Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

[jonesgj]

Hope you like this.

The church was built in the 1800s , originally known as Saint Matthew's. The building of the reservoir would have resulted in this church being below water level but a special project saved it and it now has houses a museum and is a much loved (and photographed!) landmark. Source: a little bit of local knowledge and Rutland online


[ame]http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonesgj/4957292385/[/ame]
[ame]http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonesgj/4957292385/[/ame] by graydon63, on Flickr

Camera Canon EOS 7D
Lens EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Exposure 30 (B+W 10xND)
Aperture f/22.0
Focal Length 55 mm
ISO Speed 320
Exposure Bias -1 EV

[Barr1e]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

I'm not sure if this is called a classic shot, I'm sure someone will let me know. It seems you have got to grips quite quickly with your new outfit.

I like the way the light covers part of the building and the reflection adds that little touch. Conditions seemed to have favoured you.

Nice shot.

Regards. Barr1e

[ash]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Mmmm nice.

[jonesgj]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Thanks Guys,

Barrie - yes I am really pleased with the new kit, and it really is a case of any problems being with the operator rather than the kit!

I did struggle with the ND filter though. It is having an affect on the colours which is is causing a lot of post processing - haven't quite got to grips with whats going on. It wasn't cheap either: the cheaper ones I had for my smaller Olympus Lenses worked quite well.

Thanks again

Graydon

[Stephen]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Thanks Guys,

Barrie - yes I am really pleased with the new kit, and it really is a case of any problems being with the operator rather than the kit!

I did struggle with the ND filter though. It is having an affect on the colours which is is causing a lot of post processing - haven't quite got to grips with whats going on. It wasn't cheap either: the cheaper ones I had for my smaller Olympus Lenses worked quite well.

Thanks again

Graydon

Usually its the cheaper ND filters that produce a colour caste, but B&W is not a cheap make, esp when its 77mm However I'm questioning the need to use one in this situation. It looks as though it has given you a 30s exposure and if so I don't think its enough. The thing is that you are after the blur of moving things caused by a long exposure and for me there wasn't that much wind. The clouds do not show much blur and come to that neither does the water. The wind sock shows only a little movement. My guess would be that you could have got a better result without the ND, though you may disagree, I wasn't there so can't be certain. I also think you should have used ISO100. 320 seems an odd figure, was the camera on Auto?

[jonesgj]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Usually its the cheaper ND filters that produce a colour caste, but B&W is not a cheap make, esp when its 77mm However I'm questioning the need to use one in this situation. It looks as though it has given you a 30s exposure and if so I don't think its enough. The thing is that you are after the blur of moving things caused by a long exposure and for me there wasn't that much wind. The clouds do not show much blur and come to that neither does the water. The wind sock shows only a little movement. My guess would be that you could have got a better result without the ND, though you may disagree, I wasn't there so can't be certain. I also think you should have used ISO100. 320 seems an odd figure, was the camera on Auto?

Hi Stephen,

Thanks for the reply/advice. No, the camera wasn't on Auto (for good or bad) it was controlled by me.

Since my first post on the critique forum I had taken on board the feedback you and Ian had given. I had been trying to use and understand the camera, examining my lenses strengths and weekneses etc.. Lots more reading on Aperture, hyperfocal length etc.. I have found 'Understanding Exposure' by Bryan Petterson very interesting. I'll admit though, not all of it has gone in and stuck yet.

I didn't try the shot without the B+W.
I noted that I was blurring the movement of the water, which is what I set out to do, but this was at the max 30 secs. Haven't researched why this was the max time I could set the camera to.
ISO 320 I had found gave me some good results. Not too sure why I hadn't set it to 200 or even 100 as you have suggested.

What do you think?

Not sure exactly what to try next, but I can garantee I will have fun trying it!

Kind regards

[Stephen]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Hi Stephen,

Thanks for the reply/advice. No, the camera wasn't on Auto (for good or bad) it was controlled by me.

Since my first post on the critique forum I had taken on board the feedback you and Ian had given. I had been trying to use and understand the camera, examining my lenses strengths and weekneses etc.. Lots more reading on Aperture, hyperfocal length etc.. I have found 'Understanding Exposure' by Bryan Petterson very interesting. I'll admit though, not all of it has gone in and stuck yet.

I didn't try the shot without the B+W.
I noted that I was blurring the movement of the water, which is what I set out to do, but this was at the max 30 secs. Haven't researched why this was the max time I could set the camera to.
ISO 320 I had found gave me some good results. Not too sure why I hadn't set it to 200 or even 100 as you have suggested.

What do you think?

Not sure exactly what to try next, but I can garantee I will have fun trying it!

Kind regards

Shooting at ISO100 will give you about 1.5 stops longer exposure. So I'd experiment with f/16 and 1-1.5 mins. Prob best on Manual, and ignore the meter. Shooting in Raw will give you more latitude and room for adjustment after.

I also noticed you are using Adobe RGB. For the net sRGB will prob give a better result

[jonesgj]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

I also noticed you are using Adobe RGB. For the net sRGB will prob give a better result

Stephen - Help!

