Micro 4/3 First few shots with new LX5 - flowers 'n things.

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
I took it out into the bright afternoon sun today and took a few test shots of flowers mainly for the macro-bokeh. All the shots are RAW, some of the photos have been cropped and all have been slightly adjusted on Silkypix with its easy-click settings (because I have no idea how post-processing works otherwise). Will probably check out Lightroom at some point.

I noticed blue-ish highlights on that ant though, don't know what that is..
 

Attachments

Fuddlestack

Regular
Dec 1, 2010
43
Alsace, France
Congrats on the new camera! :bravo-009:

As far as I can see, the spots - which also occur in the bud to the top left - are colour aliasing occurring at light/dark edges that are too small for the camera's correction software to recognize. It's mostly red/cyan fringing. See http://www.tedfelix.com/ColorAliasing/index.html. Adobe Camera Raw reduces it substantially without recourse to squinty retouching - I just pinched your pic and tried it.

I wouldn't be disappointed in the camera for this, it's something that afflicts all digitals to some degree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Boyzo

Veteran
Jul 14, 2010
68
Congrats on the LX5 (I have the LX3) its a small wonder
Nicely saturated images and no noise :wink::thumbup:
 

BBW

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 7, 2010
123
betwixt and between
BB
Traam, I am so jealous of your season and those flowers!

No, they are not too big at all! We want to be able to see everyone's photographs in their full glory!:2thumbs:
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
Thanks everyone. I'm kicking myself because I accidentally deleted a photo of a bee in full flight.

Thanks for that link Fuddlestack, that link explained it in a straightforward way in the context of digital still photographs that made it easier for me to understand. It happens a lot in the video mode of DSLRs as well but in a slightly different way I think, due to the compression.

I looked up Adobe Camera RAW - looks like it's a plug in to go with Photoshop, I'll have to look into this. I'm assuming if it's Adobe, it'll go with Lightroom as well.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
Another question - if it wasn't a polarizer filter issue, would a UV or polarizer filter have made any difference to those photos above? (Do I need them?)

I've never used a ND filter before but there have been some instances when I've used my 7D to take a photo with the aperture wide open, where the sky has been blown out. I was toying with the idea of getting an ND for the LX5, have any of you ever felt the need to get one?
 

olli

Super Moderator Emeritus
Sep 28, 2010
123
Sofia, Bulgaria
olli
Traamis - Adobe Camera RAW is another RAW processor. It works with Photoshop and Photoshop Elements - you process the RAW file through ACR then open it in PS or PSE for further editing. If you are using LR you don't need ACR since you are opening the RAW file directly in LR. If you have PS or PSE LR will recognise this as an external editor and if you want to do more processing in either programme you can run them from within LR. LR functions as a more sophisticated alternative to ACR so you only need one or the other for RAW processing. Hope this makes sense.
 

Fuddlestack

Regular
Dec 1, 2010
43
Alsace, France
Hi Traamis, I think Olli just said it all. I haven't tried LR, since I had Photoshop before LR came out and it seemed to do double duty. Maybe I'll have a bash at the 30-day trial. Other products such as Bibble 5 also offer RAW processing, and might come out cheaper than either.

Re the filters, they might dull down a few individual spots below aliasing level but I don't think they would eliminate the issue entirely.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
Traamis - Adobe Camera RAW is another RAW processor. It works with Photoshop and Photoshop Elements - you process the RAW file through ACR then open it in PS or PSE for further editing. If you are using LR you don't need ACR since you are opening the RAW file directly in LR. If you have PS or PSE LR will recognise this as an external editor and if you want to do more processing in either programme you can run them from within LR. LR functions as a more sophisticated alternative to ACR so you only need one or the other for RAW processing. Hope this makes sense.
Yes I had to read through that a couple of times to let it sink in, nothing to do with how you wrote it though, it definitely made sense. So it looks like LR is more of a complete package for my purposes for now since it will allow me to work with the RAW file from start to finished product without linking it with any external editors.

Hi Traamis, I think Olli just said it all. I haven't tried LR, since I had Photoshop before LR came out and it seemed to do double duty. Maybe I'll have a bash at the 30-day trial. Other products such as Bibble 5 also offer RAW processing, and might come out cheaper than either.

Re the filters, they might dull down a few individual spots below aliasing level but I don't think they would eliminate the issue entirely.
So many programs! I thought about the choice of photo processing programs - at present I'm considering purchasing the Adobe Production Suite sometime in the near future so maybe it might make things easier for me if I stay with the Adobe products in the hope that it will allow for a smoother workflow.

Traam, one of the other software programs that works as a "plug in" with Lightroom is by Nik and it is called Color Efex....and within it there is an option to use neutral density "filters" which is pretty cool for certain types of scenes. You can read more about Color Efex here:Photographic Filters for Adobe Photoshop, Professional Image Enhancements
I'll have to store this bit of information away for when I get my hands on Lightroom. I assume though that doing it this way is more of an effect because you're adding it in, in post.
 

olli

Super Moderator Emeritus
Sep 28, 2010
123
Sofia, Bulgaria
olli
Traamis, PS and PS Elements will also let you work with RAW files. ACR is built in to both these programmes so when you open a RAW file in either it will open in ACR and once you are done with RAW you can work on it in the PS editor.

And just to confuse it even further you can work with JPEG's and TIFF's in LR as well as RAW.

To me, the key difference between the two packages is that PS is a graphics programme that has photographic applications while LR is a photographic programme. Since I'm not really interested in the graphical abilities of PS and since LR is not just about managing processing but managing the whole digital photographic workflow I've never bothered with PS.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
And just to confuse it even further you can work with JPEG's and TIFF's in LR as well as RAW.

To me, the key difference between the two packages is that PS is a graphics programme that has photographic applications while LR is a photographic programme. Since I'm not really interested in the graphical abilities of PS and since LR is not just about managing processing but managing the whole digital photographic workflow I've never bothered with PS.
haha just when I thought I had it figured out!

I recall years ago when I thought PS was a similar version of what used to be a very basic Paintshop. But more and more I'm seeing Photoshop being hailed as THE application to use, as seen in almost every major photography magazine I see at the newsagents.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom