Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Forum reputation = neutral

About CrowingHen

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Profile Information

  • Location
    Left Coast, Canada (west of The West)


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    20 Jun 2019

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I ended up going with Capture One with the perpetual licence. The trial was a big help as I can see how the controls work and if I can get along well with the software, although, I suspect part of my choice was being lazy and this is good enough for my needs. The spending money part of the process was easy and I got an email with an licence key. However, the instructions for activating that key are difficult to find and didn't work. I had to deactivate then reactivate and I got there, but it was a very different process than the tutorials suggested. During my frustration, I got some help from capture one via email and they were very polite. I sent my query in before I went to bed, and the reply was there before I got up the next day. Bonus points for quick response time. I like that the licence key can be used on three computers at one time. I could see this being useful if I have need of it at work. Noise: I'm doing better with this. I'm still convinced it's user error as DPP was doing something automatically and trained me not to think about it. I wish I knew what that was. A big part of the noise problem - I usually darken the shadows for my art photography and some of my stock https://www.alamy.com/an-example-of-hemstitching-on-handwoven-cloth-in-white-cotton-yarn-on-the-loom-unwoven-warp-showing-strong-sunlight-and-shadow-as-example-of-need-image331024905.html But for the series of shots I was doing at that time, I needed to lighten them a bit to brighten the entire scene (I need to sit down and have a talk with my camera about what settings will give me this so I don't have to do it in post - but that's something for another day. Now I'm going back to my regular style, it's not so bad. seeing the noise - still working on this one. glasses are helping. Need more training. I have been playing with my new 22mm f2 lens a lot, and the out of focus area seems to be more noisy than the same with my kit lens. But I haven't done some controlled experiments to see if this is true yet. There are a lot of buttons and sliders I have yet to learn on capture one. I can do something called a mask and apply the extra noise reduction layer to the shadow parts. This is neat. I haven't figured out how to do this well, but I've been playing with it for my personal/art photography. When I get better at it, I'll try it for stock. (yes, I'm an absolute beginning at this editing thing) I'm still using DPP for sorting and culling images and for quick processing, but I love having a more powerful editor for my fun stuff and for removing spots or more targeted exposure, highlight, shadow, and colour. I also really like that I can batch add keywords. I've been doing 30-40 keywords that belong to the batch, then doing the last few word that are individual to the image. It's going to take me a bit of practice to get this method more efferent. Thank you everyone for your help and this thread. There's so much great stuff here, I'm enjoying going back and rereading all the advise.
  2. I need to do some more experimenting, but is it possible that the jpeg size from capture one is larger than the jpeg size from DPP? And if so, would it show up noise more?
  3. Reading glasses and a clean computer screen is helping! Thank you for the tip! Still not getting as much noise reduction in Capture One as I do in DPP. In Capture One, even with the slider pushed all the way, it's still noisier than the same image in DPP with minimal slider push - BUT, the Capture one slider doesn't blur the crispness of the focal area as much as DPP noise reduction. I need to do more learning about Capture One. But halfway through the free trial, and I think this will work. Maybe I can find an affordable (or better yet, free) noise reduction software later on.
  4. For every 400 photos of a bird, I throw 399 away. But every now and then, I get one fun or unique enough to upload here. I want to get that number down to 1 keeper per 200 photos, then 1 keeper per 100 photos. I need a lot more practice. When I can get chickens down to 1:100, then I want to start on some of the wild birds. Funny story: when I was first learning about stock (especially microstock) I read about the "ducks on a pond" and I thought this meant that duck photos sold the most since this is the kind of photo I'm selling the most of (at that time). But like I said, I have a lot to learn and I do appreciate the suggestions. I read and absorb the advise... but I also am going to make mistakes. A friend of mine says, "try 200 things and maybe 4 will succeed." I'm going to try a little bit of a lot of things until I find my groove. I just wish I could get my eyes trained better for noise and artifacts. This seems to be where I'm failing the most this week.
  5. I agree. I have a lot to learn. So much to learn that I find it easier to break it down into sections and focus on one or two at a time. Right now it's in-camera skill and post processing skill. As photography becomes less effort, then I'm focusing on the story telling aspect. As for the lichen, it's good advise. I've already sent that photo to the naturalist for an identification of that lichen. When I hear back, I'll be adding the technical details of the lichen (botanical name, common names, stage of growth, etc) to the keywords. Ducks, geese, and chickens are my joy to photograph. They seem to sell well on microstock (especially ducks) and one of my first photos to sell on alamy was a chicken (on a generic bench). I'm very happy to waste my time on these as it's my time to waste.
  6. Thanks for the critique. I agree, definitely not a good photo and most definitely not good enough to upload here but I think it made a good example of the difference between the two programs and how they automatically process noise. As you noticed, the highlights are a problem with both, but I think Capture one has the ability to fix this better than DPP. The Capture one I can see the noise but the DPP one, I have a bit of trouble seeing it as I see the texture of the paint in that shadow. When I bring the noise slider up on DPP, I loose the crispness of the focal area. I suspect with capture one, I can apply a mask and apply a noise filter to just the areas with shadow - but even sending the slider all the way to one side, I can still see noise. So I think there must be a better way to fix this problem in Capture one.
  7. Happy news - the set I processed for Alamy just made it through quality control! So I'm not too far off the mark! But I still want to do better.
  8. They don't specify the noise type. But I haven't had this error with such low ISO before. I'm pretty sure it's user error that's causing the problem. I need to learn something new. I'm guessing that DDP was doing something automatically to make the noise/artifacts less and maybe I need to do something manually in Capture 1. Here's a photo I've been having trouble with (I know it's not a good photo, but it tells a story and might be useful for someones blog or paint product talking about how not to have this happen) Both done with fairly light touch on the sliders. I can see noise in the second one when I zoom to 200%. But I'm also having trouble training my eyes for noise. Digital Photo Professional 4 Capture One I'm pretty sure this is user error in the processing. I can tell I also need to train myself more to see what's going wrong as they don't look hugely different at 100%. On the whole, I like the effect that Capture One is giving me, especially with the way it can tone down the whites while keeping the midtones. 22mm 1/60 second a 2.8 ISO 250
