Typhoon H CGO3+ camera has a focus problem. Period.

[Rubik]

"White Branches" . My wife bought it for me as a present. FWIW my wife was 100 times the darkroom expert I could ever be. I would spend half a day on a print and she would walk in and in 15 min create a better print. These days she's also 100 times better than I am in Photoshop. I'm much better in Lightroom and some specialty software for things like panos and HDR. I'm better with the camera but to be honest we're not interested in taking photos of the same things. She's pretty much into abstract work.

I wonder what artistic things Adams would do with my White Branches photo taken on Lava Butte in Oregon.

 

[FlushVision]

You brought up a good point Ron. Often what pleases the eye does not accurately represent what was being photographed. For me the extreme color alterations we often see in photos and videos presents a false image, one than cannot be recreated naturally.

I actually agree with this.
I've seen some aerial shots posted in this forum that I admit look astounding to my eye, but clearly not a 'real' representation. They've obviously been through a heavy post procedure to look so stunning since I know I can't produce anything as good without severely attacking them in post.

I'm not sure if this is a good thing or bad thing, though. The 'false' images may look stunning but images that haven't been 'processed' in post so much are closer to the real...but real is often also bland. When I process my stills I try to opt for some sort of middle ground unless the images have been produced for a client...in those circumstances the aim, of course, is to please the client.

 

[Prosecutor]

@Prosecutor what is your goal for your photos and video? Are you going to do any post processing? Do you want a "look" that is pleasing and will not require post processing?

Caveat: I'm a nut about photos. I've been doing photography for a long time and I take it seriously. For many people I might be over the top so please take what I have to say with that in mind and perhaps with a LARGE grain of salt. . This is why I asked the questions above about your aspirations for the photos and videos.

I am looking at the photos in Adobe Lightroom Classic CC 7.4 . All the photos are exposed well. It appears to be late afternoon. Its hard to judge color as I have no standard to judge by. By this I mean that I have no idea what the actual color of your car looks like. Pleasing to the eye doesn't mean accurate color to a photo geek.

Sharpness looks good on the photos1.1-6 and 2.1-3 but at 3:1 I can see the halos that @Rubik mentions. Gorgeous mode adds saturation and sharpening in the camera.

When I look for color accuracy I will use a target like what is below or an 18% gray target by which to set the white balance in the camera. In the CGO3+ I use an 18% gray to set the WB like this https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HT9MA1W/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Its a bit harder to judge the "Natural Mode" photos since they aren't the same resolution as the "Gorgeous Mode" but.... when I process the "Natural" photos in Lightroom I get much better shadow details and the halos are much less noticeable at 3:1. The color of the car is similar after processing but a bit less saturated.

I'll take a look at the videos next.

Aiming for a footage (mostly video) that is okay to look at, possibly without post processing. Usually compressed to 1080p. Filming an activity of mine and group of people (sailing) and doing this just as a side hobby so I don't need top notch quality and preferably wanted footage that's good to go straight from the card to save time not needing to process it.

As said considering footage without processing I'm more satisfied with Gorgeous mode although color of the car is a bit off there. It's bit darker and more cherry-like as seen in Natural mode - 3.1 photo.

 

[rdonson]

I wonder what artistic things Adams would do with my White Branches photo taken on Lava Butte in Oregon.
View attachment 10289

I see sooooo many possibilities for that scene!

 

[rdonson]

Aiming for a footage (mostly video) that is okay to look at, possibly without post processing. Usually compressed to 1080p. Filming an activity of mine and group of people (sailing) and doing this just as a side hobby so I don't need top notch quality and preferably wanted footage that's good to go straight from the card to save time not needing to process it.

As said considering footage without processing I'm more satisfied with Gorgeous mode although color of the car is a bit off there. It's bit darker and more cherry-like as seen in Natural mode - 3.1 photo.

There’s nothing wrong with “Gorgeous Mode” as long as you’re aware of its effects on the images and videos. In some circumstances you might consider “Natural” but your goal is likely sharing with friends who won’t be overly critical. They’ll be delighted with your output.

If you were serious about stills you’d likely want to shoot DNG and post process to get the most out of it. With JPG a lot of data is discarded vs DNG so you have less to work with if you’re shooting for the best image.

Use what looks good to you and enjoy it!

 

[Rubik]

There’s nothing wrong with “Gorgeous Mode” as long as you’re aware of its effects on the images and videos. In some circumstances you might consider “Natural” but your goal is likely sharing with friends who won’t be overly critical. They’ll be delighted with your output.

If you were serious about stills you’d likely want to shoot DNG and post process to get the most out of it. With JPG a lot of data is discarded vs DNG so you have less to work with if you’re shooting for the best image.

Use what looks good to you and enjoy it!

Ron, picking up on this old thread, I've been trying to reduce the sharpness of my 4K videos in Natural mode. I'm down to 4 and still not satisfied. I noticed that Gorgeous mode applies less sharpening and RAW applies no sharpening at all. Videos that show more sharpness also seem to have a higher average bitrate. It's easy to add sharpness in post, and possibly a better sharpness effect. Do you know if the sharpness setting applies to all video modes (except RAW)? And, are Auto exposure or Auto WB effected by the sharpness setting? My testing is inconclusive.

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

To my knowledge, settings such as WB and exposure are not changed by sharpness settings. Rubik, for S&Gs set the in-camera sharpness at 1...

 

[Rubik]

To my knowledge, settings such as WB and exposure are not changed by sharpness settings. Rubik, for S&Gs set the in-camera sharpness at 1...

S&Gs ??

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

sheets &giggles

 

[Rubik]

sheets &giggles

OK, I'll give that a try.