Seeking Seattle

[Detail Man]

I have ventured so far into technical matters of late following my recent purchase of a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 ("raw" format, competing processors, and the plethora of various mathematical algorithms that constitute and surround the pursuit of attempting to maximize image quality) that my bones became sentimental for (and my heart revisited) simply using the LX3's in-camera JPG Engine without all the fussing (in the way that I've decided to configure the LX3 settings for best post-processable JPG results, while also providing for a workable RW2 file to be recorded).

My personal sense of beautiful subjects oft surrounds flora (riverine moss, fern, and tree, the flowers that line my way back to my beloved creek),
and my dear little friend now nearing age five, and so far away - a sense of wonder to which human-made structures seldom in my mind's eye compete.

I ventured to the heart of this modern city, to the square, where seven generations ago my ancestors' manifest destiny wrested it from peoples who,
for nearly 100 times longer than have we, loved it's lush forests, rivers, and shores; treasuring them as much, if not much, much more than do we.

The conquerors, loggers, regraders, developers, and industrialists have (nestled between skyscrapers reaching to the sky like steel and glass,
edifices to all that we imagine ourselves to be) have been persuaded to let be and preserve the market square dating back over five generations,
where the spirits of those who came before dwell amongst walls and stalls of this gathering place of many peoples since the birth of this burg.

As dusk drew last night on a clear but temperate Winters' evening, the luminous lights of our night play host to the vast and wide skies.


The EXIF data got stripped in the midst of my PaintShop Pro 9.011 post-processing fray, but the (camera and processing) vitals are provided below.

Panasonic DMC-LX3, Firmware Revision 2.1
10 Mpixel (3648x2736), High Quality JPG
Optical Image Stabilization: Mode 2
"My Film" Film Mode settings: Contrast = -1, Saturation = 0, Noise Reduction = -2, Sharpness = -2
Metering: Multiple (full-frame).
Auto Focus: Single Area (normal speed)
ISO = 80

Mechanical Stabilization: Braced upon a metal railing.
Zoom = 2.5 (60mm, full telephoto)
Aperture Priority, F = 4.0
Shutter Time = 1/50
EV (ref. ISO 100) = 9.97

PSP9: JPG to BMP; Crop to 2610x1958; Brightness; Histogram Color Balance; Saturation; Highlight/Midtone/Shadow.
XnView: Lanczos-3 re-sampling to 1024x768 pixel-size.
PSP9: Unsharp Mask (radius=0.5, strength=100, threshold=1); Export JPG (Compression = 2, no Chroma-Sub-sampling).



Mechanical Stabilization: Hand-held; my body partially braced against a parked automobile.
Zoom = 1.0 (24mm, full wide-angle)
Aperture Priority, F = 3.2
Shutter Time = 1/20
EV (ref. ISO 100) = 7.98

PSP9: JPG to BMP; Crop to 3201x2401; Brightness; Histogram Color Balance; Saturation; Highlight/Midtone/Shadow.
XnView: Lanczos-3 re-sampling to 1024x768 pixel-size.
PSP9: Unsharp Mask (radius=0.5, strength=100, threshold=1); Export JPG (Compression = 2, no Chroma-Sub-sampling).


I must say - if I had my druthers, I'd rather shoot in JPG and post-process in BMP in my familiar and relatively straight-forward ways than wrestle with complicated mathematical technologies and collegian debates that overwhelm and challenge the human mind - all for the purpose of further bring forth the possibility of beauty to behold in the ever intangible mind's eye of the beholder(s). Such noble depths embroil and wrestle my brain away from it's more mystical place as a mere seat of the mind and spirit - where beauty is witnessed in time/place, at best polished a bit by me.

The painter rearranges the elements in order to, within matter, and from the mind's eye, create beauty.

My photography witnesses beauty (when I am lucky, following persistence), then carefully eliminates that which
seems to detract from what the subject is somehow saying to me, humbly polishing merely it's chroma and sheen.

Technical Mutterings: Though it cost as much as my FZ30 and FZ50 cost me, and lacks the (both) larger and better optics,
for a pocket-able "little wonder" the DMC-LX3 is quite adjustable, and offers meaningful improvements (even in JPG mode)
over my previous Panasonic compacts (LZ5 and TZ4) in usable dynamic range, focusing, and color rendering. And the DxO
LX3 Module promises to take the post-optics software corrections/enhancements to the limit in RW2 "raw" processing ...
.

