Hook, Line and Sinker

[Steven L. Gotz]

I have bought into this photography thing hook, line and sinker. Can you believe this?

I went out and bought a new laptop that would fit into my new camera bag. How sick is that?

The bag maker said that it could hold a laptop with a 15.3" screen. Unfortunately laptops have 15.6" screens. Even the 14" screens would not fit because the pocket, while wide enough, is not deep enough.

Oh well, now I have Windows 8 to play with, and a touch screen to boot. So I guess I need to try writing touch apps since the Adobe software for that comes with the Creative Cloud.

[able123]

hiya Steve,

You bet.. that sound sync stuff would be fun to test out and probably some others down the road would like to have access to something like that. Maybe you can find a way to make the file size perfect for copy/paste to make it " longer in duration" on timelines and still be exactly 30fps ( and whatever other fps samples you might make in future ? ).

It's really only useful IMO as a way to see how much drift there is on the off camera sound recording, compared to the 'on camera' sound. Otherwise it's a matter of slating the sound as usual ( like on normal sets ).

I'm not sure this is a great way to explain myself.. but I think it makes sense ?

For example, I shoot the file you make ( played on some computer media player ), and start my off camera sound recording... and shoot a couple minutes...

Then I put the camera video into timeline along with the actual file I SHOT ...and sync that.

THEN I put in my off camera sound file and compare them from beginning to end to see if there was latency or drifting or whatever... know what I mean ?

This for me was important cause I was actually looping from recorder to camera and back to recorder ( where I could then monitor the sound from camera OR mixed )....

In then end I decided ( regardless of this test ) that the mini stereo plugs are too unreliable for me to do on camera sound at all... and will ONLY shoot with slated stuff.

Except of course for stupid B roll stuff etc ...where I can put my little shotgun ( I have a small one to mount on camera ) on the camera.

I'll never use the built in mics in the camera.

Anywho, this is just ME and what I want out of things... so maybe someone else down the road would also appreciate your work on this stuff too !

Thanks !

[Steven L. Gotz]

I was just about finished and realized that after I put a timecode effect on the bottom layer, I was having drop frame counting issues.

I don't really know how to deal with what happens between 59;29 and 1;00;02.  I know that my video does not actually drop a frame, but the timecode does and what should my metering bars do? Jump ahead two frames? Basically dropping two frames. If I don't, the vertical bar is not longer all the way down and the horizontal bar is not at the 15th frame when the timecode says ;15.

If the camera starts ahead of playing the video there is no way to match these things up and still get the same timecode.

I am a little confused. How is this supposed to work?

[able123]

I dont know Steve.. Unfortunately I never got into this end of things as a grip. And asking questions about it during work was difficult due to everyone rushing around to get work done.

Before digital there were crystals ( like quartz crystals used in watches ) that somehow regulated speeds of camera shutters and recorders (like nagra tape )..and since then with digital the slate and camera and sound all get "jammed" with a timecode generator that makes each one have the same exact code no matter when they get turned on and off..

So if you shoot the digital slate ( numbers stop when clapper hits slate ) nowadays you dont even need the sound mic near the slate to hear the clap...you can just match the timecode.

After I move and get new computer and monitor I'll get back into this stuff..right now everything is packed and ready for moving.  I have a week to move small stuff and after that I'll be taking this computer apart ( and phone, tv etc ).. and move furniture to new place.

It's an interesting thing isnt it ???  Probably silly to spend much time on it though...I have no clue if anyone is really in need of such things..other than me wanting to see if there was any delay etc in my recording... even that I can fix using methods discussed in forums in various threads about sound drifting off over time...

thanks for checking into this stuff Steve, but really.. don't spend time on it just cause of me cause those stereo mini plug issues kinda made the whole scenario for me a new deal.

[Steven L. Gotz]

You know, using the on camera sound is not always terrible. For interviews, sure, but for concerts or speeches coming over loudspeakers my camera seems to sound pretty good, much to my surprise. It is certainly good enough to sync up the sound with the external device.

I have someone I can ask about how to deal with the drop frame issue.  However, I think it is just a matter of the number of frames, not the timecode. If we just counted how many frames the beeps drift off, that should be sufficient.

I think.  As long as you don't need it, I think I will table the whole thing until a later date.

[able123]

Thanks Steve, thats a good idea.. save it for later.

I am now into phase 2 of my crazy ' make a documentary' mode.. mainly bought cs6 and now have to move, then buy new computer to run cs6. After THAT I'll be broke basically. So everything I bought has been calculated to do this move and project and THEN ( maybe ) be in a position to work on other people's stuff ( edit, shoot, whatever ...get back to 'work ' ).

