Photo postwork

[efflux]

I've been taking some photos again , in particular because we had a lot of snow. This is one which I'm very happy with:

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/4924/snowtrees3effluxle3.jpg

I'm trying to deal with TG2 renders in a similar way to photos. Photos go into Rawstudio for exposure correction (Cinepaint for TG2 exr). After this I may take into Gimp for some post (especially with photos) or go straight to lightzone and hence retain 16 bit tif format. However with photos I find some chromatic aberration adjustments need to be made (with Gimp) when using extreme wide angles (not a problem in TG2 of course).

I make sure photos or renders from TG2 are exposed so sky can not be blown out then I fix the rest with exposure adjustments in RAW or EXR usually to an acceptable compromise. Any masking postwork that is required can be done in Gimp but the finishing touch is with Lightzone. Although lightzone can do a whole lot it has this algorithm called "relight". It does what it says and you can relight dark underexposed areas which are easily selectable. It's almost like putting a new light in the scene. Then lightzone is used for final colour and level adjustments since it's all realtime visual and you can see every minor tweak you do instantly and it is entirely non destructive. You can reopen the file to readjust later.

I'm finding my images are all starting to take on a similar look from this post process. It's a look I'm very happy with. Subdued lighting but everything can be seen. I like the atmosphere of this rather than extremely bright lit scenes. Particularly useful for photos taken in the UK.

[Saurav]

You're getting good results out of a RAW file, that almost looks like a well tonemapped HDR photo.

[FrankB]

Indeedioso! Beatiful photograph. I would be curious to see how the unpostworked shot compares.

cheers,
Frank

[efflux]

Raw is not as good as exr from TG2. I don't know the full specs of these formats but the exr from TG2 is awesome. You can really push and pull the exposure. The difficulty comes if you need to do any masking. I use Cinepaint for exr exposure adjustments and you have layering etc but it's not as comprehensive an app as Gimp. Trouble is, Gimp doesn't direct edit exr or raw. Cinepaint is a very powerful app. It's so ludicrous that this is not more widespread in use. It's got some bugs and even in Linux you can have trouble installing. Luckily I found a Ubuntu package for my Ubuntu version. Otherwise you have to compile which I had to do in the last Ubuntu version I was running. I think you even have to compile on Windows and Mac. Crazy since Cinepaint is free.

Good idea. Here is the unprocessed shot. Sent out from Rawstudio to jpg without any exposure correction. You can see this is a dull photo but this was deliberate. I know how to adjust back without going to the trouble of multiple exposures etc. I may get into that later though. The problem with photography in the UK is that it's nearly always dull. Of course this shot was just before sundown but still, the UK is usually dull so these processes are often needed.

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/5592/snowtrees3unprocessedwf3.jpg

[FrankB]

it's obvious now how the postwork made a difference! Thanks,
Frank

PS: if I recall correctly exr is 32 bit, while raw is 16 bit? Not sure though, but that would explain why there's so much more room for exposure adjustments.

[efflux]

Yeah, I just checked. EXR is capable of 32 bit but RAW is usually 12 or 14 bit. It depends on your camera. A new SLR will be 14 bit. I think mine is probably 12 bit.

This is why even with RAW image format you still have to be careful of not over or underexposing. With EXR output from TG2 it seems huge exposure adjustments can be made.

[efflux]

The trick is in getting the postwork looking natural if that's what you want. One photographer I think is great who clearly uses a lot of post (often not so natural looking) but to great effect is this guy called Andrea Stridsberg:

http://www.mystic-pic.com/

His name on Renderosity is Zacko.

He has a great camera which also helps.

I'm been thinking of upgrading mine. It's a APS-C sensor (EOS 300D) which is smaller. My ef-s lenses (except one zoom lens I have) are for this format but this smaller CMOS can use any ef lens as well. Canon have three sizes - now a full 35 mm size sensor. The idea seems to be that this is the future but I don't see it like that. Digital is different. The ef-s short back focus lenses are very close to the sensor. These cameras are designed for digital. Full frame 35 mm makes it easier for them to get bigger resolution and all the old lenses still work exactly the same as on analog cameras but the cameras also have to be bigger. I don't see that this is the future be all end all but I've investigated upgrading my camera and can't see any huge benefits for the cost. In fact the 300D has some advantages over it's replacement models. You'd have to do a huge upgrade to pro level. Also, one of the best lenses I ever used is in this ef-s format. The EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM is a totally awesome lens.

