Stained Glass Window

[escape]

Recently took this photo at an old industrial site. Comments welcomed.

[IMG]IMG_window by pongo now, on Flickr[/IMG]

[Wavelength]

Excellent; i really like the mood it created

[Shadowman]

Nice effort.

[Manfred M]

I like the scene, but with the heavy back-lighting, I think many of the interesting elements in the shot are hidden in the shadows. Open those up and the whole scene becomes much more interesting, in my view.

[DanK]

I agree with Manfred on both counts, although I might have brightened the shadows a little less. I might also leave the edge at the top left unbrightened. It would be worth trying a variety of edits like this to see which you like best. I think this is an excellent image that would be worth the time to do that.

[MrB]

I also agree with Manfred's suggestions, but perhaps the reds in the room (but not in the window) might benefit from a modest reduction in saturation.

Philip

[escape]

Thank you all for your comments. I agree that opening the shadows would improve the image. I did try that but wasn't satisfied with the overall results.
I took this photo with my cell phone. I'm thinking of retaking the photo in Raw to better open up the shadows. This will be a new step for me.

[Manfred M]

Thank you all for your comments. I agree that opening the shadows would improve the image. I did try that but wasn't satisfied with the overall results.
I took this photo with my cell phone. I'm thinking of retaking the photo in Raw to better open up the shadows. This will be a new step for me.

Raw is always better, but I managed with the posted JPEG. As long as you don't push too hard, you'd be surprised how well JPEGs work. The main issue I saw with the phone shot was the digital noise; I used noise reduction to control that a bit better.

[selig1656]

Nice capture and actually I kind of like the original,maybe a little more light.Must be careful for too much noise.

[DanK]

Thank you all for your comments. I agree that opening the shadows would improve the image. I did try that but wasn't satisfied with the overall results.
I took this photo with my cell phone. I'm thinking of retaking the photo in Raw to better open up the shadows. This will be a new step for me.

I almost never take photos I care about with my phone, but recently I have had some experience with iPhone files because I have had reasons to print photos my son-in-law took with his phone. I don't know which model he has, but it is reasonably recent, I think. They generally look pretty bad when I open them up on my large monitor for editing. I don't know quite what the issue is, but after the phone's processing, they look very granular on screen. It's not quite the same as posterization, I think. I suspect it may be partly oversharpening. I have printed as large as 17 x 22, but that was for a poster, and the low quality didn't matter. I can often get 8 x 10 prints (A4) that look quite good. By "quite good" I mean that they don't look very good to me, but non-photographers looking at them from a normal viewing distance don't notice anything wrong with them.

For those who follow these things, the files were HEIC, not JPEG. ACR and LR now open HEIC files directly.

All of which is to say that my limited recent experience confirms what I had suspected: if you really care about an image and may print it, it really is worth using a real camera and shooting raw. The camera may be more important than the file format in many cases. Shooting JPEG or HEIC on a phone is not equivalent to shooting JPEG on a high-quality camera with a reasonably large sensor.

[Manfred M]

I almost never take photos I care about with my phone, but recently I have had some experience with iPhone files because I have had reasons to print photos my son-in-law took with his phone. I don't know which model he has, but it is reasonably recent, I think. They generally look pretty bad when I open them up on my large monitor for editing. I don't know quite what the issue is, but after the phone's processing, they look very granular on screen. It's not quite the same as posterization, I think. I suspect it may be partly oversharpening. I have printed as large as 17 x 22, but that was for a poster, and the low quality didn't matter. I can often get 8 x 10 prints (A4) that look quite good. By "quite good" I mean that they don't look very good to me, but non-photographers looking at them from a normal viewing distance don't notice anything wrong with them.

For those who follow these things, the files were HEIC, not JPEG. ACR and LR now open HEIC files directly.

All of which is to say that my limited recent experience confirms what I had suspected: if you really care about an image and may print it, it really is worth using a real camera and shooting raw. The camera may be more important than the file format in many cases. Shooting JPEG or HEIC on a phone is not equivalent to shooting JPEG on a high-quality camera with a reasonably large sensor.

No surprises there Dan. When looking at the tiny sensor is. I read that the active area of the iPhone XS sensor is approximately 5.6 x 4.2 mm, so regardless of what the pixel count is, the image has to be magnified significantly to get it to print size. I was asked to print an image from a phone a few years ago and my experience was similar to yours; 8-1/2" x 11" / A4 size was pushing it and the images had all the signs of heavy handed processing by the phone's software.

That being said, in my film darkroom days, a 16" x 20 " was pretty well the limit the limit of how far one would go with 35mm film. It's amazing how far we've come from a technology standpoint.

[escape]

The photo was taken with an iPhone 6. The cell phone is the only camera I carry daily. I use it as a tool as if I was out on an advanced scouting mission: looking for scenes I may want to return later to and capture with my camera.
The photo under the elevated subway line was taken with my cell phone. I'm at this location every ea morning but only for a few minutes. People get off the bus and hurry to the subway. When I finally did take my camera, it was daylight because the clocks were reset the night before. For me, this is a backdrop photo. Still giving thought to a subject. Left it on the back burner.
IMG_6021-3 by pongo now, on Flickr

[DanK]

This looks like a perfect scene for what some people call "fishing" street photography. "Hunting is when you move around, looking for an opportunity. Fishing is when you find a setting you like and a time with the light you like, and you go there and wait.

[escape]

This looks like a perfect scene for what some people call "fishing" street photography. "Hunting is when you move around, looking for an opportunity. Fishing is when you find a setting you like and a time with the light you like, and you go there and wait.

I think it's a great scene too. In the meantime, I took a series of raw photos of the stained glass windows today. I will work on them. Who knows, I might be back with Stained Glass Windows 2.

[Wavelength]

New image posted is very nice

[escape]

Went back and took some photos with the Lumix GX 85.
[IMG]_1070271 by pongo now, on Flickr[/IMG]

[lovelife65]

It's a pretty small photo, but the windows to me seem really blown out. I liked your first photo better.

[escape]

It's a pretty small photo, but the windows to me seem really blown out. I liked your first photo better.

I probably should have worked on it more. Your comment is appreciated. .

[William W]

IF you want to get in in a single shot - using a CPL on the Panasonic Lens; Making a Bracket of Exposures on Shutter Speed, plus and minus one and one half Stops, in half stops - (i.e. 7 shots); using a tripod and release; and using the raw files as the basis for post processing will benefit.

The effort is worthwhile: it's a moody scene.

WW