As you know I got out of film biz as grip in ny and moved to MN. and this is a whole new deal for me on limited finances and income stream.

That said, I'll be focused on quality for my product and deal with my dream of making a decent story. I think I have enough things lined up now to make that happen. It's taken a year to get to the point where I may be able to do that. This cloud junk is nothing to me personally cause I'd never in a million years go with that uncertainty added to my own real worries about making a product. I'm an old dog about this and just need as much control as I can get because I personally am so out of control I need some degree of certainty in the tools I use.

So thanks for all your help with this and we'll move on to some new fun stuff ... which if we wanna get back to ' hook line and sinker ' reminds me of

BEER THIRTY AND BILL HUNTS TROUT RANCH !  YIPEE !

[Steven L. Gotz]

FINALLY!!!

I finally got a couple of attractive girls to pose for me.

Funny thing. I am pretty sure that the very first picture I took was the best of the day. I would have thought that they would get better and better. But no, the first one looks like it might be the best. On a little laptop screen in any case. I am about to sit down and really look at them on a decent monitor. One of the girls is rather exotic, and the other more girl next door. I have a little work to do in Photoshop to smooth out the girl next door, but I have a feeling I might not need to improve a thing on the other one.

Finally. Now I can see if I have actually learned anything from all of those videos I have watched.

All pictures are with natural light. It was a foggy day today on the California coast so the light was as even as could be. The light from the big window was like a huge softbox. Taking them outside was not too good though. The girl next door type kept squinting no matter where she turned. The brightness came from everywhere.

I have to get their approval to publish any of the shots although they said it would probably be no problem. I may even have to print one of these if it is as good as I hope. Finally. I have yet to shoot anything worth printing so far. Maybe today was the day.

[shooternz]

You know the rules...

It did not happen... without pictures!

[the_wine_snob]

Or, "what happens in Oakland, stays in Oakland... "

Hunt

[shooternz]

Not according to Steven.

He is a creative sharer and its be there or be square .

Wow.  Got my smileys backs and the enter key is working ( Compatibilty mode - thanx to Stan Jones advice).

Darn..just when I am considering leaving this mad house.

[Steven L. Gotz]

OK, it takes longer to get it exactly right, but here is a preview. This is Tina.

I don't even want to post a photo as small as this one, but to be honest, I don't know just how big a picture I can publish on my web site and still have everyone see it. In the full size version I can even see in her eyes (in the catch light) what is outside the window. It is a railing on the upstairs balcony overlooking the Pacific Ocean.  The railing has glass panels. This photo was taken indoors on a foggy day, but there is a huge picture window which I sat down low and in the corner of, treating the window as a big softbox.

This is her left eye at 100% of scale. I am just amazed at the detail of what is outside. You see the window frame and then the railing. Amazing detail. I never knew a camera would do that. Seriously. This is FUN!

I think she will like the picture. I did take off a blemish or two and I am not sure how she will feel about that. We'll see. She isn't a model so you never know.

By the way, what do you think of my watermark on the right hand side of the picture. Is it enough to keep it from being used? No. But it does say where it came from if people want to "borrow" the picture after I make it public. She I do more? Less? Any ideas? Comments?

Oh, and for those who might care, it was shot at 100mm on my 100-300 lens at f/5.0, ISO 200 at 1/800 sec.

[shooternz]

Nice ..you have something to work with there with that soft light...and you also almost have broken away from your "symmetry" compulsion disorder.

Eyes are everything. Would  love to see a least some of her other one ..even though she has a lot of lovely dark hair.

Heres a tip.  Ask (question) yourself..is this a "snap" ...or is it a photograph that evokes something beyond that.

LIke to see how you "treat" this photo.

[Steven L. Gotz]

Craig,

I am almost afraid to touch it any more than I have. It isn't perfect, in that the right eye is a little bit out of focus. However, I am a bit entranced with what the camera saw and I really don't know that I can improve on this. I thought of lightening up the catch light a bit but I don't want it to look like I did it. I am not exactly a Photoshop expert. I only know how to do some of the basics. Maybe with time...

Also, I am not sure how the rule of thirds applies to pictures like this that take up the entire frame.  I probably should have put her eyes up higher and gotten her entire chin in the picture. I could not back up anymore than I did. I was up against the corner of the room. But it is still pretty symetrical. A habit I need to eradicate, as you obviously understand.

Later I changed lenses to get more of them into the shots. You'll see. I will get some more posted later tonight.

[shooternz]

Heres something for you Steven

Also, I am not sure how the rule of thirds applies to pictures like this that take up the entire frame.