[Seth]

some marvelous shots !

[Saurav]

RAW files from cameras are not exactly 16bit, depending on the sensor on the camera it's either 12 or 14bit. For 12 bits cameras that's 4,096 (2^12) brightness levels and 14 bits camera sensor it's 16,384 (2^14) brightness levels. Currently I don't think there is a consumer camera out there that shoots in native 16bit mode, so software interpolates those 12/14 bit into 16bit. Obviously you can shoot multiple exposures (HDR) and turn photos into 32bit images. I have tested 12bit vs 14bit using my camera and personally I can't see much difference at this stage when I post process photos so for me it's only theoretical advantage versus a practical one.

However getting into the habit of editing in higher bit modes is a good idea as it allows you preserve as much details as you can from an image, helps avoid banding and posterizing etc.

For me post production with TG involves the use EXR files and editing in 32bit mode using Photoshop, After Effects and Photomatix. I shoot photography primarily in RAW and sometimes shoot HDR if the lighting situation requires it (not all lighting situation and subject requires 32 bit precision) and I edit in either 32/16 bit mode and down convert to 8bit just before print or screen.

[efflux]

I've been looking at example test shots on the net from various Canon cameras. I can't see radical improvements over the 300D except bigger resolution so I'm sticking with it for the moment. Some of the differences are actually in processing within the camera which is pretty irrelevant. Also, I know for sure the 300D is still a good camera because the results from my EF-S 60mm are stunning so the lenses are actually more important. I wish Canon would release a fixed focal length wide angle in ef-s format. I guess I could use an ef lens but due to the CMOS size I'd actually lose angle. Once you go fixed focal it ruins you for zooms. They simply don't compare. One thing I don't like about the newer 450D is that there is only one big LCD so you have to use that for all setting unless you adjust from the view finder. On the 300D there is a separate small LCD for settings like shutter speed etc etc. The 450D has to have a bigger battery due to the power guzzling LCD. Most differences are in speed i.e. dumping the shot to the flash card. I don't care about this.

[reck]

Hi Efflux,

I was thinking of getting some software to help me process my photographs. My first thought was Adobe Lightroom but i've just taken a look at lightzone after reading your post and it looks pretty good.

Would you mind telling me how you've got on with the software and would you recommend it? Have you had experience with lightroom and how it compares?

The only thing that concerns me is that there doesn't look like there's much activity going on with this software. Version 3 was released coming on for 2 years ago now and since then just minor updates, sometimes just adding camera support. Also the forums don't look very active with no or little input from the developers. I don't like the idea of investing in some software that may be dying. I'll make a post over in their forums as well but would be interested in your experience.

Thanks

[reck]

Hmm i've just read this post on the forum by a Lightzone user of a couple of years.

I don't know what's going on here, but I believe that the days for LightZone are gone. I don't know any case in business, where are company stopped responding and talking to its customer base completely, do not update their web site about new releases (even if it is a point-point release), refuse to communicate what's in the release, and do not give any hint about future plans (camera support and new features). I think that the 3.6.2 release fixes some important issues on the MAC, which they were somehow forced to fix based on the support cases they still receive.

The company obviously still exists, but developer resources (if they have any) are devoted to other projects, which we don't know of. So they keep the absolute minimum of necessary maintenance (showstopper bugs).

I have reported some issues with metadata loss, when exporting from Lightroom, which they never responded to since August 2008, and an open thread regarding the support of the Lumix G1.

I think we, the user community, have to face that we see the end of a product here, sadly. Still usable for existing cameras and operating systems, but with no future, as new cameras aren't going to be supported (from the experience of the last half year, and the development pace of the other raw converter vendors, we unfortunately have to assume this).

It is quite possible that they have other business plans in the digital imaging field, and will surprise us with something new, but that should not be any reason to keep the LightZone user base lost. It could well be that the developers lost their interest completely, because there are other economically more valuable fields of business.

My only hope is, that they have indeed made a deal with BibbleLabs in selling their technology to them (the screenshots of the selective editing features in the Bibble 5 mockups resemble too much to LightZone), and that eventually the zone concept will be carried over (but this is still a secret, because otherwise the deal would have been too obvious). The difficulties of the Bibble development team to keep the planned release schedule might explain this long time of silence here in the LightZone camp.

