# Burst of color and dew drops



## jcdeboever (Feb 21, 2017)

Fujifilm X-T2 / 60mm 2.4 macro. Straight out of camera jpegs, all of them. No cropping. I only scaled them down. You can even take 1:1 images with this wonderful camera. 

1.



 

2.


 

3.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 21, 2017)

Nice photos. I think these would look even better with a very slight tweak of the curves...they look just ever-so-slightly low in contrast--which is exactly how most SOOC JPEGS should be, for maximal post-shoot editing. But seriously though--how cool is it to have such a nice file, right out of the camera! Pretty nice "look" at these settings.

On another note, I really like the way this lens slides out of focus behind the DOF zone--it looks nice and smooth on the edges of the OOF leaves, not harsh, not edgy. It does not seem to have any tendency toward double-lining on the edges of the OOF leaves, nor does it seem nervous or jittery.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 21, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Nice photos. I think these would look even better with a very slight tweak of the curves...they look just ever-so-slightly low in contrast--which is exactly how most SOOC JPEGS should be, for maximal post-shoot editing. But seriuously though--how cool is it to have such a nice file, right out of the camera!
> 
> On another note, I really like the way this lens slides out of focus behind the DOF zone--it looks nice and smooth on the edges of the OOF leaves, not harsh, not edgy.



Thanks. I thought of bumping the exposure but I was so darn giddy over the jpegs out of camera, I thought it was more important to show people what it was producing. First day using the camera and didn't have much time (hour for lunch). Get me a tripod, shutter release, raw editing software, and I just may be a decent photographer some day. These were all hand held, no IS


----------



## Derrel (Feb 21, 2017)

These DO look very good for SOOC JPEGS!!! And you're right, showing the SOOC gives us a good idea of what the camera does, as it is configured right now. At most, I would bump these up only about 3/10 of an EV I think,at most--OR I might leave the exposure alone, and only use the curves tool to vary the contrast a little bit.

As far as it goes, I would verify what the Tone Curve is set to, and also what the color information is set to. Different cameras tend to create somewhat different SOOC jpeg images, mostly depending on the color saturation value, and the tone curve.

I shot 75,000 or so Fuji S2 Pro images, many SOOC, and also RAW + JPEG, and Fuji really,really was capable of making beautiful JPEG images, and had a pretty simple size-sharpening-saturation-tone curve (contrast) , 4-parameter control method that did pretty doggone well for me. Back in those days, Fuji .RAF raw files were VERY,very badly handled by most raw converters, and they were large, and sloooooow to convert.

Looking back over 16 years digital, in many ways, the Fuji digital pictures had the most pleasing color out of the multiple cameras I bought from 2001 to 2012. I totally "get" WHERE FUJI has gone with their SOOC images. Adding even a bit too much contrast to an SOOC JPEG can ruin it for additonal editing in post. If the goal is a quick post-shoot editing of a camera-created JPEG to create the perfect image in just a few seconds,it is far, far better to have a balanced JPEG like these than it is a high-contrast one.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 21, 2017)

Derrel said:


> These DO look very good for SOOC JPEGS!!! And you'e right, showing the SOOC gives us a good idea of what the camera does, as it is configured right now. At most, I would bump these up only about 3/10 of an EV I think--OR I might lave the exposure alone, and only use the curves tool to vary the contrast a little bit.
> 
> As far as it goes, I would verify what the Tone Curve is set to, and also what the color information is set to. Different cameras tend to create smewhat different SOOC joeg images, mostyl depending on the color saturation value, and the tone curve.
> 
> ...


Yes sir. I see in the menu you can bump all this in camera. I just need some time to test it out. These were the velvia film simulation setting, and you can tweak it from there as well, according to manual. Good stuff for day one.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 21, 2017)

I pulled two into Lightroom and adjusted just the curves, not a single thing else; they're so,so close to the originals that it was shocking to me how good the SOOC exposure and processing actually was!









