popcorn
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 227
|
Post by popcorn on Dec 27, 2022 15:38:53 GMT
Hi and best wishes to all. My favourite subject is nature and birds rank very high with Birds in Flight at the very top. What normally happens is I go out on a shoot, spend two hours in the field and then arrive home with 500 photos on my card. Normally about 50 images of each subject. 2 hours in the field becomes 8 hours of choosing and processing. The only real chore is selecting the best images of each subject to process, and this takes by far the most time. How do you get from 50 images to one? and when you do, are you sure that it was the best choice. I am hoping someone out there can help me do this more efficiently. My camera is always in manual mode, I selected shutter speed and aperture to suit my subject and auto ISO, with a limit of 6400. I limit my bursts to 10 but normally shoot 3 or 4 in a burst. I also shoot in Raw. I use the FastStone App to select the images to process because: it allows you to view from 2 to 4 photos simultaneously you can select it to display, or not display the EXIF and Histograph. Each image can be zoomed and moved with-in its frame or they can be zoomed and moved in synch This is my present workflow for making that critical choice of which images to keep for processing. I download the images from my camera into a folder on my hard drive. I then open them in FastStone. I only view three images at a time because the viewing size suits me. I view the images with no EXIF or Histograph, I zoom in to 100% to compare details and focus. I then set the Zoom so I get an idea of what they will look at my expected crop size. I choose the image that I like best from a visual point of view. I open the EXIF mainly to show me the ISO used. ( I have normally set the speed and aperture manually so they are the same ) I open the histograph to check on the highlight and shadows clipping. This is where my problems begin, because I am never sure which shape of Histograph will process best. ( See attached sketches ) If the curve is full width and no clipping then I have no problem. ( Top sketch ) If I have two images which rank equally for visual but have different shaped histograms, which should I choose; The one with slight clipping in the highlights but stronger mid-tones ? or
The one with no clipping in the highlights but weaker midtones ?
The one with no clipping but biased towards the shadows or biased towards the highlights?
I tend to prefer stronger midtones at the expense of slight shadows or highlight clipping and want more detail in the highlights. If the images are very similar, I then view the first and second images and make a choice and delete one. I then compare the better of the first two with the third image and once again delete one. I never allow myself not to make a choice. ( but I wish I was more certain of my interpretation of the best histograph for processing ) I then open the the comparison window and open the next two images and include my choice from the previous round. I apply the same criteria as above and eliminate two of these. One of the deleted photos could be the best choice from the previous round. I am always comparing the best to date with new contenders. Theoretically I should end up with the best image to process. I make one exception to my routine, if during the course of elimination, I find an really exceptional image, I "leave it behind" and no longer include it in the elimination process. This take a long time and I am hoping that someone has a more efficient and certain process that they are willing to pass on. Here's hoping!!  |
|
popcorn
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 227
|
Post by popcorn on Dec 27, 2022 15:47:48 GMT
Sorry, posted wrong file!!? See correct one attached  |
|
|
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Dec 27, 2022 17:59:02 GMT
You and I are kindred spirits regarding how we take photos. - M mode ... manually selected speed and aperture and often using auto ISO.
- ISO mode depends on overall lighting. I use both pre-set ISO or Auto ... depends.
- Shoot burst a lot ... too much?
- Take 500 photos in one outing (Go Team!!)
- Often spend more time selecting and processing than shooting.
- Use FastSstone viewer for rapid selection.
I love FastStone. If I have 300 photos of one bird from one photo session, I used FastStone to go though quite fast as you do. I do not use the multi-image screen display...just one at a time. I write down numbers of "first cut" images. Then in File Explorer I will select the "first cut" images and move to a new folder. Then from the "first cut" folder, I select "sister" images (say taken from one angle) that have similar lighting and open all of that bunch in ACR. Generally, I process these all the same in ACR: exposure, contrast, lights, shadows, etc. I rarely tinker with vibrance of saturation. However, before opening in PSE I preview each photo. Before opening the batch in PSE, some might be deleted; some I will tweak (say shadows) differently than the mass adjustment; I check critical focus points such as bird eyes (enlarged at 100%); in the ACR group I might select just a few to open in PSE. So, perhaps I have opened 20 similar (first cut) bird photos in ACR, I might only open (say) 8 in PSE. Generally, those 8 will all be named and saved to a new subfolder. Then I do a final critical review of those 8 and might post one or two of what I think are the best. (I belong to several photography Facebook groups where I share photos. Plus, I post photos about every 2 or 3 weeks on my own FB Page.) But we are different on the use of histograms as I ignore them and use my "gut instincts" to select photos. Maybe I am just arrogant, but I think my eyes are better than a histogram chart. I do pay close attention to clipped darks and lights. I try to avoid blown whites like the plague. Therefore, I tend to underexpose photos of subjects/scenes with pure white. I am a true believer in the statement below with the text in color. support.shutterstock.com/s/article/what-is-a-histogram-in-photography?language=en_USRemember, there's no such thing as a "correct" histogram shape. It all depends on your light conditions and creative goals. For example, if you're trying to capture a dark image with plenty of shadows and only a small sliver of light, your histogram will be weighted more heavily on the left (i.e. dark tones). Likewise, if you're shooting a balanced city scene with a variety of tones, the histogram should have a wavy shape across the tonal spectrum.
In short: your photographic goals should dictate how the histogram looks, and not the other way around.
Hope that makes sense. So regarding your histogram sketches, the answer is: it depends. Later today, I will look for two examples and post two images and their histograms. Really enjoyed learning about your photography techniques and processes. Clive |
|
|
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Dec 27, 2022 19:38:43 GMT
popcorn These two examples show how two histograms can be vastly different, yet the primary subjects are more-or-less correctly lighted. Both of these images were taken in "bad" lighting. The top photo was all in equally low light...this the somewhat uniform, bell-curve histogram. (The reflectance of all areas in the photo are somewhat similar...perhaps around 20%) The bottom image was quite different with the finch in shade and the background was snow and also in shade. The snowy background has thrown the histogram far to the right. (The reflectance of the background snow is probably 80% while the reflectance of the finch is perhaps +/- 20%.) If the background was replaced with (say) a uniform, mid-range gray the histogram would become more of a "normal" bell curve. Point being, the histograms describe the exposures but not overly helpful in making adjustments. (Clipping excepted.) If the bottom histogram was forced to be bell curved the image would be of no use. Perhaps an example trying to put a round peg in square hole: it won't end well. BTW, the sliders in these two images show no adjustments because I opened two jpgs for these histogram examples. Sidenote: These are house finches, Haemorhous mexicanus. World finch taxonomy is complex. New World finches are not closely related to finches in SA. Both are passerines but in difference taxonomic families. See references. carolinabirds.org/HTML/Fringillid_Newworld.htmcarolinabirds.org/HTML/Finch_Estrildid.htmnhpbs.org/wild/Passeriformes.asp  
|
|
popcorn
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 227
|
Post by popcorn on Dec 27, 2022 20:20:56 GMT
Hi Clive,
The different histograms that I get are usually the same subject in roughly the same position and taken from the same angle.
As a birder yourself, you will know that sitting in a hide you don't pick your "angle of attack" the subject moves around into differently lighted situations. Even when in the open the birds delight in not co-operating with the photographer. So I can't design my histogram to suit the photo. I take the photo using the best settings for the situation I hope they will be in so I get presented with different histograms in consecutive shots. . Not much time for Pixel peeping!!
I would like some certainty about which histogram is going to produce the best result without having to process it during the selection process.
If I have a set of badly exposed images I will do a rough bulk process in ACR to get a better idea of their potential.
I try not to duplicate any photo in my "keepers", so while I may have many images of the same species they are all in different situations. The only reason I keep shooting the same bird in the same place is that I live in the eternal hope that the next photo will be the best ever, and then I delete the previous best with absolutely no compunction!!!
You may be interested, I had a Common Chaffinch on my lawn a couple of days ago. Why they are amazing is that they were introduced into the Newlands area of Cape Town by Cecil John Rhodes in 1898. They have been here for +-125 years and they have never moved from an area about 15km x 15km, they have never proliferated and have never become extinct. A very unusual occurrence in introduced wild life species.
|
|
|
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Dec 27, 2022 21:15:36 GMT
I live in the eternal hope that the next photo will be the best ever  That keeps us going! Will re-read your post tonight. |
|
|
|
Post by fotofrank on Dec 28, 2022 1:40:39 GMT
To start, a histogram is a graphical representation of the tonal values of your image. In other words, it shows the amount of tones of particular brightness found in your Image. Next, there is no such thing as a perfect histogram so selecting what image to edit based on a histogram, to me, does not merit any value.
I pick my selected images based on Impact, Composition, Story Telling, Mood etc... the histogram never enters into my image selection process, shooting in raw, with todays software resolve any image issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by srmoment on Dec 28, 2022 2:06:26 GMT
I have quit taking 'bursts' when the subject is not moving much as I don't need 10 photos of the same position. I do take bursts if a subject is moving and then choose the one (or two) I like the most, using Faststone.
Once or twice during the year, I will look at my subject folders and quite mercilessly delete anything that I would consider less than good (unless I can use it for more abstract images).
ahaha, I look at a hissstogram maybe once a year!
...oh, I have backups of backups.....as I don't trust the great beyond.
[editor's note: I usually copy Clive's settings as we have the same camera (different lenses) and he knows what he is doing....].
|
|
|
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Dec 28, 2022 4:35:17 GMT
Even when in the open the birds delight in not co-operating with the photographer. So I can't design my histogram to suit the photo. I am thinking perhaps you might be possibly trying to create the perfect histogram. As fotofrank noted, "there is no such thing as a perfect histogram" The histogram reflects the range of lighting in a photo that you feel is good. [editor's note: I usually copy Clive's settings as we have the same camera (different lenses) and he knows what he is doing....]. Oh Pat, you poor soul. That could be dangerous! I thought you had the Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G. |
|
|
|
Post by VickiD on Dec 28, 2022 6:38:26 GMT
popcorn, I'm in the camp with Clyde and Frank, and Pat--I never look at histograms except to check out clipping. As Frank said, it's only a representation of the distribution of tones and really doesn't represent your image. For example, I took a photography class at our local community college a number of years ago and one of the other students had a lovely image of her grandfather's hands. It was a dark image with only the hands and some edges having any light, and very little light at that. The 'professor' who was a recognized photographer, told her the photo was bad because the histogram was leaning toward the dark end. It's as if she never looked at the photo...just the histogram. I think that's what stopped me from caring what the histogram 'says' about an image!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by PeteB on Dec 28, 2022 14:53:06 GMT
Popcorn
If you desire more info about histograms, photographer/author Al Judge has a good book entitled Mastering Histograms. In it he states that “There is no such thing as a perfect or ideal histogram”. He goes on to state that the data the histogram provides can be used by the photographer to create mood or impact that he/she desires.
In a studio setting, I think, a histogram can be helpful because the photographer has some control. Then in post processing, the histogram can provide information for corrections or creating mood.
For me, like the others, I occasionally check a histogram and that is in post processing. Also, I do not shoot in burst mode, although I do multiple shots of a subject. Those occur because of changing the framing, the viewpoint or the camera angle.
As far as managing my images I use Adobe Bridge … since I never see it mentioned here, I wonder if anyone else uses it.
Interesting to see all the comments … I hope it helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by VickiD on Dec 28, 2022 20:25:52 GMT
As far as managing my images I use Adobe Bridge … since I never see it mentioned here, I wonder if anyone else uses it. PeteB, I use Adobe Bridge, too. I learned a long time ago that the Bridge is looked down upon by many so-called knowledgeable people. They use Lightroom, mostly, and I just don't "get" LR...too many things constantly go wrong with it! Anyway, I've used Bridge since I started using Photoshop back in 2003, and love it. |
|
|
|
Post by michelb on Dec 28, 2022 21:24:54 GMT
As far as managing my images I use Adobe Bridge … since I never see it mentioned here, I wonder if anyone else uses it. PeteB, I use Adobe Bridge, too. I learned a long time ago that the Bridge is looked down upon by many so-called knowledgeable people. They use Lightroom, mostly, and I just don't "get" LR...too many things constantly go wrong with it! Anyway, I've used Bridge since I started using Photoshop back in 2003, and love it. The obvious reason Bridge is not much mentioned here, apart from discussions about metadata management and Camera Raw connection, is that from the beginning, Elements had its own management system based on catalogs and databases : the organizer companion. That was before Lightroom was launched. Historically, it was not available for Mac users, so Adobe offered Bridge for a couple of years before the organizer was added to Mac PSE versions. I am a notorious fan of the organizer, but I have used Lightroom for some time (I like it too, but for my own needs, I can do what I want with only the organizer). I also use Bridge which is available in the free Creative Cloud. It has a superior metadata management capacity and batch processing. In my particular case, it's no secret that as an 'Adobe Community Expert' I have a free access to the Photographer's Creative Cloud (PS + LR...) which I don't use except for learning and answering questions, but not for my own needs. The real advantage for me is that the piece of software I need most is ACR, the full version of PS, not the limited one of PSE. This enables me to use Bridge + the full ACR as a full solution to raw processing, the file management of LR being easily performed in the organizer. Bridge is set as my alternative processor. This lets me select files in the organizer, send them to Bridge from which I can open the full ACR. So, while I still consider that Bridge can't compete with the organizer in terms of organizing and speed of searches, it's now a regular tool in my workflow.
