Using bad photo to ask for advice

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

M

Morado

Active member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
Z09_5914.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Hello everyone.

As part of my recovery from cognitive damage done by COVID-19, I am supposed to spend more time outdoors and in nature. My doctors also recommended I retake by hobby of snapping bad photos. Worse yet, they have asked that I start sharing them with others as doing so might bring about conversations outside of what I usually talk about (mostly work); this is part of what I am supposed to do to help my brain reboot.

Anyway, I thought I would try to follow my doctor's orders by asking here a question based on a bad photo. It was taken a few days ago during a visit to the Chapada dos Veadeiros national park in Brazil. One day at dawn, the fog made everything look in shades of yellow, orange, and, to a lesser extent, red/ish. I did not have time to go to a spot with a great view, so I took a couple of snaps where I was.

Anyway, my question is related to the attached photo. First is a slight crop of what the camera recorded. The second image is what I remember seeing. So I wonder what would be the more "honest" image, what the camera recorded or what I remember seeing (note: one of my post covid issues is related to visual challenges related to contrast and color gradation perception)

More importantly, if this had been in a better spot, how much touch up –if any at all– would you do?

My apologies if my question does not make sense.

Z09_5914_CapOne_s.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
First, I hope your recovery continues to go well. Second, the call is really yours. It is your photo and you have the final word on what you want to say in your image. And what the sensor records is only what the sensor records. To characterize it as "honest" is akin to saying that what a film camera records on a negative is "honest". Both are designed to processed a bit more to make them a final product for public consumption (excepting if you only want jpeg files out of the camera and do not want to edit them, but you will still make setting adjustments prior to taking the picture).

FWIW, I prefer the second image.

Good luck,

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
As Ken said, second image is best. It has a lot more detail and the colors are still very rich and appropriate. I'm glad to read that you are out and active with your camera.
 
Member's gallery
beautiful - second image for me. Perhaps the scene was something between the 2, color/brightness-wise. As you are training your brain - perhaps challenge it by using more features in Photoshop. For instance - if you had to add/remove an element to the photo, what would it be? Then do it. I find it particularly interesting that you could pinpoint visual challenges related to contrast and color gradation perception so precisely. Example: remove the powerline. Or to add - bird silhouettes in the sky. Or go big, use generative fill, and add a spaceship. I hope you get my drift.
 
Member's gallery
I think both images are good. Now, my right eye had a detached retina a few years back….that resulted in a cataract which meant the OEM lens was replaced, now I’ve perfect vision in my right. My left, very short sighted and I wear a contact lens for great vision.
when I use one eye, the reds are prev. The other, blues! So what’s real? Both your images would be “true” for me.
They‘re great.
photography is for you to enjoy. If others share it, so much the better, but never shoot to satisfy what others may like. You just cant tell.
Hoping your recovery goes well.
 
Member's gallery
Replytoken said:
First, I hope your recovery continues to go well. Second, the call is really yours. It is your photo and you have the final word on what you want to say in your image. And what the sensor records is only what the sensor records. To characterize it as "honest" is akin to saying that what a film camera records on a negative is "honest". Both are designed to processed a bit more to make them a final product for public consumption (excepting if you only want jpeg files out of the camera and do not want to edit them, but you will still make setting adjustments prior to taking the picture).

FWIW, I prefer the second image.

Good luck,

--Ken
Click to expand...

Dear Ken,

Thank you for your responses and the well wishes. I would not wish this long covid thing upon anyone, not even my enemies if I had them.

Your analogy regarding a film's negative being the "honest" image is well taken. Perhaps I should have said the image is "reasonably believable" would be better. Given my challenges with color and contrast perception, these days I am always wondering if any edit I do, whether light or more involved, makes a photo look weird or wacky color/contrast/brightness-wise. While I have some presets, they have seldom been the definitive edit on any given image. But these days I struggle with my own workflows, as sometimes brain fog stops me from remembering them or remembering simple local adjustments I would normally do (e.g. feather detail on a bird). Nowadays, when I edit a photo, sometimes I will do multiple edits and then bother someone in my family –usually my 10 year-old– to help me choose or at least tell me if any colors or shades look weird.

