# Slipping into the ocean - Seascape



## AdamK

Hi guys, long time no see! 

I took a trip to the sea to photograph a moody scene, so I found my perfect little spot on some rocks and waited till the sun went down for a longer exposure. The clouds really add something to this photograph but I love the slipway into the ocean. Please tell me what you think! :mrgreen:





View on black for full effect: Slipping into the ocean. | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Thank you!


----------



## Virtuosos

I like it, but it looks slightly underexposed on the left side whereas everything else is lit up to a degree :/


----------



## AdamK

Virtuosos said:


> I like it, but it looks slightly underexposed on the left side whereas everything else is lit up to a degree :/



Yeah I think a cloud came over casting a shadow, making it slightly darker on one side and obviously with the ND Filter only accentuating that so it came out underexposed to the rest of the photo. But I am just going to call it mood  Haha. Thanks Virtuosos!


----------



## frisii

IMO, it can be lightened up quite a bit. In Levels, drag the RGB midpoint slider left, to 1.80. Looks better to me.


----------



## AdamK

frisii said:


> IMO, it can be lightened up quite a bit. In Levels, drag the RGB midpoint slider left, to 1.80. Looks better to me.



Woah, the photo almost looks washed out on my monitor are you sure you meant 1.80?


----------



## frisii

yes. See this screencapture of the dialogue.

khggjgjjflickr - Minus
i can't repost your image because it's NOT OK


----------



## AdamK

frisii said:


> yes. See this screencapture of the dialogue.
> 
> khggjgjjflickr - Minus
> i can't repost your image because it's NOT OK



Ha ha! exactly what I did but it was washed out and way, way too bright. Is one of our monitors not calibrated because that could be our problem!


----------



## frisii

Maybe..The rest of the world looks ok on this monitor  How does this look ? http://www.indiev.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/color-test-file.jpg


----------



## AdamK

frisii said:


> Maybe..The rest of the world looks ok on this monitor  How does this look ? http://www.indiev.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/color-test-file.jpg


242 on the greyscale is very faint grey and 255 is white, the photo is perfectly exposed and I can see every colour on the colour chart? Looks as good as ever


----------



## frisii

Diagnostic website
LCD monitor test images
Freeware (only works when connected to the web)
Calibrize


----------



## AdamK

I have one of those Syder 3 express monitor calibrators and I calibrated it a couple of weeks ago. So do you think it's worth doing it again?


----------



## frisii

If you can distinguish 0 and 255 for what they are, then your image at 1.8, appearing  "washed out and way, way too bright" is a contradiction in terms. The robots seem to confirm this ..i just ran your posted jpeg through an auto-exposure (correction) tool which corrects the midpoint to approx 1.90. 



AdamK said:


> frisii said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe..The rest of the world looks ok on this monitor  How does this look ? http://www.indiev.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/color-test-file.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 242 on the greyscale is very faint grey and 255 is white, the photo is perfectly exposed and I can see every colour on the colour chart? Looks as good as ever
Click to expand...


----------



## frisii

No harm in trying I guess. Maybe the washed out reaction is a personal subjective thing that is at odds with your idea of what you want to show. All the numbers add up otherwise. 



AdamK said:


> I have one of those Syder 3 express monitor calibrators and I calibrated it a couple of weeks ago. So do you think it's worth doing it again?


----------



## AdamK

frisii said:


> If you can distinguish 0 and 255 for what they are, then your image at 1.8, appearing  "washed out and way, way too bright" is a contradiction in terms. The robots seem to confirm this ..i just ran your posted jpeg through an auto-exposure (correction) tool which corrects the midpoint to approx 1.90. If it's "perfectly exposed", i think your camera's broken
> 
> 
> 
> AdamK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frisii said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe..The rest of the world looks ok on this monitor  How does this look ? http://www.indiev.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/color-test-file.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 242 on the greyscale is very faint grey and 255 is white, the photo is perfectly exposed and I can see every colour on the colour chart? Looks as good as ever
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


I understand that, but what I think is happening is that if your saying the photo is at approx 1.90 then bumping it up 1.80 is adding the already exposed 1.90 and adding 1.80 so totaling the image to 3.70


----------



## frisii

No..regard your posted image's luminance as 1.00. After auto exposure correction the resulting picture equates to an additional adjustment of + 0.90... i.e your jpeg opened in an editor then the midpoint raised by 0.90. My manual, 'by eye' adjustment regarded it as 'better'/'optimal' at 1.80. An automated adjustment puts it at 1.90. Your '1.00' looks too dark compared to a lightenend version which reveals lots of detail obscured in your edit.


----------



## AdamK

frisii said:


> No..regard your posted image's luminance as 1.00. After auto exposure correction the resulting picture equates to an additional adjustment of + 0.90... i.e your jpeg opened in an editor then the midpoint raised by 0.90. My manual, 'by eye' adjustment regarded it as 'better'/'optimal' at 1.80. An automated adjustment puts it at 1.90. Your '1.00' looks too dark compared to a lightenend version which reveals lots of detail obscured in your edit.



Got an idea:







How does that look and is that correct how you would do it? :mrgreen:


----------

