Armanius
Bring Jack back!
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Name
- Jack
I can only see a placeholder with a question mark.
So weird!! Looked fine before.
Just put the link there again. Working so far ...
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
So weird!! Looked fine before.
Just put the link there again. Working so far ...
BBW
Legend
- Location
- betwixt and between
- Name
- BB
Looking good, Armando - she is lovely, as ever.
BBW
Legend
- Location
- betwixt and between
- Name
- BB
BBW
Legend
- Location
- betwixt and between
- Name
- BB
Same day but over on the other side - the sound side, at low tide.
Armanius
Bring Jack back!
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Name
- Jack
- Location
- Northern New England
BBW
Legend
- Location
- betwixt and between
- Name
- BB
Thanksgiving
Iansky
All-Pro
- Location
- Cotswolds, UK
Nice set - I am still yet to try the X100 for portraits, I did see a short video of a photog shooting portraits using a single source light - he produced some amazing images at f4 @ 1/60th.
Brilliant images.
Brilliant images.
- Location
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- Name
- Sue
Am I still the only one seeing BB's shots all squashed up in firefox? Safari displays the large (1024) size by shoving the right sidebar further to the right, but firefox wont do that.
BBW
Legend
- Location
- betwixt and between
- Name
- BB
Now we know this issue has been figured out: https://www.photographerslounge.org/f19/i-dont-know-where-else-put-5260/
Meanwhile back to the portraits!
Meanwhile back to the portraits!
Armanius
Bring Jack back!
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Name
- Jack
I decided to shoot RAW with the X100 to see if I could do better than the camera's JPG. I think I can. But barely. Had to test on something though. Ended up using myself! Did a BW version and color version. Unsure which one I like better. Probably the BW.
LR3.6, some PP (reduced clarity, added some NR, little bit of sharpening and then unsharp mask), cropped, reduced to 1024, ISO 2000.
View attachment 46229
View attachment 46230
LR3.6, some PP (reduced clarity, added some NR, little bit of sharpening and then unsharp mask), cropped, reduced to 1024, ISO 2000.
View attachment 46229
View attachment 46230
bilzmale
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Perth, Western Australia
- Name
- Bill Shinnick
I like the B&W too and as Bob has said the WB/skin tones in the colour version could be improved.
Iansky
All-Pro
- Location
- Cotswolds, UK
I agree with the two posts above, the B&W version works best for me.
In either case we see once more the capability and quality of image that the X100 can produce and lets face it , its not the camera that counts - it's the camera you have with you at the time and the photographers skill with that camera that counts!
In either case we see once more the capability and quality of image that the X100 can produce and lets face it , its not the camera that counts - it's the camera you have with you at the time and the photographers skill with that camera that counts!
Armanius
Bring Jack back!
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Name
- Jack
I think I kept the OOC JPG. I'll post it later when I get a chance. It'll be difficult to tell if it's "better" or not reduced to forum size though (1024). The likely noticeable differences were the color and exposure, if I remember correctly.
Iansky
All-Pro
- Location
- Cotswolds, UK
Portrait images at both 3200 & 200 ISO with built in flash.
Seeing the other images on this post inspired to do a quick test when visiting my wife in her little shop today.
The first image is shot at 3200ISO @ f4 using flash - considering the ISO it is a pretty good image and more than passable for general use with a bit of work to correct skin tones etc.
The second image was taken at 200ISO @ f4 using flash and is a 50% crop from the original image (she was holding a white book that detracted too much from the image) - I prefer the tones on this and the quality at 300% is amazing, I also find that the flash is quite subtle - when using in camera flash remember to take hood off or you get a shadow!
These were both "quick shots" rather than anything set up so I would expect that set up images at low ISO with good lighting would be superb.
Seeing the other images on this post inspired to do a quick test when visiting my wife in her little shop today.
The first image is shot at 3200ISO @ f4 using flash - considering the ISO it is a pretty good image and more than passable for general use with a bit of work to correct skin tones etc.
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
The second image was taken at 200ISO @ f4 using flash and is a 50% crop from the original image (she was holding a white book that detracted too much from the image) - I prefer the tones on this and the quality at 300% is amazing, I also find that the flash is quite subtle - when using in camera flash remember to take hood off or you get a shadow!
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
These were both "quick shots" rather than anything set up so I would expect that set up images at low ISO with good lighting would be superb.
Iansky
All-Pro
- Location
- Cotswolds, UK
I would agree with that Lee, it produces nice images - I have also got the EF-20 unit so must get round to trying that as well and if it performs as the in built flash I will be very happy.
- Location
- Northern New England