|
|
popcorn
Junior Forum Member
Posts: 227
|
Post by popcorn on Dec 30, 2022 9:03:21 GMT
Thanks for all your replies.
It seems as if I am in the minority. Apparently the histogram hardly features in most photographers workflows. For me it is a very important component. I have found that my images require much less post processing and I can definitely see that my photos are much better for it.
If I am am shooting static images I always use 3 exposure bracketing with 3 image burst mode. I always have at least three images.I then use the histogram to help me select the "right" image to process.
For static subjects I also use the Histogram in camera after my first exposure sequence to see if I have to make any exposure allowances "to get the histogram which best suits my requirements". I use full Manual mode to have control over ISO as well.
I have just started to do macro and I definitely use the histogram to get my exposure right.
On birding/wild life field trips, my camera is always set at 10 exposure burst mode with no bracketing. I base most of my wild life photographic techniques on the books and tutorials produced by Steve Perry, he used to use the same Nikon D500 with the 200-500mm Nikon f=5,6 super zoom that I still do.
His philosophy is, if you have a good subject, keeping shooting, you can't get it to pose for you, so take as many images as possible, even perched birds are constantly moving their heads and position, the next one may be the one you have been hoping for.
This is even more pertinent for birds in flight and fast moving animals. I also have my camera on manual but with Auto ISO to take care of the changing lighting conditions. Then to, if I have time, I will also check the histogram in camera.
So I do come home with lots of images of the same subject. And lots of choices to make!!
Back in the late sixties I was sailing and doing underwater and nature orientated photography in very isolated islands. I was shooting on my Nikon F with 128 ASA bulk, self loaded, "Fast Film", kept sealed in "ammunition boxes".
I could only send my film to the UK when we found somewhere that postal service existed, this was every three months or so, and then I had to send it to UK and have the processed film sent back home. Often I never saw the result until a year later. What a difference having an in Camera histogram would have made to my results.
|
|
|
|
Post by pontiac1940 on Dec 30, 2022 17:01:50 GMT
His philosophy is, if you have a good subject, keeping shooting, you can't get it to pose for you, so take as many images as possible, even perched birds are constantly moving their heads and position, the next one may be the one you have been hoping for. Agree. Even perching birds are almost in constant motion. Depending on possible opportunities, I might slow shooting down to mid-burst rate, but if it is a "one of" opportunity I shoot at 10 fps. This is a 1- or 2-second burst from yesterday. "Just" a chickadee that is not only a common bird, but has no fear of people and will come close. A photographer's best friend.  I also have my camera on manual but with Auto ISO to take care of the changing lighting conditions. Then to, if I have time, I will also check the histogram in camera. I switch between manual ISO and auto ISO...depends. When time permits, I check the images just taken for exposure and usually just look at the photo and make a visual assessment of the overall exposure. If I call up the histogram I do not look at the chart but look for white and black clipping. Yesterday, I took common goldeneye (duck) photos and they have both almost-black and bright-white feathers. (As bad as a bride and groom in sunshine.) In this case, I think the histogram window showed both white and black clipping. When that happens I will underexpose (i.e. expose for the whites) because blown whites are not recoverable, whereas there is usually some detail in the dark regions. (I normally prefer sunshine for bird photos, but there is a case for bright overcast.) Lots of fun.  |
|
That keeps us going! 