You oughtta' have a good solid month or more to get through all the possible permutations this machine can apply in-camera to its JPEGs. I remeber how awful early Nikon digitial color JPEGs were in the D1 and D1h and D100...ugly, flat, dingy-looking colors.

I think you might have discovered a camera system that really connects with **you**.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 21, 2017)

Derrel said:


> I pulled two into Lightroom and adjusted just the curves, not a single thing else; they're so,so close to the originals that it was shocking to me how good the SOOC exposure and processing actually was!
> 
> 
> View attachment 135542
> ...


I like them, real close if not dead on to my edits.


----------



## Gary A. (Feb 21, 2017)

I'm looking at these puppies and I'm smiling ... so I'm figuring you must be grinning from ear-to-ear every time you download to your computer.  Derrel's treatment seems to have added just a bit of pop, of mid-tone contrast, (at least that's how it looks on my monitor).  Good job.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 21, 2017)

Gary A. said:


> I'm looking at these puppies and I'm smiling ... so I'm figuring you must be grinning from ear-to-ear every time you download to your computer.  Derrel's treatment seems to have added just a bit of pop, of mid-tone contrast, (at least that's how it looks on my monitor).  Good job.


I am liking it. The XT2 gives me way more control at the camera. I like that I could set it up so I don't have to pull my eye from the subject, everything is external. Keeper rate is way up and that is what makes me feel better. Now I need to gain a greater understanding of the hardware. At least it's fun again.


----------



## 407370 (Feb 21, 2017)

I have been saying SOOC JPG is the way to go for years. People get focused on a workflow that starts with RAW and dont get why other people dont use RAW.
My FUJI HS 20 has been so good at SOOC JPG that I stopped using RAW altogether. I have been looking for an upgrade recently and X-T2 (on this evidence ) needs to be investigated.

Great set and great processing by Derrel.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 21, 2017)

407370 said:


> I have been saying SOOC JPG is the way to go for years. People get focused on a workflow that starts with RAW and dont get why other people dont use RAW.
> My FUJI HS 20 has been so good at SOOC JPG that I stopped using RAW altogether. I have been looking for an upgrade recently and X-T2 (on this evidence ) needs to be investigated.
> 
> Great set and great processing by Derrel.


It seems the velvia works real good on color for landscape and such. The STD provia works well on just about anything, the classic chrome is very good on people, but the Acros is the bee's knee's on B & W. With the Acros you can push / pull, add filters, etc. in camera. I love this camera.


----------



## Ysarex (Feb 21, 2017)

It's a great camera and lens (I like mine) and your orchid photo is excellent -- fabulous shot. But you're losing perspective over the SOOC JPEGs. The camera processing is not good, they're dingy and flat. Here's the histogram of your orchid photo SOOC.



 

That's the histogram of a photo that needs repair.

Joe


----------



## Gary A. (Feb 21, 2017)

Wouldn't exposure also contribute to that gap?


----------



## Ysarex (Feb 21, 2017)

Gary A. said:


> Wouldn't exposure also contribute to that gap?



A histogram of a camera JPEG is always the result of both the original sensor exposure and in this case the EXR processor.

The bulk of the data appears to end long before reaching the right corner -- then there's a thin line that extends up to the right corner. That thin line represents a very small amount of data. Increasing exposure would shift all the data right (which is needed) but that shift would also force clip the data in that thin line given the way the processing was done.

Joe

P.S. time to say goodnight -- I'll check back in the morning.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 22, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> It's a great camera and lens (I like mine) and your orchid photo is excellent -- fabulous shot. But you're losing perspective over the SOOC JPEGs. The camera processing is not good, they're dingy and flat. Here's the histogram of your orchid photo SOOC.
> 
> View attachment 135560
> 
> ...


