Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Can you see the difference?  (Read 3527 times)
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2821


« Reply #20 on: December 31, 2012, 06:42:04 AM »
ReplyReply

If the lighting is consistent for all shots then the source of the light is immaterial.


Even if it is the "wrong" light?
Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2821


« Reply #21 on: December 31, 2012, 06:50:39 AM »
ReplyReply

just an amateur, but the texture of that orange in  its mid-body and navel look different between 1 and 3

secondly, again just my opinion but I think I know which camera you used and having owned one myself was never sure I liked its rendering ability, even without comparisons. I think that generation of that brand falls flat for me. Of course YMMV...

You can tell the type of camera despite flash being used. Three different lenses have been utilized and into the bargain the images  have been converted to sRGB?
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7702


WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 31, 2012, 06:58:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Camera is Sony Alpha SLT. Let's put it this way. The orange is the same orange and it has not moved, so if you see a difference in texture it's either difference in lens or difference in processing. Regarding processing I tried to keep it constant (adjusting white balance to color checker and same exposure on white square on CC):

Best regards
Erik

just an amateur, but the texture of that orange in  its mid-body and navel look different between 1 and 3

secondly, again just my opinion but I think I know which camera you used and having owned one myself was never sure I liked its rendering ability, even without comparisons. I think that generation of that brand falls flat for me. Of course YMMV...
Logged

allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 525


« Reply #23 on: December 31, 2012, 07:28:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Oh yes Erik, I understand that the only difference is the lens, and from my perspective the Sony out-resolves the Hassy

Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #24 on: December 31, 2012, 07:28:49 AM »
ReplyReply


Even if it is the "wrong" light?

What is "wrong" with a flash?
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7702


WWW
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2012, 07:44:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

The reason I posted the images was to have some reactions. Most posters seem to prefer the Sonnar (Hasselblad lens) image. But that can change.

Best regards
Erik

Oh yes Erik, I understand that the only difference is the lens, and from my perspective the Sony out-resolves the Hassy


Logged

RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #26 on: December 31, 2012, 08:10:30 AM »
ReplyReply


Even if it is the "wrong" light?

How is it the  'wrong' light?  Are you suggesting that the use of flash would alter the colour balance of the orange, or other parts of the scene?  That may be the case in a situation of mixed light where the white balance is set for one or the other, or set as an average of the two. From Erik's description it seems he balanced for the flash light source.  But, given what he's doing, it doesn't matter.  All that's required is that the light is consistent between the shots, and it is.  Flash or not doesn't matter.
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2821


« Reply #27 on: December 31, 2012, 08:45:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Camera is Sony Alpha SLT. Let's put it this way. The orange is the same orange and it has not moved, so if you see a difference in texture it's either difference in lens or difference in processing. Regarding processing I tried to keep it constant (adjusting white balance to color checker and same exposure on white square on CC):

Best regards
Erik


Erik. the fact that you have processed the images and I assume you have converted to sRGB sort of invalidates any comparison? Instead of using flash would daylight balanced lights for illumination and no processing be a valid way of making a comparison. I haven't used flash on oranges but I am thinking that the flash and the prominent orange colour would give you problems.
Logged

Hening Bettermann
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 573


WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 31, 2012, 12:41:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The only significant difference I can see is the larger DOF of the Sony, which is why I would prefer it for landscape.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7702


WWW
« Reply #29 on: December 31, 2012, 12:49:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I reshot the images with a new color checker passport. Here are the imatest evaluations. Processing was grey balance, +0.25 exposure, black level -1 saturation -12, I believe, report exact values next year.

OK, here is the rest of the story:

I measured the actual orange using my Color Munki Spectrometer and found out the LAB coordinates. I took the corresponding part of the image and smeared it out using a large diamater Gaussian. Converted it to Lab and checked L. Created a selection and filled with "ab" values read by Color Munki but using L value from photograph and got a virtual match. End of story.


Best regards
Erik

Erik. the fact that you have processed the images and I assume you have converted to sRGB sort of invalidates any comparison? Instead of using flash would daylight balanced lights for illumination and no processing be a valid way of making a comparison. I haven't used flash on oranges but I am thinking that the flash and the prominent orange colour would give you problems.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2012, 02:22:13 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad