I would really like to know how to remove the distortion of colour around the sun in this sort of shot.
I would really like to know how to remove the distortion of colour around the sun in this sort of shot. I am very much a learner in Lightroom, so any hints for using that would be appreciated. Thanks :)
Originally shared by Frank Smith
Solar panel!
Fisherman Bay, South Australia
#sunsetphotography
Frank Smith, I cannot seem to blow this up at all to see closer. I am unsure of what "distortion" you refer. I see a thin layer of clouds across the face and to the sides of the sun. I also see a slightly 'jagged' edge to the circle of the sun. That however, is caused by uneven temperatures in the air. An atmospheric distortion. It is nothing caused by either lens or camera. Every camera would display the same, as it it is what we can see with the fluctuating densities of patches of air. (This also can be a problem with any long distance shot.)
ReplyDeleteIf indeed this is the 'distortion', there is nothing directly you can do about it. It is often less, when the air temperature is more every distributed, such as mid day, or when there is no wind.
If this is not it, then try and describe it? Perhaps verbaly, I can get an idea. As, with the level of magnification I have available, I can't see it.
Oshi Shikigami Thank you, Oshi. I often find that there is a red ring, & similar distortion around the edge of the sun when I take such shots, & if it is just a normal "distortion", you have cleared that up for me, & I no longer need to worry. I also found that when I converted it from RAAW to JPEG, the sky area appears blotchy & wavy.. this seems to happen when I process sunrise/sunset shots.
ReplyDeleteAtmospheric prismatic dispersion?
ReplyDeleteI figured out a way to make it bigger on my 27" monitor :-) I can at full screen only see a suggestion of the 'red ring' effect. This is something that can beset far more pronounced during an eclipse. It is the bending of the light around the sun. So, it is a natural effect, not any form of 'defect'.
ReplyDeleteAs regards the blotchiness of the sky, this happens to some effect whenever .JPG files are created. Usually it is almost microscopic, and un-noticed. However, I have found in converting or, even when working on .RAW files in the first place it also can happen. Sometimes very small, and other very obviously a blocky sort of effect.
It becomes more pronounced, the greater the amount of editing close to maximum on the settings. In other words, if you say push one color way down in luminosity, and the color next to it way up in luminosity, it can be a problem. But it is not just luminosity, it can be contrast as well.
It's my belief that when used to extremes, the algorithms in the software star misbehaving, that cannot 'cope' with extreme settings real well, sometimes.
Converting to .JPG just compounds this effect, for the same reasons. The numbers just don't 'crunch' well and you get blocky, blotchy, and other odd "artifacts". ("Artifact" is any thing in the picture that was not part of the original image.)
I think this information might be of use for the photograph community. May I use you photo with my diagnostic, as a teaching post on some of the photo communities? Thanks for considers it. :-)
Oshi Shikigami Thank you so much, Oshi. That is very helpful. Yes, please feel free to utilise the image to share with others. :)
ReplyDeleteHenri-Pierre Chavaz Thanks, Henri-Pierre, I am sure that is part of the problem when the sun is in that position.
ReplyDeleteFrank Smith you should of course edit in 16bit tiff not in jpg. this may need some more room on the disk, but hard disks are cheap today. conversion to jpg is the last step and LR is very good at resizing it. no more jpg artifacts then :-)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Robert Glöckner. If you have the option, shooting in RAW, and waiting until the very last, to do a full size, 100% quality JPG is the best to do.
ReplyDeleteG+ allows photos to be uploaded full size, as an option. Be sure to select it in preferences.
However, they do some compression. You can't change that option. When they do, 95% of the time you cannot notice it. But rarely there are some minor or not so minor artifacts made.
If you notice a bad upload, you can try agin. that may fix it. If not, edit (very slightly) the original, recreate another JPG for upload, and try that. Sometime just a few bits changed, and make quite a difference.
Oshi Shikigami sometimes there is a small color shift on the thumbnails, but generally the quality is very good for the free meal up to 2048px.
ReplyDeleteI have found the thumbnails to sometimes be lighter or darker than the blow-up. But fortunately not real often.
ReplyDeleteRobert Glöckner Oshi Shikigami Thank you for your invaluable feedback. I do shoot in raw, and convert as suggested, but have never ventured into TIFF, so I now have something new to try. I appreciate you taking the time to share :)
ReplyDeleteFrank Smith I see you use Nikon too - since the free Capture NX-D is available I use it to correct exposure, white balance and sometimes noise here and export then as 16bit tif directly to Lightroom. Here most of the time the PerfectHdr processing is the way to go, and, depending on my mood, the NIK filters are helping me to achieve the desired results: Color Efex or Silver Efex with many filters to go. For few month there is PS CC here (only €10/month) and sometimes I try and play with it's infinite possibilities and learn...
ReplyDeleteRobert Glöckner Thank you, Robert. I gave up trying out Capture NX-2, as it would not download correctly, & Nikon could not overcome the problem for me, & was unaware of Capture NX-D, so I will try it. I am new to Lightroom, I have not used (and processing in general) & have not ventured into anything like NIK.. a world of adventure awaits :)
ReplyDeleteFor my work, I use Lightroom to create DNG files from my Nikon NEF files. I then use Lightroom for 95% of my processing work. If needed, it then can go to Photoshop. I like the Adobe software better than Nikon's.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, when I make DNG files from my NEF files, I in-bead the original NEF file intact within the DNG file. That way if I ever need it, which I never have so far, I can extract it from the DNG file.
But the DNG file can be used by many other softwares, and printing houses. It is universal, and in my opinion, superior to work from than the original RAW files, or TIF.
I can, if I wish make TIF files, but they do not retain all original data in an unedited form, as do RAW or DNG files. I fear sometime of screwing one up, and not being able to "re-start" - as I have needed to do on occasion.
Oshi Shikigami Thanks, Oshi. I recently read a post on the value of working with DNG, but am yet to try it..
ReplyDelete