184. Ornament(s) - December 18-24, 2016
Paul-
Yesterday (which was Wednesday as I write this), I spent quite a bit of time staging, post-processing, post-post-processing, and writing up all the bytes and pieces that went into the photograph I was going to submit…and then decided not to a few hours ago. See what happens when you can’t leave well enough alone, kids?
Regrettably (for you), later today I will be sending all that stuff from my initial submission to you as well. Who knows, you may tell me I really selected the wrong picture and this picture is the one that should have been consigned to the digital trash heap. Fine. I’m tired (my 2-hour Christmas cookie sugar high just imploded), and at this point I don’t care.
What happened: After I finished up my first WPOTM submission, I made the obvious (though apparently not to me) mistake of taking a walk yesterday (Thursday) late afternoon with camera in tow. I thought it would be fun to see if there was anything in the area that might catch my eye as a better subject for this week. I found it. Yippee.
After opening the image I wanted in Lightroom I decided that “excessive special effects” would be (for lack of a better phrase) the sub-theme for this week. So, with the few remaining molecules of refined sugar still in my blood stream, I’ll try to document what I did. Here we go: In Lightroom I bumped up the exposure; left the contrast alone (a holiday miracle!); kicked up the Shadows and Whites; dropped the Blacks; went ballistic on the Clarity; nudged up the Vibrance and the Saturation; oh-so-gently pushed Luminance to 100%; and was equally ruthless with other noise reduction-specific settings like Contrast, Color and Detail.
Then (there’s always a then), with watermark added, I imported the image to PhotoScape (v 3.7) and committed the following creative crimes: I added a slight “bloom” to the image; used this program’s crude sharpening feature; applied a “Watercolor Pencil” filter effect; fiddled with a few sliders inside the “Lens Flare” tool; selected (and why not at this point?) “Color Enhance”; clicked on “low” for the Contrast Enhancement function; did the same for the “Deepen” tool; and then swore I would never do any of this again. Ever.
(Unless you like the result.)
I had a lot of (ornamental) balls to submit this: Nikon D5200 in aperture mode; 18-55mm lens set at 31mm; ISO 5000; f/13; 1/1500 sec.; + .5 EV; WB set for shadow; matrix metering. The camera was unnecessarily mounted on a monopod.
Yesterday (which was Wednesday as I write this), I spent quite a bit of time staging, post-processing, post-post-processing, and writing up all the bytes and pieces that went into the photograph I was going to submit…and then decided not to a few hours ago. See what happens when you can’t leave well enough alone, kids?
Regrettably (for you), later today I will be sending all that stuff from my initial submission to you as well. Who knows, you may tell me I really selected the wrong picture and this picture is the one that should have been consigned to the digital trash heap. Fine. I’m tired (my 2-hour Christmas cookie sugar high just imploded), and at this point I don’t care.
What happened: After I finished up my first WPOTM submission, I made the obvious (though apparently not to me) mistake of taking a walk yesterday (Thursday) late afternoon with camera in tow. I thought it would be fun to see if there was anything in the area that might catch my eye as a better subject for this week. I found it. Yippee.
After opening the image I wanted in Lightroom I decided that “excessive special effects” would be (for lack of a better phrase) the sub-theme for this week. So, with the few remaining molecules of refined sugar still in my blood stream, I’ll try to document what I did. Here we go: In Lightroom I bumped up the exposure; left the contrast alone (a holiday miracle!); kicked up the Shadows and Whites; dropped the Blacks; went ballistic on the Clarity; nudged up the Vibrance and the Saturation; oh-so-gently pushed Luminance to 100%; and was equally ruthless with other noise reduction-specific settings like Contrast, Color and Detail.
Then (there’s always a then), with watermark added, I imported the image to PhotoScape (v 3.7) and committed the following creative crimes: I added a slight “bloom” to the image; used this program’s crude sharpening feature; applied a “Watercolor Pencil” filter effect; fiddled with a few sliders inside the “Lens Flare” tool; selected (and why not at this point?) “Color Enhance”; clicked on “low” for the Contrast Enhancement function; did the same for the “Deepen” tool; and then swore I would never do any of this again. Ever.
