Thanks for sharing many useful information about WB, Flash and Color Filter/Gel. Much to learn I have. I do notice what you mentioned about changing the WB in PP resulting/affecting the ambient or background; Adjustment later can't be perfect only can adjust to "acceptable" level. Worst, if there're green tint here and there, then pink tint the other area, your one person is very yellow and another is white, or something like that, fixing in PP is not easy.
The worst is, viewing on different display, some display, it'll be warmer, some display adjust to 9300K, which has bluish tint, resulting the person face become even more white like geisha or pretty bad result if you adjust too much.

I usually try to PP so the colors look OK on my display, and most display, as well as the prints. Although, I notice the prints the colours will be different, due to CMYK conversion? Is there any solution?
And some highlights which recover from PP looks OK on soft copy, when printed, the highlights might look worst than soft copy.


If I shoot RAW, I turn off noise reduction and I didin't use any luminance/noise reduction even for ISO6400 shots... I just find the noise reduction destroys the details and sharpness; For JPEG I leave it on standard/default, as I rarely use it.

Noise/Grain it depends; I used to be very picky, but I learn to accept these noise/grains; As long as the picture look OK when not view 100% crop, and prints OK, then it's good. Even at ISO6400, when print, it's "still" acceptable, although for experience people, they can notice the noise, but for many people it's considered good; Imagine the situation, it's already FAR better than what their digital camera can do. OR you can choose to shoot at lower ISO, under-expose it, and output like a normal digital camera.

Personally, what makes many people "wow" is the output what DSLR can produce at lowlight conditions; Let's say in an event, nowadays many people bring their expensive digital camera (let's forget about handphone); They took many photos; If your DSLR results output is more or less the same like theirs, but more clean and detail, it doesn't really make much difference; But if your DSLR output is like worlds apart difference, that's what makes people open their eyes.
This is my personal experience;
One example is 2 DSLR output, one is the darker image at lower ISO, thus little or no noise, but the environment is dark, the subject is clear; It looks not much difference with a digital camera except it's much more clean, detailed, sharper, etc. Another output is like WYSIWYG, it's like being there and seeing what you see, everything looks clear and bright, but it is shot at very high ISO, but viewing at normal view, it's not noticeable/obvious for most people.

But there's no right or wrong here; As I said before, some people prefer the mood/ambience and they have their own preference; So, it really depends, everyone has their own style and preference, but generally, most people would want to see clear and bright picture, like what you see is what you get especially; Some artistic touch are nice, but as an art, it's not everyone's taste or appreciated by everyone. The good thing about PP is, you can produce both output, provided you shoot it right.

** WYSIWYG - what you see is what you get

This post has been edited by Andy214: Aug 10 2011, 10:51 AM

I'm not referring to DSLR difference. I'm referring to DSLR vs normal Digital Camera/Point And Shot output; Normal Digital Camera/Point And Shoot, most output you see indoor or say in events, the output is dark, or if they use flash, the background is dark, almost only the subject is clear. With DSLR, if your output is similar, then then difference would be the more cleaner picture, details, sharpness, etc.
But if you utilize the DSLR and shoot "properly", you can get something like WYSIWYG on the picture, just like being there looking at them. This to those people who are shooting with their point and shoot, they will notice the difference immediately.

Of course, as I mentioned before, it's also about preference and style; And also depends what you're shooting as you mentioned. For events, "generally", people want to see the enviroment and so on, and if we're shooting FOR PEOPLE, we should understand what they want in their photos and produce the output they desired. Many/Some people tend to use what they think it's best for others, example, buying presents, some people they buy what the person SHOULD use or like, not what the person like?

Lastly, just to highlight in case I didn't make it clear in previous posting, I didn't say anything about right or wrong; It's like you said, it's about which is better; but this also depends on the person's preference, but there's always a "better" for most people or when we use the term generally.
As art, it's more on "specific" rather than general. It very much about preference.
For Bokeh, it's also really depends, altough many appreciates if, but let's say if you shoot a very nice bokehlicious shots and you're really impressed with it, but if you give to your client who doesn't appreciates this (usually senior citizen), he/she might complain, what is this? Why all blur blur one? etc.
Just saying...

** WYSIWYG - what you see is what you get

This post has been edited by Andy214: Aug 10 2011, 10:51 AM

True, if you're saying 100%, but what I mean is.

You go to an dinner event, everything is bright and clear.
With a point and shoot without flash, the output is usually dark and it doesn't give the feel of the place, or what you're seeing.
If you use Flash, the background most probably is dark and only the subject is clear. Some will say, where is this place, it doesn't show where you are, no difference if you take in other place.
With DSLR, one can produce output like a point and shoot, with slightly better image quality, OR really bring out and show the difference in output, giving the feel just like you're being there and looking at the environment.