  9. I've been playing with the free trial of Capture One for a week now. I love it... mostly. The keyhole correction is my new best friend. I've been playing with some of the fancy tools for my creative work, like heal and layers. I think this program would keep me happy for years. But, I have having a few issues (which are probably user-caused). 1. when I submit my photos to the other site, I'm suddenly getting noise rejections on ISO 100. I don't generally have this issue until over ISO 400. About two thirds of the photos I processed with capture one have this issue, but when I process the same photo with the Digital Photo Professional, I usually get about 5% with this error. 2. the default setting is to have 50% vignetting (dark corners) centered on the crop. I can't figure out how to change this yet. I processed a batch and double checked at 200% before uploading to Alamy, so we'll see what the quality control has to say here. I hope I don't loose a star over this experiment.
  10. We may be too late, but I don't see that as a reason to give up. Looking at history and cultures that have faced natural climate change (mini ice age) and smaller examples of human-caused localized climate change, we can see that most societies died out with much suffering. But there are examples of societies that made it. Not only did they find ways to survive the ecological change long after 'too late' had come, some historic examples managed to reverse the damage (of the small, localized climate change) through drastic changes in social attitudes. The book Just Enough talks about how Japan reversed their desastor in the Edo period and reversed their climate change. So there is hope, but historical examples show it takes massive changes on every level, from government all the way to the individual. History also shows that most societies don't manage it. Unfortunately, history only shows us these smaller scale examples and doesn't have a president for what we are about to experience. But looking at Just Enough and the attitudes that changed in society, this harks back to what I said up-thread about photographers. If people could approach clothing the way that photographers approach buying gear... then this would have a huge impact on reversing the 'too late' part of the equation.
  11. The book, The Carbon Farming Solution has some good numbers about the source of materials. One thing I thought was scary, is that agriculture is one of if not the biggest (depending on how the numbers are crunched - the book goes into this) sources of CO in the atmosphere - and over half of that is for textile production. This doesn't include transportation (the raw materials can go to 5 or more countries before reaching the consumer), dyes, labour issues, and synthetics (a much larger percentage of textiles than natural ones). As for actual numbers on the actual fashion industry, these are very difficult to find. There are a few books that go into the fashion end of things, but even these authors had trouble sourcing the raw data due to industrial secrets. Tackling these eco-issues is difficult. One step at a time make the journey easier. This is their first step to admitting that they made a mistake in the past and are doing something to improve it. It's not their biggest mistake, but if people respond well to this admission, then they can start repairing other mistakes like the impact of their industry.
  12. I come from an eco-background. One of the things that impressed me about photography is just how eco the people are here. Looking at the technology, it has enough ecological impact to earn the wrath of eco-activists (which I don't consider myself part of for the record). But looking at the photographers, you can see in any "what equipment should I buy" thread, that people are encouraged to think long term about their investment. This isn't a smart phone - buy and replace in 2 years, or the new technology trend of buy and brick when it's time to upgrade. Professional photographers (and hobbyests like myself) choose to put their money towards cameras with longer life and good reputation for repair. When it comes time to upgrade, one doesn't have to throw away every accessory (lens and filter), these stay compatible for years and there are adapters to keep them useful long after the system they were built for goes out of production. Photographers want to get the most use of their equipment. When it's time for someone to change systems, they can sell the used equipment for enough money to make it worth keeping out of the landfill. There are very few areas with such a strong eco-friendly attitude. What makes it even better is that it doesn't look eco. It's not greenwashed... except for the green of money because what makes financial sense in photography is also accidentally eco. I suspect most people here are probably doing more to help the environment with their photography than they know. Although, there are some actions that are maybe less helpful to the environment - like going off trail in a park - but on the whole, I dislike the idea of tarring all of photography because a few money-bags photo-shoots are bad for the environment. ... I suspect flying experts in from all over the world for a massive photo shoot is expensive. Flight shaming is an up and coming trend (and maybe worth taking photo of if anyone is into that kind of shoot). Their wallets are hurting, their getting angry loud people who like to complain about companies because it's easier to complain on twitter than making changes in their own world. I could see the future of magazines is to have smaller shoots (maybe 20 people) and use local talent and resources.
  13. I can see how a photoshoot like this one could be considered bad for the environment. nearly 100 experts flown in from around the world (plus the people making the video), trampling all over the forest, equipment, electricity generators, batteries... all take it's toll. https://fstoppers.com/bts/behind-scenes-photo-shoot-benedict-cumberbatch-vanity-fair-58919 (pretty pictures though). If photography is done respectfully, then it can benefit the environment by helping people be aware of it's fragile beauty. The key word there is "respectfully". ... Story time Near where I live there is an endangered plant. From the limited scientific studies done, this plant has some amazing healing qualities that could transform modern medicine. The problem is, the plant is fragile and resists propagation and attempting to move it is the fastest way to kill it. There are only three examples of this plant known to exist in the world. One of the three was recently discovered right next to the trail in a very popular park. They don't tell anyone about it for fear of poaching, but they did put a fence up and signs telling people to stay on the path. Of course, people like taking photos of big trees and climb over the fence to get the shot - trampling the plant. If it wasn't for this abuse, the plant would have created seeds by now that could be propagated to make more. There's a reason why the parks want you to stay on the path. Unless you really know your plants, you can do some serious harm with a misplaced footstep.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.