I am very comfortable shooting images  and am certainly not the "best in the world? by a long, long  margin.

I learn continuously and I test and challenge my own work by using my eye and my  "mind".

I am more challenged musically  and are some what in a comparable area  to where  you maybe now are compared to  very experienced photographers.

There are rules we self limit to  and rules we break in music and image making.

Look hard..listen hard.  Look forward to your pix.

and I really don't know that I can improve on this.

Always start with a vision how you want it to look and work to that goal with your skills

[Steven L. Gotz]

OK. I know. I really have to stop putting things in the middle of the shot. I almost cropped this to pretend I shot it better, but who would I be trying to fool? Myself?

Sigh.

Oh well, here is the other girl. She is the daughter of my wife's first cousin. These two are good friends and about the same age. They are quite remarkably different from each other. This one took a little more touching up, but I think she shines. I considered sharpening up her eyes a bit, but once again, I really hate to mess with what the camera saw. I think I am going to have to practice in private.

[Steven L. Gotz]

One last one for tonight. I guess they didn't come out quite as good as I thought. But they are close.

However, I think they are good enough to print and present to their parents. Up to this point I had never taken a photograph I wanted to print.

I heard from Tina. She likes the pictures. I am glad to hear that. I wasn't really sure. Some girls are funny about removing imperfections, others, I assume, would demand it?

Starting with a vision is the hard part. I am a technical guy. Tell me what you want done and I can figure out how to do it. However, I probably would never have thought of doing that on my own. That's the problem. I am using photography as a way to find my creative side. It's tough. Certainly tougher than I expected. But I will keep after it.

I decided to try letting this one be a little cooler than the other two. I am not sure yet how I feel about that.

[the_wine_snob]

Craig,

So glad to see that it is quite simple to keep you around...

Hunt

[able123]

Steve, you can get into the eyes and touch them up using paths and selections with feathering etc... steal color and detail from right eye to fix left eye, or vica versa.. whatever works...there's no such thing as doing 'bad' touchup stuff using psd... but it has to be subtle or it looks dumb..

like you could lighten up ( select just iris ) eyes of that first pic to bring out color and select pupil only to make them more round and free of spectral hightight ( reflection of light source)

This isnt a great example but I did that sorta stuff on this pic... eyes out of focus which didn't bother me for this particular shot... but the pupils had the spectral light in them and I took it out. I also fooled with the iris a bit..

Also some skin imperfections on face etc..

Also some stray hairs ( fly aways )...

Just sorta saying you can't work on it too much in psd.. it just gets better.

edit.. i also took some red out of the eyeball ( whites )...

but i have to say that i am like really experienced with paths, selections, feathering and basically "drawing and painting" with ps... which is probably something you either know already or can learn in a week with trial and error ...

using ps as a drawing program ( painting program ) was my first real lessons in using ps..after that using it on photos is a lot easier.

[Steven L. Gotz]

The most I have really done so far is to use a 50% gray layer to help me dodge and burn. And I used two layers set differently to get soft skin and sharp eyes.

And you will notice that I didn't get rid of all of the texture. They are real girls, not models. And these are not supposed to be glamour shots. Just photos that they can use on the facebook pages, or to send to their boyfriend's cell phones. And for me to work on, of course. I can't get people to pose unless I have pictures of people posing. Well, now I have a tiny little portfolio I can show someone and say, "wanna be next?"

I have not done anything with the first picture - yet - because I kind of wanted a base photo. Also, those are rather dark eyes and you kind of fall into them anyway. So, I don't know. I really don't. I am so happy with that picture that I can't bring myself to touch it. Although the right eye needs to be a little sharper. I can do that, I think, with a minimum of effort and little danger of going overboard with it.

Maybe in the next couple I post I will get more aggressive with my adjustments. While the Amy (the second girl) squinted outside, Tina (the first one) didn't. So I am going to crop the photos to just have Tina in them. I think she might come out pretty good in a couple of those.

I did something on the second picture that I have never seen done. I am sure everybody must do it, but I have never seen the tutorial for it. But I haven't really watched too many. I have been more concerned with getting the picture into the camera first.

I use the Camera RAW settings to take the contrast and clarity way down in order to soften everything. But, of course, you want sharpness in the eyes. So I ran the picture through Camera RAW again and sharpened it up. I then put the sharpened layer under the softer layer. Then I simply erased the eyes of the top layer. Simple. Nice sharp eyes. Then I lightened up the eyes just as you suggested by using the 50% gray layer in overlay mode. I just painted the parts I wanted lighter white, using a very low opacity - like 12% - and the brush was very soft. I was going to erase the hair to make it sharper also, but it seemed sharp enough and didn't suffer from the reduced clarity setting.

