My 2nd submission

[mrodgers]

When I was out in the snow letting the 4 year old play, I walked around with the new camera. I spotted this apple as the last one hanging on the bare tree. Thought it would be a good shot. Post edit I changed the background to black/white keeping the apple color because I thought it would look cool and to learn something new in PaintShop Pro.

Hand held and in macro mode.



Camera: Fujifilm FinePix S5700 S700
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/3.5
Focal Length: 63.3 mm
ISO Speed: 64
Exposure Bias: 0/100 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire

[tomw]

Hi mrogers,
Here's my two cents:
So you've decided to do that selective black and white technique that I despise so much lol, but it actually turned out OK. Personally I hate the technique because I think it draws away from the actual greatness of the photo and makes people say "Oh thats cool" and then move on. Anyway, enough rambling. The purpose of this technique is to make one object stand out right? So why don't you try saturating the apple so the reds really pop out at you. Don't make it too saturated, but make it noticeable. Right now, the apple has a grey tint over it, making it have not the best color.

The one other thing that I noticed was the blur. I see a little bit of blur in the apple. It's motion blur, at an angle of about 100 degrees. Of course, your first option would be to increase your ISO since it was at 64 (Wow! I usually keep mine at 400, but my camera probably has less noise than yours at 400). Alternatively, now after you shot it, you could use a filter in photoshop CS2/CS3 called Smart Sharpen. You can select the type of blur there is (Gaussian...i.e. out of focus, Motion blur, and something else), set the angle of motion blur, and compensate for the mistake. I doubt PSP has this (Although I don't know PSP), but you can download Photoshop CS3 for free from Adobe.com for a 30 day trial. I can't said that I haven't done that I loved it. It's a great program, and if you haven't tried it, dnld it now. It's really amazing.

Of course you could go to your local Apple store and work on your photos there. They have CS3 and you can work on the computers too! Not sure if they will like it though...

Hope this helped. Good job and good luck on your next photo!
-Tom

[FrankenPengie]

I think you're moving in the right direction here. You've got a colorful thingy in a wintery background. Going B&W with the background bits is fine. I believe this could have used a shorter exposure time to help cut motion blur. Some diffused flash may help control this too.

As far as post-processing this image, I've managed some good things with PSP 6.01. Contrast, sharpness and color-pop can be enhanced using various similar methods to Adobe. Unfortunately this shot is mostly lost to motion blur. But that's okay - I post plenty of repaired pics to the web that have the same problem.

[Nathan deGargoyle]

B&W background to focus on your main object can work well but you need to boost your focal point. This is vastly overdone but you get the idea

[mrodgers]

=tomw;82951]
So you've decided to do that selective black and white technique that I despise so much lol, but it actually turned out OK.....

Ha ha, I had a feeling I'd get a bit response like that. I've read now from quite a few here and elsewhere that many don't like this technique .

I'm specifically quoting the comments next, but anyone can answer my questions arising from these comments.....

The one other thing that I noticed was the blur. I see a little bit of blur in the apple. It's motion blur, at an angle of about 100 degrees. Of course, your first option would be to increase your ISO since it was at 64 (Wow! I usually keep mine at 400, but my camera probably has less noise than yours at 400).

I do know that there is some blur going on. I took several shots with several compositions (different focal lengths and distances) and this was the best one and the least blurred. But, I do wonder about ISO numbers. This was shot outside in full daylight, a nice sunny day, but some big pines to the side of this tree does block the direct sun in the winter. Also, everything was covered in snow at the time. I wonder about the "Wow" on the ISO 64. I am assuming that outside in daylight, lower ISO is desirable. I was just thinking that 64 is my lowest and I should use 64 or 100 outside, and 200-400 inside. I'm not sure how much noise I would get from 400, but I'm sure noise would definitely be significant at 800 in any situation. I am not sure when I would use a particular ISO setting. I can set at 64, 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600, which at 800 and 1600 I think would be too noisy thus I don't plan on ever using the 2 highest. So, I ask in what situation examples I would use 64 or 100 and where I would use 200 or 400? From your comment, I gather that I would get less blur with a higher ISO number?

Now on to the rest of the comments from all the other posts.....

Originally Posted by FrankenPengie

I believe this could have used a shorter exposure time to help cut motion blur. Some diffused flash may help control this too.

Noted about exposure time. I think I shot this just in P-mode just to set the ISO at 64, since I assumed this is what I would want for sunny outdoor snow shots. I was mostly taking snapshots of the 4 year old playing in the snow, very bright. I may have moved to Aperture just to force my widest aperture setting (f/3.5) for this particular shot when I saw it. I can't remember. The 1/30 shutter speed was set automatically in either mode. I haven't jumped into the full manual mode yet. I still have to burn the relation between shutter speed and motion into my head since the numbers don't really mean anything to me yet other than, "yeah, 1/xxx is faster than 1/x" .

Contrast, sharpness, saturations, etc, post-processing..... I'm pretty new to all this as well. I couldn't seem to see any difference in using the sharpness in PSP. I just played around a bit more with contrast and saturation and uploaded that. I desaturated the background a bit less so there is still a bit of color there, and gave the apple a bit more saturation to bring the red out. I think it turned out quite a bit better than my first post-process.

Thanks again guys, it's a great learning experience reading the comments. My 2nd post-process attempt is as follows......

[Amira]

I like your 2nd edit mrodgers. The blur is a little less visible and the "feel" you were going for is much better represented. The red stands out more briliantly against the grey background, and even the little droplets on the apple stand out better. A much better 2nd edit. It would have been best to use a tripod to help with the motion blur, as I have learned the hard way, but we know oftentimes that is not possible and we have to make do with the situation at hand. Overall I like the shot. =)

[peeperita]

i like your second edit as well.....especially that it came about using one of the fastest teaching tools here.....the critique column....

about the "motion blur"......from glancing at your data, i believe it might be more of an indication of a tight depth of field......if it is something you'd care to try to remedy, go back and try the shot a little further away with the same aperture.....or increase it's number from the same position.....for me it's a perfectly acceptable image as far as your subject's clarity......

learning post processing is a wonderful journey....

thanks for sharing....

peeper