Let’s play #14

[Ben Egbert]

See the let’s play guidelines above

This week image is generously supplied by Rick, (rfkiii)

Show us what you would do with it.

Here is a link to the download.

https://app.box.com/s/7s2mp56zts66bilspv8rmc1kcu0lt4n6

Trying something different this week. Rick is supplying a 50MP RAW from his Fuji MF camera. He specifically has question about crunchy water after shooting at 1/140 second rather than slower.

Here is a link to a normal DNG if the raw does not work for you.

https://www.focalworld.com/index.php?resources/lets-play-124.26/

The embedded image is a small jpg of the raw, but use the download dng file for rework.

 

[JimFox]

That was nice of Rick to let us play with this one!

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ok, here is my try at this. Fun to work with the raw in this image. It's a great image other than the water speed.

I made a layer of just the water, no easy job that. I made several copies and tried many different kinds of blur, including field path (2 versions) and Gaussian. In the end, I liked a speed 20 path blur which is what I am showing here.

I then finished it with some Topaz exposure warmed it up a bit, added some gamma, and that's it.

Like to hear descriptions of how you did this. This is my first time making blurred water after the fact.

 

[Kyle Jones]

I've been tempted by that camera so I have no choice but to go with the full RAW file. Fantastic detail in it. Working on the image now...

 

[Kyle Jones]

Here's my take...

 

[Ben Egbert]

Looks good Kyle, a bit warmer than mine, so it will be interesting to see what we get here, how did you treat the water?

 

[Kyle Jones]

Looks good Kyle, a bit warmer than mine, so it will be interesting to see what we get here, how did you treat the water?

I did a slight motion blur but otherwise not much. I didn't like how it looked when I blurred it more so I focused on the rest of the image.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Thanks Kyle, I had a similar problem, it's very hard to simulate a slow shutter speed.

 

[AlanLichty]

I have tried a couple of different blur techniques but so far everything ends up looking like it's out of focus rather than flowing water.

 

[JimFox]

What I don’t understand is what’s wrong with the water as it is? The water looks great to me. On distance shots like this I almost always go with a faster shutter speed. The water movements at this distance render them so small you really aren’t going to see much difference anyway.

 

[Ben Egbert]

What I don’t understand is what’s wrong with the water as it is? The water looks great to me. On distance shots like this I almost always go with a faster shutter speed. The water movements at this distance render them so small you really aren’t going to see much difference anyway.

This is a good point Jim, it does look gritty at 100% and maybe this is what Rick is wanting to fix. I know that he view his images on a high 4K 32 inch monitor so he would see more of that detail.

 

[AlanLichty]

Bear in mind what is being called gritty in this case is in fact extreme detail. The water I am looking at with zoom at 100% is razor sharp which should be expected with a shutter speed of 1/140. The resolution of Rick's camera is incredible.

I was not successful at making a very good image look worse in a specific way in this case. I tried a number of different blurring tools but in all cases none of them looked good at all - especially when blown back up to 100%.

 

[rfkiii]

Hi Ben. For the record, my viewing resolution is 3600x2160 (after cropping to a 9:15 aspect ratio) on a 32" monitor. Alan is correct about the detail. All of that grit is every tiny piece of white water resolved by a really sharp lens and 50 MPs. Since you were there with me shooting the same thing at maybe a slower shutter speed, how would you feel about posting your shot of this scene?

At the size allowed by this site, the grit is mitigated in both yours and Kyle's renditions.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Right Rick, and this is not a really good image for lets Play because it does not need fixing, at least at web size. My image is at 1/100 second and also 50MP with a sharp lens, so not a lot of difference, and as Jim says, long view images don't need slow water. But here goes.

By the way, you can also enter the contest.

 

[rfkiii]

Well, 1/100 makes some difference looks like to me. I'll post something tonight when I get to the hacienda.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Good, we only have two entries so far, 6 would be better. Where is Darcy and Alans? You guys can use the DNG version.

 

[AlanLichty]

I was so underwhelmed with my effort I deleted it after I finished

 

[Ben Egbert]

Alan, I think at this point we need to abandon the water issue and just focus on the best overall process. I realize it does not need much, but things like how warm, how saturated and how contrasty to make it are variations. Also cropping. How would you finish it if it were yours?

 

[AlanLichty]

I will have another go at it with that as a goal. I was entirely focused on the water with my initial pass.

 

[rfkiii]

Here's my shot (which initiated this rescue).