Coffee_Drop_0040.CR2.xmp (10.3 KB)
Sorry, is not what you asked for.
As a side note, don’t be afraid to pump the ISO, better to have a high ISO, well exposed image than amplify the low ISO noise afterwards.
Coffee_Drop_0040.CR2.xmp (10.3 KB)
Sorry, is not what you asked for.
1 Like
I don’t drink coffee but I cannot stop playing with the image! My alt3: Groggy in the morn, craving that caffeine fix.
1. RawTherapee → same as alt2.
2. gmic → extract noise from L* (D50) → remove hot pixels → smooth → brighten → screen blend with alt2.
Hi afre,
I like your alt2 recipe very much. Thank you!
But [why is there always a but?}]: why on earth did you convert into Rec2020 linear?
The only thing it did (?) was to shift the histogram to the left. Or is there something that I have misunderstood?
Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden
Initially, I did it to reduce the amount of out-of-gamut values. Now, I do it to confound you. 
In truth, it has a different aesthetic, like medium format, and has become my signature.
Hmmm… if the histogram shifts left when the image is converted with a linear Rec2020 profile, that’d indicate to me the image already has a non-linear profile assigned. For my camera’s images, I start by assigning a linear calibrated profile, then I’ll convert to a gamma 1.8 Rec2020 profile for work, and the histogram shifts right. If I use the linear Rec2020 profile instead, the histogram doesn’t change. Thanks @elle, for all the neat profiles; they are the foundation of my “profile zoo”.
Instant americano!
And people have been pouring even more weird liquids into more weird liquids in the name of art.
I love coffee! Tried to capture the lazy feeling before my caffeination rituals.
Coffee_Drop_0040.CR2.xmp (12.9 KB)
A low key approach:
RawTherapee (Coffee_Drop_0040.jpg.pp3 (10.2 KB)) followed by some slight dodging in Gimp.
I wasn’t making any strange beverage… after washing the machine, I made a couple of waste coffees to refill the pipes and try.
So, in the end it was just for art. While I was washing the machine I’ve seen the chance for some nice shots.
And wow guys… I’m so glad to see you’re all making these great works. It’s cool to see you’re having fun and I’m actually learning quite a lot.
@billznn, sorry for the off-topic, you seem to have changed some lens-related metadata. (I used to do this too, for the same camera/lens combination, but don’t any more.) Which editing program did you have to please?
What do you mean by changing lens metadata? I can’t fully understand.
What I can say is that for some reason the lens recorded in the metadata is a Canon 17-55, but actually, as I wrote in the initial post, the lens is a Sigma 17-50, so I used the correction for the Sigma.
I used Darktable.
Sorry for the confusion, your lens causes different metadata to be written than mine, perhaps it is a different version. Mine is recognised as Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS HSM or Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC by ExifTool, which can’t distinguish the two similar lenses. (While the programs, using Exiv2, can.) Darktable recognises it as Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM. Since “for some reason the lens recorded in the metadata is a Canon 17-55” in your case, I was wondering, if you have changed anything. Well, you have not. For darktable, your lens is Canon’s EF-S 17-55, which triggers the “wrong” lens correction data.
This is about third-party lenses and their ways, it might not be worth the time. Thank you for your patience, have a nice evening!