S.W. Waterfront/Cherry Blossom Festival, Mar. '12
[Minolta 500si Tamron 19-35 Promaster mcUV filter Fuji ISO200 CNF F13 1/45-1/180s ~22mm eff. > CVS > Epson V300 > Gimp]
came out kinda "flat" and definitely less than sharp...despite a lot of elbow-grease on both issues...and I lost the tip of the boat applying just a slight wide-angle correction.
I really do have to wonder if there's a big difference between standard Fujifilm print film and Fuji Superia print film...or is the focus off with this gear, or is the lens just that soft, or is it just that my eyes are now jaded by shooting digital a lot recently, even with the same lenses.
But there was a huge DR, I shot this while standing under a cherry-blossom tree looking at the bright sky...
I don't know, overall it's fairly decent but still "meh".
You never know for sure what it is until you try the same shot with different equipment. I could have shot this with the SX130 also but I think that I didn't bother to. Maybe.
I think this will sell someone on a DSLR, though. It might be an effort to match the DR, but I'm sure that the building to the right could look much better, and I'd want better color overall. I did forget to boost the saturation a bit which I usually do now.
In the end I refuse to butcher this by sharpening it more and the color and contrast will have to survive like it is for a while. It looks like the kind of "HDR" shot that one would get out of a DSLR like one of the late-model Sonys, but at the moment I'm not into playing around with another pair of exposure-masks to reduce the overall DR and allow for a boost in contrast. It could be done but I'm not in the mood at the moment. Plus, really, I'm not sure it would end-up a lot better than this. Probably the best change would be to just boost the saturation a little, a spot-boost of contrast on the buildings would be an easy-fix, along with brightening the midtones in the sky to get a brighter blue there. Or just raise the whole thing and tamp-down the blown parts in the sky. Anyway there are things that could be tried but on a 30MP image on an old laptop in Gimp, these things take time and effort that I'm not willing to put into it right now. I suppose that in LR you could just click the "auto-enhance" button and it would look much better :)
Those things are great, as long as the image actually does look better when they're done. Too bad that you can't just click it 5 times and have it look phenomenal.
All right, eff it...I pushed the whole shot, added some saturation and ran another USM mask, adding another 30% or so to the overall USM. I usually don't blow-out that much of the sky but call this an outlier. Took me an hour to decide to do just that after spending some time trying to run freehand exposure-masks through the sky...and blending about 80% of them so that they were virtually-undetectable at full image. If you really wanted to, you could use a mask when pushing and tamp-down the blowouts in the clouds...I just said fuck it and left them in this time, just for once. So it looks a bit "dramatic". I just couldn't get it to not look flat and gray without adding more contrast and the saturation too, but too much contrast meant another mask for the left side, another GND...it just got too complicated for a Sunday afternoon when I've already spent 2 hours+ working on this. It's a bit "dramatic"...c'est la vie.