 

[thelps]

Hi DetailMan,

I do also feel that the out of camera jpg is often enough. I suppose one could do a test pair of prints, one from the out of camera jpg (OOCJ) and another from a RAW file that you have put your best work into and let the RAW processor do its magic. You could then print them bothand see if you can tell the difference or if you think the difference is worth it. A good friend of mine has a DP2 and loves its output - after processing the RAW file that is. He claims he can clearly tell the DP2 RAW processed output over other cameras in postcard prints even. His recent Japan trip images were awesome!

I also consider that RAW processing is bordering on an "Art form" a bit. It needs skill and a well calibrated monitor. I realised that some of my recent posts may look a bit dull due to a new monitor I have (the last one died). The monitors basic startup is for a very bright punchy screen and I may have backed off some of my image in PP. I did wonder if anyone runs a service to PP onyour image for a fee?

Here is a LX3 OOCJ with no PP except resizing in XnView. Its a view of my city across the Torrens lake.
Looks like I took this one in 16:9 mode. I guess a RAW processor may be able to retrieve some of the white roof in the festival center on the left?

 

[Detail Man]

Hi DetailMan,

I do also feel that the out of camera jpg is often enough. I suppose one could do a test pair of prints, one from the out of camera jpg (OOCJ) and another from a RAW file that you have put your best work into and let the RAW processor do its magic. You could then print them both and see if you can tell the difference or if you think the difference is worth it ...

I would say (with the LX3, and after twiddling with the in-camera JPG parameter settings) that sometimes the JPG is enough. Inveterate fiddler that I am, however, I am virtually unable (by my personal nature) to not fiddle around after the fact - using PaintShop Pro 9, more and more DxO Optics Pro 6, and now using XnView 1.97 (for the wider range of re-sampling algorithms that it offers, including "Lanczos"). Thus, my camera setting are aimed toward producing a JPG for (loss-less) JPG post-processing - leaving brightness/contrast, color balancing/saturation, and any "sharpening" operations to be applied after the shot. I like your shot above a lot! It demonstrates that the LX3 is capable of dealing quite gracefully with it's own limitations, in bringing forth respectable and admirable JPGs without further assistance! Having an 8 GB SD Memory card, I can record (about) 500 HQ 10MP JPGs as well as a RW2 for every shot (just in case that "crown jewel" may emerge). Well worth doing (for me) as I can upload them via USB at 5-6 MB/second. 97% of them find a "happy home" in my Recycle Bin in the end, but with SD memory so inexpensive, (I figure) why not! Taking 500 shots in a day's time usually wears me out, anyway ...

I also consider that RAW processing is bordering on an "Art form" a bit. It needs skill and a well calibrated monitor. I realised that some of my recent posts may look a bit dull due to a new monitor I have (the last one died). The monitors basic startup is for a very bright punchy screen and I may have backed off some of my image in PP. I did wonder if anyone runs a service to PP on your image for a fee?

I have evolved and developed a loss-less JPG post-processing "regimen" that (usually) allows me to fairly rapidly bring the in-camera JPG to "where it seems to want to be". In that sense, the "science" that I have assembled to easier facilitate the "art" of cropping and polishing "little gems" of the JPG variety. After my usual experience of shooting a few hundred shots, and eliminating (usually) not less than 97% of them (I take many near-duplicates of a desired subject with two exposure choices, and from slightly different perspectives), it is gratifying to then be more readily able to explore the polishing of these few (little gems) without feeling as if one is embarking upon the long and laborious project of trying to surpass the formulas of the camera-engineering-team that "raw" development in Silkypix has been for me (with my inexperience being a significant contributing factor, I am sure).

Though I have (after greater experience with Silkypix) developed a more systematic (and rewarding) approach, greater possibilities lead to more fiddling and iterations with any tool-set. Having become fairly familiar now with DxO Optics Pro 6.x (processing JPGs and TIFs only, so far), I feel that I am (similarly) developing a "system" that is allowing me to trust DxO to automatically get things closer to the processing effects desired, and then "staff" the controls from that point to "tame the automation" with personal preferences and tastes. My hope is to evolve a system(s) with "raw" processor(s) that more rapidly "converge" to what I am looking for, thus increasing the pleasure (and mitigating the pain) of the joys/pitfalls of "rolling one's own" finished image.