(Unless you like the result.)
I had a lot of (ornamental) balls to submit this: Nikon D5200 in aperture mode; 18-55mm lens set at 31mm; ISO 5000; f/13; 1/1500 sec.; + .5 EV; WB set for shadow; matrix metering. The camera was unnecessarily mounted on a monopod.
Jerry-
Happy Holidays Hipsters,
My first thought with "ornament" was about hood ornaments on cars, particularly ones from the 50's. But as it was well below zero temperature wise and there are few car shows this time of year. So my mind wandered to the religious ornaments that I purchased while volunteering at a local thrift shop. I am attracted to the types of geegaws that the Catholics in particular like to buy. While the thrift shop (PRISM in Golden Valley) has support from many churches and synagogues in the surrounding area, the Catholics have the upper hand with donations. When they kick off the relatives box up their less desirable stuff and donate it to PRISM.
The meaning behind this geegaw I purchased ($.25) is a mystery to me but I gave it a whirl. Maybe you hold it tightly in the palm of your hand while you say your hail Mary's. Gingerly held in one hand with camera in the other, lighting from the floor lamp, background the dull greenish wall, I managed this with the Sony A6300. Lens was the 16-50mm zoomed to 50mm with a +2 close up lens screwed on the front. Exposure was 1/80 @ f11, ISO 6400. Not the greatest for sharpness but I wanted to know if this combo was viable for macro photography. It sure is a compact way to have a close up lens. There is a +1 and +4 that you can use in combination. I think I will go back to using the Nikkor 55mm Micro with adapter in the future.
PS: it is a very compact rosary. I will have to research the proper use via google.
Happy Holidays Hipsters,
My first thought with "ornament" was about hood ornaments on cars, particularly ones from the 50's. But as it was well below zero temperature wise and there are few car shows this time of year. So my mind wandered to the religious ornaments that I purchased while volunteering at a local thrift shop. I am attracted to the types of geegaws that the Catholics in particular like to buy. While the thrift shop (PRISM in Golden Valley) has support from many churches and synagogues in the surrounding area, the Catholics have the upper hand with donations. When they kick off the relatives box up their less desirable stuff and donate it to PRISM.
The meaning behind this geegaw I purchased ($.25) is a mystery to me but I gave it a whirl. Maybe you hold it tightly in the palm of your hand while you say your hail Mary's. Gingerly held in one hand with camera in the other, lighting from the floor lamp, background the dull greenish wall, I managed this with the Sony A6300. Lens was the 16-50mm zoomed to 50mm with a +2 close up lens screwed on the front. Exposure was 1/80 @ f11, ISO 6400. Not the greatest for sharpness but I wanted to know if this combo was viable for macro photography. It sure is a compact way to have a close up lens. There is a +1 and +4 that you can use in combination. I think I will go back to using the Nikkor 55mm Micro with adapter in the future.
PS: it is a very compact rosary. I will have to research the proper use via google.
Byron-
I decided to be conventional this week. I found a photogenic ornament that agreed to be in my photo. Micky and Minnie always enjoy mugging for the camera. This was shot using just available light from a South window. It was very overcast, so the quality of light was similar to a north window. I used my trusty Micro-Nikkor lens from the 1980s. After choosing the shot I decided to experiment with Photoshop. I created 2 layers. Both layers had the identical picture. I darkened the bottom layer and left the top layer normal. I created a mask on the top layer and using the erase tool I selectively allowed the darkened bottom layer to show through. I shot a photo at each f-stop so I could use the one that had the depth of field I wanted. I know my photo instructor, Marty Nordstrom, is probably rolling over in his grave because of that technique. I should have measuring the distance from the focal plane to the front and then to the back of what I wanted in focus. Then I should have used the colored lines on the lens barrel and see what f-stop would work. I was too lazy to do that, plus as Mr. Gordon says "pixels are free". I just shot one at each f-stop. I ended up using f11, 1/3 sec ISO 200.