This is only speculation, I know, but also in this latter optimistic case, we face the end of the product.

Oh yes, all the happy users, which will use the same camera (which will not break and not be stolen) for the next ten years with the same OS and same computer, will still be able to use the existing LightZone release in 10 years, so what's the problem? And staying analog would have avoided this problem altogether and instead of writing this reply in the forum, I could be somewhere shooting a few artistic images.

Which doesn't sounds to good.

I've just tried to register with the forum but new registrations have been disabled! So seems something is going on with this software. It's a bit disappointing really because the trial i've downloaded seems really good.

Someone mentioned some software called bibble over in those forums. Has anyone got any experience with this?

[mhall]

I'm actually processing a Batch of images in Bibble right now. I'm browsing the forums while it outputs.

This is my first post here, though I've been a TG user since ... 1996? 1997? Something like that and I've been reading these forums for a couple of years now and admiring the work of the many artists here (I would love to get into TG2, but I KNOW it would consume too much of my time, so I have refrained from giving in to that particular temptation).

I also happen to be a photographer and use Bibble as my main RAW conversion software.

The version being referenced in the post quoted is version 5. BibbleLabs has been working on it for about two years now - it's a ground up rewrite of the entire processing pipeline, as well as a complete interface overhaul and the addition of Database/Cataloging features. The new release also features file versioning (several different interpretations of the same RAW file grouped as one)m regional adjustments - via polygon, bezier curves or pixel based brush regions - and file history and undo functionality. Image quality is quite good and the speed is incredible (they have rewritten the code base to scale linearly in performance to 16 cores and beyond and - amazingly enough - it has also been demonstrated running on netbook class computers and wiping the floor with Lightroom and Aperture). In my testing it was outputting 10MP 1DmkIII files in 1.33 seconds on a Core Duo 2ghz Dell m90 laptop. Performance is, in a word, incredible.

The recently released a "preview" version of the latest release to registered users of the software. It isn't anywhere near primetime, but I figure in the next quarter year or so it should be nice and stable. Though the preview is quite buggy, the potential in the software is amazing - I actually see the end of much of my PS work, as I'll be able to do pretty much all of it on my high bit RAW files with full flexibility.

It's rather amusing to me - two of the pieces of software I like most (TG and Bibble) are created by small companies, pushing the boundaries with high quality code and amazing results, but both really struggle with release dates and communication. I know the feeling - being a small business owner myself and the person responsible for 95% of the work, it can be really tough to keep in touch and up to date with everyone.

Anyway, the current release version of Bibble is 4.10. All in all, the software is quite good, but suffers from some stability issues from time to time (I've already had one crash tonight).

They offer a 30 Day fully functional trial. Right now no new development of the 4-series is taking place and no new camera support is being added, as they have all of their resources on 5-series. The forums are a good place to check things out - their staff participates a great deal and is very responsive (much like Oshyan and Jo with Matt chiming in - over there it's cvermillion, dthorup with the creator Eric chiming in from time to time).

The website is www.bibblelabs.com

Oh, the software is named after Eric's cat ... Bibble.

Anyway, hope that helps!

Regards,
Micheal

[reck]

Hi mhall,

Thanks for the informative post.

I have actually been spending some time with the version 5 preview and quite like the look of it. The big problem with this preview though is that it only works with a small subset of RAW files so I can't load any of my RAW or jpg files into it. To test it out i've been using some example raw files from the net.

I've also made a post over at the bibble forums to test out the response and i've been impressed with the feedback, as you mentioned I saw quite a few posts from their staff, which is always a good sign.

I've given up on Lightzone, I love the demo but it seems like dead software. There is very little activity on the forums and the few recent posts are complaining about the lack of info coming from the developers. They have stopped new people from joining the forums so I am unable to ask any questions. As a last resort I emailed them directly but after nearly a week i've heard nothing so they are obviously not interested in getting new customers.

There is one other software application i'm going to check out before I invest in Bibble called dxo optics pro (http://www.dxo.com/uk/photo/dxo_optics_pro). I want to see how it compares to bibble and what the image quality is like.

I wondered where the name bibble came from, now I know, his cat lol

[mhall]

You're welcome. Glad I could help.

I haven't tried DXO. I've used lots of RAW converters, but not that one. I've heard it's pretty good, but not particularly responsive/fast, but I'm not talking with any personal experience at all.

Regards,
Micheal