Here is a LX3 OOCJ with no PP except resizing in XnView. Its a view of my city across the Torrens lake.
Looks like I took this one in 16:9 mode. I guess a RAW processor may be able to retrieve some of the white roof in the festival center on the left?

(Only) now that you have directed my eye to it, it does look like the highlights are a bit up there on the white roof. Better to nearly over-expose than under-expose in this case (with the LX3)! it looks fine as it is. I'll PM you my email so that (if you like), you can email me the in-camera JPG, and I could apply my recently assembled Dxo/PSP9/XnView "sytem" to it, and email back what I come up with. I (personally, and only by my own tastes) would likely drop the overall intensity a bit in order to bring out more details in general. If you send it, let me know what pixel size you would like the output JPG to be. Of course, personal tastes are diverse to the degree that "farming-out" such labors will always demonstrate differences between the eyes and preferences of human post-processors (not to mention other viewers) ...
.

 

[Detail Man]

thelps -

What do you think of my attempt at post-processing your "Adelaide City" image posted above?

(To your eye) better, worse, or about the same?
.

 

[odklizec]

The Farmers market shot has wonderful atmosphere. You catched the best part of day for this kind of shot. It's not dark yet, but the lights and neons are already on. Very nice!

 

[thelps]

thelps -

What do you think of my attempt at post-processing your "Adelaide City" image posted above?

(To your eye) better, worse, or about the same?
.

To bring readers up to date, I sent DetailMan the original out of camera jpg of the Adelaide city image above and he has kindly post processed the image as an experiment using DxO Optics Pro 6 and Xnview for a final output of a resized image.

I have attached the re-processed image, take a look at both and see what you think?

 

[Detail Man]

Re: Seeking Seattle - RW2 Processed With DxO Optics Pro

The Farmers market shot has wonderful atmosphere. You catched the best part of day for this kind of shot. It's not dark yet, but the lights and neons are already on. Very nice!

Odklizec,
Still "earning my wings" with DxO Optics Pro 6.12 (DOP), I thought that I would see what could be done for the "Century-old Hub of the City" shot that you liked by processing the simultaneously recorded RW2 image-file using DOP - instead of the (previously posted on this thread) in-camera JPG processed using PSP9. I slid the image crop to the left slightly (to better center the image components). Otherwise, the crop-size (3011x2252 pixel-size, equivalent to 6.78 Mpixels of the 10 Mpixels total of the original in-camera RW2/JPG recorded shot) is almost exactly the same.

I'm quite pleased with the results of my carefully crafted efforts, and I hope that you may appreciate the considerable differences (that I personally perceive) in the results. The ISO Sensitivity was 80 (which seems to be getting stripped out of the EXIF data by DOP). The shot was taken hand-held (with my body braced against a parked automobile) using Optical Image Stabilization.

DOP's automatic/manual optical corrections for the DMC-LX3 lens-system are outstanding, and the "Lens Softness" correction (with "deconvolution deblurring") continues to astound and impress! While I would not (from experience) expect the DMC-LX3 lens-system to perform as well in a landscape shot containing foliage at the distances from the camera that the people inside the farmer's market exist at, the "acutance" of the lettering on the small signage existing inside the farmer's market (with "deconvolution deblurring") is, nevertheless, quite impressive, indeed!

The automatic/manual Noise Reduction (with separate "chrominance" and "luminance" controls that you would surely appreciate) was used to eliminate a very small amount of noise visible in the full-sized (cropped) processed image, with no perceivable loss of image detail. We shall see if the DOP NR remains as graceful at higher ISO Sensitivity values (such as at ISO=400, etc.) ... Re-sampling to 1024x768 pixel-size was performed using "Lanczos" in XnView, and mild Unsharp Masking (pixel-radius=0.5, strength=100%, threshold=1) and JPG conversion (using no chroma-sub-sampling) was performed in PSP9. I would be curious to know what you think of this DxO Optics Pro 6.12 processed image as it compares to the in-camera JPG produced by the DMC-LX3.


Best Regards,

DM ...
.