After I get the next couple of shots done, I want to do some serious changing, like to pen and ink, cartooning, etc.

By the way, what do you think of my watermark? Is it too much? Not enough? I guess I need to go look at a bunch of photos to see what professional photographers do.

[able123]

thats interesting about your use of layer .. never did that they way you have. something to keep in mind, thanks.

I use mostly paths, selections ( multiple times in same area with overlapping areas sometimes ) with various feathering distances... and then save those selections as channels for potential use later...and use mostly the airbrush with very slight opacity and flow settings, clone and bandaid tools.. mostly airbrush for the painting and drawing though.

Those paths will sometimes be like REALLY fine ...like even between individual eyelashes..very detailed paths...takes a lot of time though.

I dont know much about the watermark stuff. Typically people post stuff I think with size that is small enough where it can't be printed on paper ( offset press or RGB printers ) which takes that market of copyright infringement away at least. Others use invisible watermarks but to me personally those wouldn't matter in places like China etc. Yours is probably a good place to put it to keep it out of most of your shot but make the information known to people.

Then there's other factors re: images. Some are copyrighted already. Like the empire state building, the chrysler building etc. Anything posted on youtube is youtube property legally speaking. Stuff like that.

I guess the main thing is if you dont wanna let people steal your work you shouldn't post it.

The other alternative is to join a photo stock house and although they have been dying the past 15 years , Getty and a few others still get used by publishers.

But anyway, your copyright notice looks nice to me.

[able123]

even working on very low res image...some stuff can be done to improve..using airbrush in path/selections..

have to feather , be subtle, do in steps etc or it looks too phony

edit: you'll notice your eye goes to the iris and pupil now a little bit more..and the reflection of porch is more pronounced.. even though I didnt do anything to the iris or pupil area.

I just made the white of eye less 'distracting' by taking away some of the 'bloodshot' look...

[the_wine_snob]

Rod,

You might want to do a touch of HBS Adjustment Layer, with a Mask, on those eyes.

A little bit can go a long way.

Hunt

[Steven L. Gotz]

Funny.

Ok, seriously. That is Photoshop, not photography. I understand the value of improving a picture - to a certain point - but for right now I just want to get what I see with my eyes into the camera so that other people can see the same thing.

Too many changes and it is painting, or drawing, not photography.

Not that painting or drawing are bad, they just aren't what I want to do at this point. Besides, I am spending all my time on photography tutorials, not photoshop tutorials.

Although, as I said, I made some significant changes to the second picture. I just didn't provide a before and after.  The before looks something like this. Keep in mind I shoot RAW so it is a bit flat, to say the least. ll the information is there, I just have to tell the software what I want to emphasize.

[Steven L. Gotz]

This is the last in the series, by the way:

This is a screencap of the RAW image:

Don't even try to make changes to a screen cap of a RAW file. It isn't worth it. It will never be as good as the RAW file ould be. Rod, just wait for the new PC. then you can shoot RAW and see why I have completely given myself over to it.

You can see I spent time on her eyes. I may have gone too far, but it is difficult for me to tell. I love this face. It is exotic and has so much potential.

You can see my on camera flash being used as a fill light, which is the catch light in her eyes. Or, wait, is that what it was? Or was that added later? You can certainly see me standing there taking the picture though. I didn't use a flash. No need with that much fog. I could barely cast a shadow. No need to worry about eiminating one.

She is a Psychology student getting ready for Grad school.

[able123]

hehe.. Bill, you were a little, as they say, 'heavy handed' with that eyeball improvement... haha..pretty funny.

Here I was trying to impress Steve with very 'subtle' help using ps.. and you blew me out of the water !

Kidding.

Steve, I should learn when to keep my trap shut. My ideas about art and photography are different than yours and I should just shut up about what you're doing etc.

Sorry.

I also love it though ( photography and cinema stuff ) so sometimes it's hard for me to not blurt out something, and hope you forgive that when it happens.

[Steven L. Gotz]

Rod,

Please continue to comment. I value every point of view. Even if I end up not agreeing with it, at least I had to think about it first. Remember, all I know about photography I learned on YouTube. I am really looking forward to see how you progress with your new Camera once I convince you to shoot RAW, even if you shoot both JPG and RAW at the same time (until you decide like I did to skip the JPG).

Heck, I don't even know what my ideas about art and photography really are yet!

I will eventually spend more time in Photoshop. I suppose now that the camera is starting to do what I want it to do, meaning that the camera has finally trained me to do what it wants me to do , it is probably time to go through a complete Photoshop course (or two) on Lynda.com.