If I had hair I'd have torn it out trying to figure this out. Is there an idiots guide that I can follow to experiment/try this. I have a Canon 7D and Photoshop CS5 and no more hair to glue back-on.

Graydon "Baffled of Bourne!"

[Bear]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Graydon

I don't have CS5 being still on v4 but I doubt things are much different. sRGb is the preferred colour space for files intended to be viewed online.

Your camera is probably set to capture the image using the Adobe RGB profile. No need to change this. It is read by Photoshop when you bring your image file in to edit it. You can change the profile at any time using the "convert to profile" option in the edit menu.

I tend not to do this because I prefer to preserve the original image file setting. I usually save a copy of images that I am going to post or use elsewhere on the web using the "save for web & devices" command which you can configure to convert the file to sRGB.

If you have a custom proof condition set (View menu - proof setup) for an sRGB profile you can check and uncheck the "proof colours" option (also View) menu to see what the file looks like in a different colour space.

Hope this helps.

[Caz]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

I tried to view this image in the gallery to see a larger version, but when I clicked it took me off to flickr..

Lovely image, like the reflections. I might have been tempted to crop to the end of the promontory to give a less central image though.

[jonesgj]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Graydon

I don't have CS5 being still on v4 but I doubt things are much different. sRGb is the preferred colour space for files intended to be viewed online.

Your camera is probably set to capture the image using the Adobe RGB profile. No need to change this. It is read by Photoshop when you bring your image file in to edit it. You can change the profile at any time using the "convert to profile" option in the edit menu.

I tend not to do this because I prefer to preserve the original image file setting. I usually save a copy of images that I am going to post or use elsewhere on the web using the "save for web & devices" command which you can configure to convert the file to sRGB.

If you have a custom proof condition set (View menu - proof setup) for an sRGB profile you can check and uncheck the "proof colours" option (also View) menu to see what the file looks like in a different colour space.

Hope this helps.

Thanks Bear.

I have found under the View menu a 'Proof setup' and 'Proof Colours' Options.

Using 'Proof setup' I can choose a number of options. It had defaulted to "Working CMYK". I have selected, instead, "Internet Standard RGB (sRGB)"

Now using the 'Proof Colours' Option, I can see a very slight change in the quality... vibrance? for the worse. So is this showing me what it would look like on the web? and therefore I need to work with this.

Sorry to be a thicky. I'm sure I'm getting nearer to understanding this.

Graydon

[jonesgj]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

I tried to view this image in the gallery to see a larger version, but when I clicked it took me off to flickr..

Lovely image, like the reflections. I might have been tempted to crop to the end of the promontory to give a less central image though.

Thanks for looking Caz. I am trying to put images in one place, so Flickr will hold most of my images. I enjoyed viewing some of your work - thanks for sharing.

Taking the Church off-centre - yes I agree, and probably have one like that having taken a few shots on the day. Can't remember why I chose this one specifically, just felt the best. Thanks again for looking.

Kind regards

[Bear]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Thanks Bear.

I have found under the View menu a 'Proof setup' and 'Proof Colours' Options.

Using 'Proof setup' I can choose a number of options. It had defaulted to "Working CMYK". I have selected, instead, "Internet Standard RGB (sRGB)"

Now using the 'Proof Colours' Option, I can see a very slight change in the quality... vibrance? for the worse. So is this showing me what it would look like on the web? and therefore I need to work with this.

Sorry to be a thicky. I'm sure I'm getting nearer to understanding this.

Graydon

Graydon

Nearly right. What you have now is how the colours in your image will be rendered in sRGB. sRGb is a narrower colour space than Adobe RGB so doesn't have as many colours and there will be some replacement of colours in your image as shot, with others from the sRGB colour space.

sRGB is the standard colour space for web viewing so if your monitor is calibrated and the person viewing the image has a calibrated monitor you can be reasonably sure that the viewer will see pretty much the same as you do.

It is the best you can do to achieve a true reproduction without having full control over the viewers computer.

It is worth remembering though, that if you monitor is not calibrated what you see may not be an accurate representation of the colours in the picture.

[jonesgj]

Re: Normanton Church - Rutland - UK

Graydon

Nearly right. What you have now is how the colours in your image will be rendered in sRGB. sRGb is a narrower colour space than Adobe RGB so doesn't have as many colours and there will be some replacement of colours in your image as shot, with others from the sRGB colour space.

sRGB is the standard colour space for web viewing so if your monitor is calibrated and the person viewing the image has a calibrated monitor you can be reasonably sure that the viewer will see pretty much the same as you do.

It is the best you can do to achieve a true reproduction without having full control over the viewers computer.

It is worth remembering though, that if you monitor is not calibrated what you see may not be an accurate representation of the colours in the picture.

Thanks bear. I think I understand a little better now. Incidentally, I have found an option on my printer properties to use sRGB or Adobe; its default to sRGB. The pictures I print seem to be fine.

I'm currently spending money on kit for my son/daughter so calibration may have to wait (is it worth it/I wonder hoew much it will cost)

Thanks again

Graydon

[Bear]