Given my perception issues, it is all the more unnerving to share photos (never done it outside of family circle). But my doctors insist that sticking to this hobby and working through my current challenges vis-a-vis taking snaps, while at the same time discussing my images with others, is among the many little things to do that hopefully will help recover my cognitive processes.

As I mulled what to do, I thought of finally joining DPR after reading their fora for ages. But while there are a lot of brilliant discussions there, there's also quite a bit of recalcitrance and obnoxious behavior. The same goes for other places. BCG fora seemed like the place to try as they seem to be cordial and constructive. Besides, @Steve projects such a nice persona on his videos that it would be hard to pick another place to ask for advice.
 
Member's gallery
Winston Churchill (Sir) said:
beautiful - second image for me. Perhaps the scene was something between the 2, color/brightness-wise. As you are training your brain - perhaps challenge it by using more features in Photoshop. For instance - if you had to add/remove an element to the photo, what would it be? Then do it. I find it particularly interesting that you could pinpoint visual challenges related to contrast and color gradation perception so precisely. Example: remove the powerline. Or to add - bird silhouettes in the sky. Or go big, use generative fill, and add a spaceship. I hope you get my drift.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the suggestions. I will certainly keep them in mind as I work on getting back to taking photos and processing them. As a side note, I am able to precisely mention my visual challenges after more than 30 tests/exams and multiple doctors over the span of 2+ years.
 
Member's gallery
Patrick M said:
I think both images are good. Now, my right eye had a detached retina a few years back….that resulted in a cataract which meant the OEM lens was replaced, now I’ve perfect vision in my right. My left, very short sighted and I wear a contact lens for great vision.
when I use one eye, the reds are prev. The other, blues! So what’s real? Both your images would be “true” for me.
They‘re great.
photography is for you to enjoy. If others share it, so much the better, but never shoot to satisfy what others may like. You just cant tell.
Hoping your recovery goes well.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your comments, for sharing your differing color perception in each eye and for the well wishes. I agree that photography is ultimately for the shooter to enjoy; that is certainly something I am trying to steal back from COVID's legacy.
 
Member's gallery
Morado said:
Your analogy regarding a film's negative being the "honest" image is well taken. Perhaps I should have said the image is "reasonably believable" would be better. Given my challenges with color and contrast perception, these days I am always wondering if any edit I do, whether light or more involved, makes a photo look weird or wacky color/contrast/brightness-wise. While I have some presets, they have seldom been the definitive edit on any given image. But these days I struggle with my own workflows, as sometimes brain fog stops me from remembering them or remembering simple local adjustments I would normally do (e.g. feather detail on a bird). Nowadays, when I edit a photo, sometimes I will do multiple edits and then bother someone in my family –usually my 10 year-old– to help me choose or at least tell me if any colors or shades look weird.
Click to expand...
Now here we share a lot in common and I am not having to deal with the challenges of long-COVID. I have been using LR and LR Classic to process since it was initially launched and I ask this question almost every time I work on an image. What I have learned over the years is to have a "gentle hand" with my images unless something more radical is warranted. This is based on two primary observations. First, when looking over images I processed in the past, I can see they were a bit "overdone" for my taste. So when I am editing and trying to decide on an adjustment, I usually dial it back a bit. Second, while my basic editing skills are competent, I do not possess many advanced editing skills to take my images to that next level. Granted not all images need a lot of processing, but I know my current limits and while I am tryi8ng to expand my skills, I tend to stay within my zone of comfort. If brain fog continues to be a challenge, I would stick to the basic edits that most of us adhere to. Most non-photographers would never know the difference, and we would probably not unless you showed us two versions side-by-side.

Regarding second opinions, your son and my wife could form a support group. It is good to get input from folks you know. This forum, and a few others I know of, have good members and it would be rare to see your work torn apart.

