A couple of shots from today. It's still cold as hell, and the light is incredible. I also did a bit of trainspotting and got the B&W image of the S-train passing under a bridge. The harbour shot had a bit of PS applied: High pass filter, curves, vignetting and red and blue channel mixer settings.
GR User Forum
The spot for all Ricoh GR camera users
Register for free, meet other Ricoh GR users, share your images, help others, have fun!
Tell your friends about us!COLD IN COPENHAGEN
- Thread starter RFH
- Start date
Thanks for the comments. I'm just teaching myself digital postprocessing by web tutorials and good old trial & error, and I have a feeling I still have a lot to learn. I'm used to manual developing of B&W. As regards image no. 2, yes it's a train – the F line of Copenhagen to be exact.
The GX100 is a nice thing to play with. I have taken it with me everywhere since I got it, which certainly doesn't happen with my DSLR. I haven't shot too many digital images before, but in this recession it's good to shoot free images ad libitum.
I must say that I'm still a bit iffy about the printing techniques for digital images. I recently spent hours PP'ing some images for X-mas presents, but the prints were far from optimal. Some even had 'printer traces'. How can a printer possibly be as refined as light photons passing through a negative? Am I in the wrong here, or is this a major setback as far as printed image quality goes? Yes, for me, the printed image is still what counts. Making digital images look fine on the screen isn't too difficult. It's getting from there to the print that concerns me.
If anyone on the forum has good suggestions or links to postprocessing for better prints, please share.
The GX100 is a nice thing to play with. I have taken it with me everywhere since I got it, which certainly doesn't happen with my DSLR. I haven't shot too many digital images before, but in this recession it's good to shoot free images ad libitum.
I must say that I'm still a bit iffy about the printing techniques for digital images. I recently spent hours PP'ing some images for X-mas presents, but the prints were far from optimal. Some even had 'printer traces'. How can a printer possibly be as refined as light photons passing through a negative? Am I in the wrong here, or is this a major setback as far as printed image quality goes? Yes, for me, the printed image is still what counts. Making digital images look fine on the screen isn't too difficult. It's getting from there to the print that concerns me.
If anyone on the forum has good suggestions or links to postprocessing for better prints, please share.
Orol
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Messages
- 2,162
Getting a nice print depends on the printer and paper being used. I would say it is more important than the post-processing itself. After trying some possibilities through the last few years in our local photo and ad-printing studios, the best solution turned out to be using a large format ink plotter and a glossy paper of 180g or even 300g weight. Sure, a bad post-processing can ruin all the process (e.g. the aggressive JPG compression that you should avoid in any case and use some of the lossless formats like TIFF instead), but I saw unexpectedly good prints even from a quite bad and small input.
Peter
Peter