---

Added on August 10, 2011, 10:50 amMy bad, I thought this is very common term, especially for graphic or imaging or display, etc.

I should've put a note at the bottom.


This post has been edited by Andy214: Aug 10 2011, 10:50 AM

Yup, looks like it, can also try play with presets in LR, and see how/what changes gives different effect.

Reviews of SB-700; Seems the colour filter provided when fitted on the Flash, it will comunicate with the camera so the camera set the correct WB. Does this feature available for SB-900?
I did notice the Flash able to detect what you "install" into it, e.g. diffuser, color filter; What about SB-900? or is this a total new feature?

Thanks~

Thanks~ Yea, good to know how it works; The automatic detection is a nice feature to have.

Btw, using this technique, I tested using these coloured filter before, didn't adjust WB back then, so suppose it already auto adjust for me; The output result turns out like the picture was taken in white lights, when the ambience or place is diferent. So, the output doesn't match the current ambience/feel.
Example: In dinner hall, with yellow lights around, it's more natural for the output to have more warm, but if use the colour filter, the picture (in LCD) turns out different from the current ambience? Thus I remove the colour and shoot without it.
Any ideas?

This post has been edited by Andy214: Aug 12 2011, 12:32 AM

Wow, done within a day? I thought must leave the cam there?
How to request for fix within a day? Cause sometimes, it's not convenient to go there twice especially for those working in office.

Previously, I send in for camera focus adjustment, it took them 2 days, when I collect, I found nothing was done. After show and explain to the technician, then he adjust on the spot which took around 1 hour or so. Seems OK after that, maybe not 100% perfect cause seems the way they adjust is also based on the lens I have and one of the lens they have?
I thought the adjustment should have a standard value and use some machine for micro efficiency?

off topic, saw ur Focus TDCi in siggy:
That day I sat in a focus TDCi remap by DKTuning to about 180hp and over 400nm torque, crazy pull!

My was the body, so have to adjust the body.Whatever lens I put on its front focus.

What I meant was, when they adjust, seems they adjust based on the lens they have, I don't know the actual process, but that's what I understand from them when I ask them because I want to make sure my camera is following the standard adjustment instead of adjust according to a lens. And seems it not a detail micro efficiency process as what I read in overseas forum, which is is very detail using some machine or something.

If you prefer to use LCD, then you shouldn't get DSLR.
If you use auto and wnt to shoot action, use Scene mode and choose sports or similar, which is optimize for fast action.
And using 50mm, in auto mode indoor, it might use widest aperture and the DOF will be shallow, you might want to use 3D tracking or something similar if you want to use auto and keep it simple.
But honestly, if you use a DSLR, you need to at least learn to use the viewfinder and some basic usage, shutter priority modes, aperture priority modes, et.
If you want simple, those mirrorlless will deliver much better job and much easier to use.

Yup, D7000. Before I send in, I was using the aF Fine tune, I modified the fine tune +8 for te default camera AF, thus all lenses mount looks ok. But that's not the way, so when I'm got the time, I send to Nikon PJ to fix it. Now its fixed, just that it was not what I expected and as detailed as what I read.

Anyway, it's considered resolved, just stating the difference of how things were done seems to be different from what I read in overseas forum or discussions, the mentioned about the detailed process an so on. I guess you could put like doing car alignment, some experience mechanic doing it by their feel while some follow the spec in the machine as a standard, but car alignment can be affected by the car condition, so manual adjustment maybe necessary.

I suppose back focus is focus on the towards the back?
My symptom was, lets say I focus on the eye and the hand is in front, you see the hand is sharp. For focus chart or lets say words, it focus on the front.
When I adjust the AF Fine Tune, as I increase the value, the focus plane shift to the back, slowly correcting the focus.

No worries, thanks.

Its slower than the D, so does 50mm f/1.4G, but its still faster than kits lens or normal zoom lens. If you compare with pro lens, then its different story.

Depends, if situations like events when changing lightings, etc, shoot raw give you more room for fixing. Its not about afraid of screw ups, nobody is perfect, and its not about ego and showing off or trying to proof one can always get it right in camera, e.g. acting like a pro. Its more important to get the result at its best than the ego.
If anyone can really always 100% get it right in camera than good for him/her, but it doesn't mean anything, really. If you look at most real pros, they always PP, most probably they always shoot RAW too.