I agree but it the eye test is better than anything I have seen. I thought it warranted a post unedited. I think once I get familiar with the camera, they should be better.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 22, 2017)

@jcdeboever I agree, this is a camera worth investigating, though just remember without the knowledge and skills of the person behind the lens, it's an inanimate block. The fact that you're excited again makes me think you'll extract every capability available in camera.

@Ysarex I've been trying hard to incorporate the histogram into my exposure decisions. I've also been working toward exposing for maximum color saturation, switching from an RGB histogram to one that shows the individual channels. So far it seems that I've achieved more success  toward my goal with a centered bell pattern with equal channels (even if they didn't extend  fully to to the left or right).


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Feb 22, 2017)

Great set!


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 22, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> I am liking it. The XT2 gives me way more control at the camera. I like that I could set it up so I don't have to pull my eye from the subject, everything is external. Keeper rate is way up and that is what makes me feel better. Now I need to gain a greater understanding of the hardware. *At least it's fun again*.


Yippee !!


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 22, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > I am liking it. The XT2 gives me way more control at the camera. I like that I could set it up so I don't have to pull my eye from the subject, everything is external. Keeper rate is way up and that is what makes me feel better. Now I need to gain a greater understanding of the hardware. *At least it's fun again*.
> ...


Now that I switched, will you still shoot with me?


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 22, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > jcdeboever said:
> ...


Cameras, yeah, any time   

I might even pull out my AE-1 ... umm .. on second thought, I doubt that.


----------



## Peeb (Feb 22, 2017)

407370 said:


> I have been saying SOOC JPG is the way to go for years. People get focused on a workflow that starts with RAW and dont get why other people dont use RAW.
> My FUJI HS 20 has been so good at SOOC JPG that I stopped using RAW altogether. I have been looking for an upgrade recently and X-T2 (on this evidence ) needs to be investigated.
> 
> Great set and great processing by Derrel.


While I agree that JPG is a really good idea for many uses, I simply can't discard RAW for other uses.

For example, if I'm shooting astrophotography- it would be silly to abandon the benefits of RAW.  If I'm shooting sports in a well lit setting, my buffer loves JPG.  

As in many endeavors, your choices should often depends on the circumstances.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 22, 2017)

Peeb said:


> 407370 said:
> 
> 
> > I have been saying SOOC JPG is the way to go for years. People get focused on a workflow that starts with RAW and dont get why other people dont use RAW.
> ...


Yup. I just haven't decided on a raw converter. I just slapped together a Windows box out of old, new stock. I downloaded a trial version of Alien Skin exposure x2. Will give that a wirl. I've tried it before on a winblows laptop but never gave it a serious look.


----------



## Peeb (Feb 22, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> Yup. I just haven't decided on a raw converter. I just slapped together a Windows box out of old, new stock. I downloaded a trial version of Alien Skin exposure x2. Will give that a wirl. I've tried it before on a winblows laptop but never gave it a serious look.


From what I've read, there can be a huge difference in which RAW converter you choose, so while I have no recommendations, I'd give the topic some careful thought.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 22, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > jcdeboever said:
> ...


You'll have to help me dig my car out from the snow though ....


----------



## Gary A. (Feb 22, 2017)

Since when do you deserve 'Reserved Parking'?


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 22, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > astroNikon said:
> ...


What the heck is that? A DeSoto?


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 22, 2017)

Peeb said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > Yup. I just haven't decided on a raw converter. I just slapped together a Windows box out of old, new stock. I downloaded a trial version of Alien Skin exposure x2. Will give that a wirl. I've tried it before on a winblows laptop but never gave it a serious look.
> ...


Yup, @Gary A. Gave me a couple of recommendations but I haven't installed them yet as they were still downloading as of this morning (crappy internet where I live).


----------



## Gary A. (Feb 22, 2017)

Capture 1 does a good job with a slick UI.  But I think Iridient does a slightly better job.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 22, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> What the heck is that? A DeSoto?


Volkswagen Type 3 Squareback ... I think
sitting in front of a Pot & "Gardening" store (notice top right sign).


----------