And when all else fails, just remember not to follow the words I was told by a stereo salesman when I was 17 and buying my first set of speakers - "Some is good, more is better, and too much is just enough!"

Good luck (and keep shooting, processing and posting),

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
First, best wishes on your continued recovery. Morado, the answer to which is better really is what you want it to be. Typically, I will color grade and edit to make the image appear the way I remember the scene looking. Cameras don't always capture what we see and what the camera captures isn't always an accurate reproduction of what was really there. Oftentimes the reality is somewhere between what the camera captured and what our mind remember.

Unless you are doing it of ra purpose like photojournalism, how a photo is post processed really comes down to what we, as the photographer and artist, wants to show and what pleases us most.

With all that, I like number 2 better for no other reason than it is brighter and less dark moody.

Again, best wishes in your recovery and hoping it goes faster and smoother than you anticipate.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
Honesty is not much of a virtue in most photography AFAICS. If you are a photo journalist, then you are presumably presenting your images as "honest" renditions of what you saw. But generally -- barring such things as contest rules that limit edits -- the goal of a photograph is more artistic than forensic. Or so ISTM.
 
Member's gallery
Sorry you are having the cognitive issues. In terms of how photography may help, from a cognitive standpoint, you might consider thinking about what story you want your image to tell as you set up to make and include that with the posted image to generate a deeper discussion beyond "I like this one better because...." Not that there is anything wrong with that as well. Storytelling will also help guide you in post processing. For instance, is your story in the images above about the sun or how the sun lights the fogged in valley or how then sun cannot penetrate the foreground foliage? I would suggest you experiment with cropping out the top half of the sun and then the sun it its entirety and see if it changes how you feel about the photo and the story you want to tell. Best of luck with your recovery.
 
Member's gallery
Replytoken said:
Now here we share a lot in common and I am not having to deal with the challenges of long-COVID. I have been using LR and LR Classic to process since it was initially launched and I ask this question almost every time I work on an image. What I have learned over the years is to have a "gentle hand" with my images unless something more radical is warranted. This is based on two primary observations. First, when looking over images I processed in the past, I can see they were a bit "overdone" for my taste. So when I am editing and trying to decide on an adjustment, I usually dial it back a bit. Second, while my basic editing skills are competent, I do not possess many advanced editing skills to take my images to that next level. Granted not all images need a lot of processing, but I know my current limits and while I am tryi8ng to expand my skills, I tend to stay within my zone of comfort. If brain fog continues to be a challenge, I would stick to the basic edits that most of us adhere to. Most non-photographers would never know the difference, and we would probably not unless you showed us two versions side-by-side.

Regarding second opinions, your son and my wife could form a support group. It is good to get input from folks you know. This forum, and a few others I know of, have good members and it would be rare to see your work torn apart.

And when all else fails, just remember not to follow the words I was told by a stereo salesman when I was 17 and buying my first set of speakers - "Some is good, more is better, and too much is just enough!"

Good luck (and keep shooting, processing and posting),

--Ken
Click to expand...

Good points on having moderation as main approach when editing and processing. Like you, I have pictures from the past that I have re-processed; though I don't think I will do much of that for a while, at least not while I am having to rely on others to make sure I am not producing crazy stuff and being forgetful of the flows I used to have. I think you are right about basic edits while the brain fog remains. With this I am not suggesting I was ever good at taking photos. It's something I have done over the years for personal satisfaction and to disconnect from the day to day.

The family is helpful in getting opinions. My son tends to be quite keen as he says he wants to learn photography and inherit my Nikon D500.

Thank you for confirming that the BCG members are not into tearing others apart. It is still a strange idea for me to share outside the family. If it were not for the doctors recommending it, I doubt I would consider it.


jeffnles1 said:
First, best wishes on your continued recovery. Morado, the answer to which is better really is what you want it to be. Typically, I will color grade and edit to make the image appear the way I remember the scene looking. Cameras don't always capture what we see and what the camera captures isn't always an accurate reproduction of what was really there. Oftentimes the reality is somewhere between what the camera captured and what our mind remember.