Some ppl will say things like, no need PP, or no need flash, well, it really depends... The question is, can one shoot a picture straight out of camera exactly like the one well PP? Even given them all the time to try as many shots as possible, can one do it?
And for flash, try shooting in lowlights area where you need ISO higher than 6400 at f/2.8 1/30 secs to say get the exposure right. Whats more, try shooting group photo.Don't want flash? Yes, you still can do it of course.....

Screw up can be over or under expose, or White Balance out, etc.

In any case, I don't see anything wrong with people who shoot RAW and those that don't shoot RAW. It really up the individual. It just seems like sometimes either party likes to tease each other, e.g. RAW shooter saying jpeg have limitation, while jpeg shooter teasing raw shooter for not being good enough? Shooting either format only doesn't proof anything or make anyone better than the other...

Thanks; Sort of discover this yesterday; I also notice depending on the environment, although under yellow lighting, using the orange filter, some of the output can be too cool/blue. Quite tough to deal for non-consistent lighting area/environment.

Very poor lighting, at f/2.8, 1/125, need about ISO6400 for proper exposure, the faster shutter is to capture action/moving subject. For group, can lower shutter to compensate for smaller aperture. Flash is a lot better in this case, but the non-consistent lighting is kind of troubling. Moving around, sometimes can get much cooler tone/bluish tint.
Another problem is stronger spotlight/yellow light at certain areas, so the person directly under it get very bright/strong exposure/highlights. Focusing on the person seems higher chance of locking wrongly to the background.

Sorry for the previous upstir, hoe there's a silver lining from the discussion; Nonetheless, it's all informative.

Yea, but I prefer the ambient as well as getting other people in the frame/scene to expose well, so it's kind of a challenge especially when the main subject is directly under the strong light.
The main problem is, the camera seems to focus on the background instead, probably due to not enough contrast; I only notice it AFTER, since it was an event with short period of time, no time to review, just keep snapping, but I did keep re-acquire focus every now and then just in case, but seems most of it suffers the same problem.

Another way would be focus somewhere else of roughly the same distance; but kinda easy to say than do especially during the event.

Hmm... You're right, some of the lights were indeed much "whiter"; Good point, must be more aware of the surroundings...


Just walking in... f/1.4 I worry it might be hard to get the person in focus as the person is walking.
In AF-S and with shutter-release when in focus option, it won't fire unless it acquires focus; Kind of annoying sometimes as it won't fire when you saw the moment there during walking in.
In AF-C, the shutter-release option selected was not require focus to lock, so I'll need to personally control the shutter and make sure it's really in focus else the shots are just waste. Sometimes, annoyed, with Nikon AF-S with focus override, I manually focus it, but then, in it may seem in focus in the frame, but actual it might not.

Any good tips for walking-in or people moving shots? Moving fast would be even harder.

Same here; in LR, I prefer to use Vibrance, but somehow, it may somehow affect the WB? I mean, the yellow/green tint become more obvious in the skin tones.

As for contrast, it affects the skin tones quite badly, especially the shadow areas, the eye backs, etc, may not be so obvious when viewed in small resolution; Sometimes kinda hard to decide as too little contrast, the picture seems more dull or less "oomph".

Kind of agree with you; A photo is more about the feel or how good it looks to people eyes. I'm not technical person as in those technique, rules, etc. As looking at the picture, honestly, sorry to say, I don't feel anything special too. It looks like the subject was cut and paste into the background? Well, just saying what I saw, and it's different feel from those samples from the website provided.

Of course, there's no right or wrong, as long as the person and client is happy with the photo. As I previously explain, some pictures is more of an ART, and an ART may not be appreciated by everyone or suit everyone's taste.
It maybe a hard to capture scene and he may have done it very well, but the results may not be everyone's taste. It's not really about how hard to capture and requires high technical skills to do, it's more about the results.

Cool; Haven't played around with each color channel yet.

Yea, that's why I was thinking if there's other ideas/solution.

Single point on the subject as she's the main person for the event.
The other way I know is to focus on somewhere about the same distance, but I find it's may not always be so easy on the field, especially if using wider aperture; plus during the "short" moment, usually we rush to capture it. Already tried re-acquire focus few times, seems all/most locks onto the background instead. Maybe I should try focus on the body which have better contrast and not affected by the strong light

I guess it's more related to below issue;
https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/ans...etail/a_id/4585

The camera is unable to obtain focus due to not enough contrast? I'm not sure how it lock to the background IF the focus point does not go out of the subject. If the subject is far away and thus small, and the focus point is bigger than the subject, I know there's tendency of the focusing on the background. But for my case, if I remember correctly, the subject is still bigger than the AF point... UNLESS, the AF Point "actual" size is not that small.....