emwalker

My Canon 20D, or I, seem to have a noise problem. I don't know if

anyone else has this issue, but on mine all the low light shots I

take and a lot of the medium to bright exposures I take have what

seems to me an unusual amount of noise, much of which appears in a

linear, horizontal bias. I am wondering if it's something I'm

doing, my camera, or a combination? This happens at 100 ISO too,

and the noise difference is not that much from 100 to 1600 ISO.

Your ideas on this are most welcome. Thanks.

 

-e-

That's kinda ironic, since PSE 2 came bundled with my 20D. Woo-hoo, thanks Canon! Oh well...

Well, now I've restarted PSE and it loads up looking like the browser version, and I've lost the original pallette I was working with. Egad, man... well, thanks for the input anyway...

Yes, they do... and peculiarly they seem to happen on the preview screen in PS Elements too. I am using an image that's a single layer, and it just looks different in the workspace than in any of the saved copies. This full-size image is a good example:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/4045621&size=lg

 

When I open it (same file) in PSE, the color tone is completely different. I guess what I'm wondering is when I print, how am I going to know what the color is going to look like, and how can I edit in an environment that is as close as practical to the finished print product? Hmmm.....

OK, it turns out that the display colors in PS seem different than other viewers on this machine. Basically, a file looks like I want it to when viewed in PS, but displays differently (browns turn red) in other programs ie IE, Microsoft Office Picture Manager, etc.

I have two problems.

 

First, Photoshop Elements doesn't open my raw(CR2) files from my

Canon 20D. Is there a plugin that I can get for PS to read these?

 

Second, when I save a file from Photoshop, the output I get seems to

be in a different pallette from my starting image- namely, warm

brown tones are turned to shades of red. I have saved in TIFF and

JPEG formats at the highest quality and still get unacceptable

results.

 

Thanks for helping.

 

-e-

I'm still waiting on my Aston-Martin to be delivered next week before I order this... do you think you can fit 39 megapixels in an Aston-Martin?

Chris- we have here a diversity of styles, formats, and subject matter. Nudes are classic mainstays in the art world, and many choose this medium to experiment with aesthetics. If you want no nudes, look at the specific categories that interest you, be that landscapes, travel, flowers, birds... sure, you'll run across a nude most of the time in the general critique forum, but I have to say the vast majority are not aimed at being erotica but simply studies in form and light. And try not to surf this site at work, lest your superiors should get the wrong idea...

 

Welcome.

 

-e-

Jamie N.-

 

I have made a vain attempt to express my regret for singling out another member- I realize it was not the best tactic, but I only meant it as an illustration. I should simply have spoken in vagueries with no concrete example. Fair enough. This is a non-archived forum, and I look forward to the time when it disappears into nil, as I feel it has served to answer my original question quite thoroughly. As for the snapshot comment, I know it's hard to stomach but I have referred to my own works which were indeed snapshots as such. There's some interpretation that goes into it- my take is that a snapshot is an opportunistic shot, ie most street shots, concert photos, etc., as opposed to a carefully constructed and composed portrait/landscape/etc. There's obviusly a lot of gray area there, and something you may consider a controlled peice I may consider a snapshot, and vice versa. There's also a lot of skill, vision, and anticipation that goes into capturing great shots in the snapshot environment. Most of my gallery, in fact, consists of snapshots, because that's what I have been doing photographically for years. Tripod? Tri-what? I didn't really mean it as a dig, just a simple observation; in retrospect I realized that perhaps I came off as a little mean-spirited and again made a weak attempt at apologizing for my poor manners. My opinion, however, is mine and has not changed.

 

S.P.- I am aware of the significance of a 3/3 rating, but had hoped for a little insight as to why people feel it's below average (and I've received several answers through this post...). Personally, I was quite pleased with the result and a little taken aback by the negative response without critique. I will post more and more in-depth comments. There was a time when I commented on a lot of shots from a lot of photographers, but I admit I got a little discouraged at the small amount of feedback I got. I guess I'll just plug away and hope for the best.

 

John-

 

I hear you, but I still feel that critique in written form should supercede the rating system. If I post a shot which I like and it receives 3.4/3.6 with no comment, I'm simply left with the impression that I like it, but everyone else thinks it sucks. Perhaps it's boring subject matter, perhaps people don't like the color cast, perhaps it looks hazy and too grainy... but the nmbers don't say any of that- they just say 'this sucks.' Now, that may be constructive for some people, and I have had a few enlightening experiences with some of what I thought were my nicest compositions receiving below-par ratings and no comment. Makes you rethink your whole tactic. I've also spent countless hours poring over other galleries, gathering ideas and information which I hope will help me in the field. Don't get me wrong, I don't think the rating system should disappear, I just think it's a little overemphasized and too often replaces dialogue as the primary method of 'critique'.

