeuwarden". And believe me, he knows how it works. Your pics and compositions are great, but indeed with a few clicks you can make a better result. You do take the time to put a logo in your pics, so why don't take a minute per photo more? The result will give you much more satisfaction. And i know... Been there done that!

[Nebbor]

CoHaBa,
I also know how it works. I am not saying that I could not learn from tips from other forum members. I process photo's in MY style not that of someone else. What you think is a better result might be a decrease in quality for someone else. Opinions are different and style is individual. The proposed way to 'improve' the pictures is in my opinion wrong.

A quote from a famous painter: I paint pictures as I think them, not as I see them.

I guess I process photo's as I see them.

In the end there is no right or wrong. If you like my shots: fine. If you don't like them: that's fine too.

[Andras]

Too bad but it's your choice, I think the example Jan showed looks a lot better and still shows the fog and mist situation.
It's one of the basic steps everyone should have in their workflow, at least, that is my opinion.
In the end I think your pictures would attract more viewers for sure but as you say, it's your choice...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Stefan]

Hi Hans,

I also know how it works. I am not saying that I could not learn from tips from other forum members. I process photo's in MY style not that of someone else. What you think is a better result might be a decrease in quality for someone else. Opinions are different and style is individual. The proposed way to 'improve' the pictures is in my opinion wrong.

A quote from a famous painter: I paint pictures as I think them, not as I see them.

I guess I process photo's as I see them.

In the end there is no right or wrong. If you like my shots: fine. If you don't like them: that's fine too.

Refreshing point of view! I like it when people don't give in to what it perceived as 'best practice'.

I would have opted for the 'Leeuwarden'-version, but applaud you for sticking to yours!

Regards,
Stefan

[Nebbor]

OK, I have 3 versions of the same shot. I know wich one I like, let me know wich one you like.

1.


2.


3.

[Leeuwarden]

My remark about your pictures was not intended tot start a "which pic is better" topic. You explained why you pp-ed your pics the way they are and thats fine with me.

[Andras]

Now I understand, your monitor is way off!... Great angle on the F-16..!

Funny post...

Seriously, keep on posting your pictures, it's great for comparison...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]