Unless you are doing it of ra purpose like photojournalism, how a photo is post processed really comes down to what we, as the photographer and artist, wants to show and what pleases us most.

With all that, I like number 2 better for no other reason than it is brighter and less dark moody.

Again, best wishes in your recovery and hoping it goes faster and smoother than you anticipate.

Jeff
Click to expand...

Thank you for the well wishes and my the powers of the universe hear you on the recover going faster.

You're right that reality is somewhere between what the camera captured and what we might remember (after all, two or more people will remember an event or a conversation differently). I probably did not choose my words well. I suppose I was thinking in terms of an image not producing skepticism that the photographer saw or is at least convinced of having seen what is presented in a processed photograph. It is perhaps because that morning, as I started trying to capture colorful mist and sky before they went away, in my own mind I was thinking I would not believe the colors, their intensity and propagation unless I had seen them.

Who knows, maybe my imprecise question was just the brain fog talking...


tclune said:
Honesty is not much of a virtue in most photography AFAICS. If you are a photo journalist, then you are presumably presenting your images as "honest" renditions of what you saw. But generally -- barring such things as contest rules that limit edits -- the goal of a photograph is more artistic than forensic. Or so ISTM.
Click to expand...

I agree that the issue of a photo being realistic is probably only important photojournalism. And even then, it would be realistic about the scene and angle of view.

You and @jeffnles1 referred to photography as art and the photographer as an artist. I often forget that because as I don't have much talent I tend to see myself not as photographer but as someone who takes photos just because it is a form of relaxation.
 
Member's gallery
RecalcitrantRon said:
Sorry you are having the cognitive issues. In terms of how photography may help, from a cognitive standpoint, you might consider thinking about what story you want your image to tell as you set up to make and include that with the posted image to generate a deeper discussion beyond "I like this one better because...." Not that there is anything wrong with that as well. Storytelling will also help guide you in post processing. For instance, is your story in the images above about the sun or how the sun lights the fogged in valley or how then sun cannot penetrate the foreground foliage? I would suggest you experiment with cropping out the top half of the sun and then the sun it its entirety and see if it changes how you feel about the photo and the story you want to tell. Best of luck with your recovery.
Click to expand...

Ron,

This is a very interesting point of view and, frankly, fresh and good advice. I really appreciate it. I have been so fixed on figuring out why my Doctors told me to retake a hobby that has become challenging that it did not occur to me that thinking about photos as story telling might help contribute to rebuilding my cognitive processes. The pictures I took during the trip to the Chapada were part of IFTTT approach. Doctors told me to spend time in nature and retake the photo hobby. So I went to the national park looking at it as a task, which also allowed me engage in another ask (resuming photography).

I am not sure how I could make a story about the Chapada, it's place to see wildlife (not much luck this time); its got many sights, from canyons to rivers, waterfalls, a place nicknamed "moon valley", etc. On top of that, it is a dark park, so you can see the Milky Way.

Perhaps the starting point is, as I think you suggest, to start simple and just think of the story of any given image.
 
Member's gallery
Morado said:
Ron,

This is a very interesting point of view and, frankly, fresh and good advice. I really appreciate it. I have been so fixed on figuring out why my Doctors told me to retake a hobby that has become challenging that it did not occur to me that thinking about photos as story telling might help contribute to rebuilding my cognitive processes. The pictures I took during the trip to the Chapada were part of IFTTT approach. Doctors told me to spend time in nature and retake the photo hobby. So I went to the national park looking at it as a task, which also allowed me engage in another ask (resuming photography).

I am not sure how I could make a story about the Chapada, it's place to see wildlife (not much luck this time); its got many sights, from canyons to rivers, waterfalls, a place nicknamed "moon valley", etc. On top of that, it is a dark park, so you can see the Milky Way.

Perhaps the starting point is, as I think you suggest, to start simple and just think of the story of any given image.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you found my nickel's worth helpful. the story is the weakest part of my photography so I am trying to work on that as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top