 

And Jayme-

 

I agree that honest, tactful comments are the best...

 

-e-

Knicki?!?- mpffh mnopfh.... ahem....

(removing foot from mouth)

You make a very valid point...

 

there is no real equal comparison between the two photos.

 

Ben- You are right, I shouldn't single out anyone... and most probably especially Pnina, as I realize she does very much in the community and comments and responds invariably to criticism or praise. My point was not to single ANYBODY out (and I failed in that ever so miserably) but to simply use an example of what I was trying to point out- the inconsistency of the rating system and its irrelevance in my expectations from the forum. I am not a paid member or a prolific poster, and perhaps some perks should be reserved for those who are. I simply think that the critique forum should be critique based and that ratings should be absolutely secondary to that. Critique is an essential part of education, and I think that many of us average photographers could grow through the observation of others, especially those more experienced and skilled than ourselves. My point was not to downgrade anyone here, but to lodge a dissent against a system which I feel is biased and a bit misguided. I plan in the future to post all my critique requests as 'for critique only,' though I fear that on many of my shots I may get absolutely no feedback at all.

and Neil, Knicki?!? is right- you are not a nobody! And I don't think I am either, for that matter, despite what the forum may ignore from time to time....

 

Anyway, I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings here...I'm not always the slickest at saying what I feel...

 

-e-

Jeff and stephen- It's true, I probably contribute less than I should to generate the response I desire. It's true that I generally comment on photos that strike me in some way. I will try to contribute more.

 

Steve- First, appeal is obviously in the observer (personally I find her very very appealing)... but that's not what I'm here to talk about or what the photo is about. You do make a good point, and I'm often not surprised when my more mediocre shots don't generate much if any attention. We all skip over comment on the ones that are, well, boring. However, I often try to comment on mediocre subjects because the 'atta boy' comments are pretty useless IMO. I try to give suggestions of how I would try a scene differntly- light, angle, etc- to make it more 'interesting'... and yes, I have suggested starting completely over in some cases. Most people don't post their shots if they don't feel they are at least above average in some way. But again, appeal is very subjective. I do have a good number of shots in my portfolio that are sentimental for me, and I generally don't post those for critique because I know that they won't amount to anything but boring snapshots for anyone who wasn't there. I guess, though, I just feel that a 4/4 shot is more in need of comment than a 7/7. If my style was flawless in my own opinion, I wouldn't bother posting here- I'd sell my work and judge its worth by imcome. I know that my latest subject matter is not exactly groundbreaking, but I am new to the format and experimenting with lighting and contrast in fairly challenging (at least for me) circumstances. I know that nude girls on dark backgrounds are pretty much a dime a dozen, so I hadn't really expected rave reviews for originality. Anyway, it's good to hear some honest feedback, and I will try some more unusual scenes next time I shoot. Thanks for taking the time to respond!

 

-e-

I've been posting here for a while, and while I don't leave a huge

number of critiques, I try to be fair when I do. I stopped rating a

long time ago because I think that the rating system is contrary to

the spirit of this site. I hoped, when I joined here, to expand my

knowledge and photographic skill through discussion and constructive

feedback and criticism. It seems, however, that nothing I post

seemsto generate much interest from anybody, and I rarely if ever

get a constructive, well-thought response on how I might have done

somethingdifferent to improve the image I posted. For example, this

is my latest post: http://www.photo.net/photo/4030878.

I received one helpful comment, and otherwise received five

(count 'em FIVE) 3/3 ratings with NO comments at all. Now, I

usually don't pay much attention to ratings, but with this much

dispairagement I kinda feel like some of these people should step up

and account for what they rate- again, why the ratings system really

doesn't, IMO, belong here. This site should be about support and

discussion, not a popularity contest among members. Contrast with

Pnina Evantal (not to pick on anyone, but surely the best example

I've found so far). Check out this snapshot of a Hina (?) doll:

http://www.photo.net/photo/3487861 , and notice the

ratings (6.15/5.87), and the fact that NONE of the ratings came from

the rate recent forum. Now, don't get me wrong, Pnina's got a

decent portfolio, but looking through her shots I found countless

examples of this phenomenon (marginal-quality shots with

ridiculously high ratings). Further, when I rated one of her shots

with honest, below-average numbers (and a verbose comment explaining

why), my rating didn't appear! What is going on here? I have an

idea! I have a suggestion to improve the ratings system- No ratings

without comment, and disable ratings for people who leave nothing

but trivial or gibberish comments. Some accountability for your

ratings might cut some of the MUTUAL BACKSCRATCHING and get back to

the real point here- artistic growth through honest, constructive

dialogue...

 

Thanks for listening to my rant, your comments on this issue are

most eagerly anticipated.

 

-e-