I decided to be conventional this week. I found a photogenic ornament that agreed to be in my photo. Micky and Minnie always enjoy mugging for the camera. This was shot using just available light from a South window. It was very overcast, so the quality of light was similar to a north window. I used my trusty Micro-Nikkor lens from the 1980s. After choosing the shot I decided to experiment with Photoshop. I created 2 layers. Both layers had the identical picture. I darkened the bottom layer and left the top layer normal. I created a mask on the top layer and using the erase tool I selectively allowed the darkened bottom layer to show through. I shot a photo at each f-stop so I could use the one that had the depth of field I wanted. I know my photo instructor, Marty Nordstrom, is probably rolling over in his grave because of that technique. I should have measuring the distance from the focal plane to the front and then to the back of what I wanted in focus. Then I should have used the colored lines on the lens barrel and see what f-stop would work. I was too lazy to do that, plus as Mr. Gordon says "pixels are free". I just shot one at each f-stop. I ended up using f11, 1/3 sec ISO 200.
Kevin-
Sometimes the WPOTM theme doesn’t sit well with me. This was one of those times. I tried various strategies to define or redefine Ornament or Ornaments. Some alternatives came to mind immediately, like a hood ornament on a car. But I thought “good luck with that when classic cars have been put away for the season. There are body ornaments of course, like piercings and tattoos, but no one in my circle of friends is covered in such (at least not to my knowledge). There are things like hair ornaments, for those who deem that placing such things in their hair is worthwhile. But again, I didn’t know how to find or choose either the ornament of the subject who would be wearing it. My brother Brad offed a brilliant out-of-the-box idea. Please a pink flamingo, a lawn ornament, almost buried in a snowbank. And it was snowing hard at the time he suggested it. But try to find a pink flamingo in Minnesota in December.
Fine, Christmas ornaments it is. I went downstairs and selected some Christmas balls and Christmas lights, brought them over to the studio and played around. That was the beginning of my second problem, how do you photograph a mirror-like Christmas ball, without the reflection of everything else around it, like the camera, the tripod, etc. looking like the most important elements? Not very well in my case. Some white panels hid them, but they also look like white cards concealing something.
Oh well. Not my best WPOTM week.
Surprisingly for me this shot was entirely with tungsten lights. The tiny out of focus Christmas lights in the background, and a couple of tungsten flood lamps completing the rest of the illumination.
Nikon D4s mounted on a Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 tripod with a Acratech GP ballhead, 105mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor lens, ISO 100, f/3.2 at 1/25th of a second.
Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, etc.
Sometimes the WPOTM theme doesn’t sit well with me. This was one of those times. I tried various strategies to define or redefine Ornament or Ornaments. Some alternatives came to mind immediately, like a hood ornament on a car. But I thought “good luck with that when classic cars have been put away for the season. There are body ornaments of course, like piercings and tattoos, but no one in my circle of friends is covered in such (at least not to my knowledge). There are things like hair ornaments, for those who deem that placing such things in their hair is worthwhile. But again, I didn’t know how to find or choose either the ornament of the subject who would be wearing it. My brother Brad offed a brilliant out-of-the-box idea. Please a pink flamingo, a lawn ornament, almost buried in a snowbank. And it was snowing hard at the time he suggested it. But try to find a pink flamingo in Minnesota in December.
Fine, Christmas ornaments it is. I went downstairs and selected some Christmas balls and Christmas lights, brought them over to the studio and played around. That was the beginning of my second problem, how do you photograph a mirror-like Christmas ball, without the reflection of everything else around it, like the camera, the tripod, etc. looking like the most important elements? Not very well in my case. Some white panels hid them, but they also look like white cards concealing something.
Oh well. Not my best WPOTM week.
Surprisingly for me this shot was entirely with tungsten lights. The tiny out of focus Christmas lights in the background, and a couple of tungsten flood lamps completing the rest of the illumination.
Nikon D4s mounted on a Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 tripod with a Acratech GP ballhead, 105mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor lens, ISO 100, f/3.2 at 1/25th of a second.
Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, etc.