Assuming for the moment that these screencasts will stay silent I personally think that the following works best:
Explain what you are about to do in a terse way. Do this the way Boris does it: An in between text only section. You only have to do this when needed, some actions might be rather obvious.
No explanatory text during the edit itself, the only exception being: show key/mouse presses that we as a viewer cannot see (Shift-X, ctrl-Y, left mouse click etc). I do believe that there are some tools for showing this in a nice unobtrusive way.
As someone who use ART for most of my edits, it’s always good to see how others use this software. Firstly, your caption use is good and adds to the video (for me).
I’m guilty of getting excellent results from my preset, so that the edit only requires minor adjustments, that I have neglected looking in depth at what certain modules can achieve, in this instance the colour/tone correction.
So many thanks for opening my eyes.
I can try and do my best to address specific requests and record some “mini how-tos”. They won’t be fancy (just screen recording, no audio, no overlay textual descriptions), but if people think they might be useful I’ll give it a go…
We can use this thread to collect requests and share the videos, would that be ok for you?
From three photos I make a DNG file (with those handy user commands). I try to get the exposure right with the log tonemapper. The tone equalizer is not optimal for DNG files, so i play around with color/tone correction. The result is not quite to my liking yet, but we are moving in the right direction!
I’m not sure exactly what you mean, but I suppose you refer to DNG files resulting from HDRmerge. In that case, I would play with the exposure compensation slider to bring the tones in the range that is suitable for the tone equaliser.
Here is a demo, using the files from this play raw.
Thanks agriggio, that is indeed what I mean. So first adjust the exposure and then try something with the tone tools. What I also wonder is the choice between tune curves or log-tonemapper (Dutch translation). Not both at the same time I guess? And for HDRmerge files the log tonemapper is probably better?
Why not? On the contrary, they are meant to work together: log tone mapping for general management of the dynamic range and brightness, and tone curve for fine-tuning
Here’s another edit of an HDRmerge file with low light and a rising sun. I can say that it is very nice to work with ART rawconverter. Selecting photos based on metadata also works much better than with a database (But it does have a disadvantage: I’ve forgotten how working with DT went However, there is one thing that I find easier in DT, and that is perspective correction )
Whatever works there’s really no single answer, it depends both on the image and on your goal. The dynamic range compression tool is really good at, well, compressing large dynamic ranges while preserving details/local contrast, but it can sometimes result in a sort of “artificial” look (which is a bit vague/hard to pinpoint, at least for me). The log tone mapping can be a bit more “natural looking”, but it’s not so effective at correcting harsh pictures with deep shadows and very bright highlights. But these are just general feelings, you really have to try and see…
@Ramana I’m surprised you say you find the perspective correction is easier in dt, as the ART version was ported from dt with a couple of tweeks. I personally find little difference.
Take care.
I noticed a difference with the control points. Especially with a photo with a wide-angle lens, a low horizon and e.g. a mill in the right corner: the mill is skewed. With both DT and ART I can straighten the mill with the control points, however in DT the horizon remains as it was, in ART the mill is straightened but the horizon is skewed. If I put the horizon horizontal again, the mill is skewed again.
This is great as always @agriggio.
I was interested in how you were doing your white balance using the person’s shorts. I assume you know they are supposed to be white and that you were entering values to get the RGB values the same. How did you come up with the multipliers? Is it just experience for what you think you need to enter?
Interestingly, the original print had cropped out the person. Without the shorts to use as reference white, how would you go about setting the white balance? This is always my biggest challenge with neg conversion.
However, there is one thing that I find easier in DT, and that is perspective correction )
there’s really no single answer, it depends both on the image and on your goal. The dynamic range compression tool is really good at, well, compressing large dynamic ranges while preserving details/local contrast, but it can sometimes result in a sort of “artificial” look (which is a bit vague/hard to pinpoint, at least for me). The log tone mapping can be a bit more “natural looking”, but it’s not so effective at correcting harsh pictures with deep shadows and very bright highlights. But these are just general feelings, you really have to try and see…