Bizman62 Posted July 30, 2023 Report Share Posted July 30, 2023 4 hours ago, mistermikev said: I guess I feel that stuff is a bit like eq... should be a last resort. I hope that as I get more experience monkeying with the iso and aperture I'll arrive at brighter looking photos at the start... I beg to disagree. Post processing has been widely used and accepted from the start of photography. With film the post processing starts during developing the film as the choice of chemicals and the time used affect the end result, not to mention making paper copies of the negatives. They all affect to clarity, crispness, colour depth, contrast and whatnot. With digital cameras an image processing program is just your photo lab, nothing more. As with any photo you can do all sorts of tricks to your photos. In the black and white era colouring some most valuable photos was common, now we may make digital colour photos black and white to make them stand out. Similarly you use all sorts of effects to make your guitar sound "good". If post processing were a bad thing, shouldn't using any effect, pedal or rack, be avoided as much as possible? Compressors, limiters, tube screamers all can be used to add presence even to a clean sound. Why would digital photography be any different? Doing some Andy Warhol type stuff on a photo is one thing, enhancing the image to improve it is another. Speaking about EQ, I guess colour correction would be comparable to that. Why would it be a sin? The manufacturers have different settings in their cameras, pictures of a Nikon are bluer than those of a Canon. Same thing with films, some are more saturated than others. As long as you're just trying to make the photo look like what you see you're not lying! And even exaggerating with the crispness and colour depth you most likely can't catch the liveliness of the wood, the chatoyance and warmth. Perfect focusing is preferable and admittedly using the right aperture and shutter speed can do magic for contrast but I wouldn't call post processing cheating. Actually it's better to have the backdrop show and add contrast afterwards than have all the dark areas underexposed and lose some details. Similarly you don't want to overexpose your images with large white spots "burned through". The video is nice in a good homecooking way. It makes me want to build a bass - and learn to play it too... The only slightly disturbing thing is the background hiss of your vocal parts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted July 30, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2023 1 minute ago, Bizman62 said: I beg to disagree. Post processing has been widely used and accepted from the start of photography. With film the post processing starts during developing the film as the choice of chemicals and the time used affect the end result, not to mention making paper copies of the negatives. They all affect to clarity, crispness, colour depth, contrast and whatnot. With digital cameras an image processing program is just your photo lab, nothing more. As with any photo you can do all sorts of tricks to your photos. In the black and white era colouring some most valuable photos was common, now we may make digital colour photos black and white to make them stand out. Similarly you use all sorts of effects to make your guitar sound "good". If post processing were a bad thing, shouldn't using any effect, pedal or rack, be avoided as much as possible? Compressors, limiters, tube screamers all can be used to add presence even to a clean sound. Why would digital photography be any different? Doing some Andy Warhol type stuff on a photo is one thing, enhancing the image to improve it is another. Speaking about EQ, I guess colour correction would be comparable to that. Why would it be a sin? The manufacturers have different settings in their cameras, pictures of a Nikon are bluer than those of a Canon. Same thing with films, some are more saturated than others. As long as you're just trying to make the photo look like what you see you're not lying! And even exaggerating with the crispness and colour depth you most likely can't catch the liveliness of the wood, the chatoyance and warmth. Perfect focusing is preferable and admittedly using the right aperture and shutter speed can do magic for contrast but I wouldn't call post processing cheating. Actually it's better to have the backdrop show and add contrast afterwards than have all the dark areas underexposed and lose some details. Similarly you don't want to overexpose your images with large white spots "burned through". The video is nice in a good homecooking way. It makes me want to build a bass - and learn to play it too... The only slightly disturbing thing is the background hiss of your vocal parts. well... not indicating post processing is bad at all, nor arguing that post processing isn't a thing... it's also a thing in audio. Esp now-a-days where you can literally do anything post. that said my main reason for not wanting to do it is effort. it'd be best for me if I don't have to touch each picture after! mostly cause I'm lazy!! I've taken some courses on audio engineering and for the eleventy hours I spent... one thing stuck w me... and that is that "EQ is something you use when you didn't get a good capture". granted the two mediums are very different and with audio it's very hard to put back what isn't there... but I imagine photos have their best shot at looking natural with that initial capture. altering pixels via an algorhythm has it's limitations. that said, my main reason for avoiding is effort. Some of my shots there had better brightness and I feel like I just need to do more of whatever I did there! the video: man... visually it is just terrible. all washed out. have a lot to learn there. i should have pointed my desk lamps up at the wall. need to diffuse my overheads a lot more... but alas... I'm just a novice. on the bright side: lots of room for improvement! anywho, I do appreciate the detailed feedback. thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizman62 Posted July 30, 2023 Report Share Posted July 30, 2023 2 hours ago, mistermikev said: I imagine photos have their best shot at looking natural with that initial capture. altering pixels via an algorhythm has it's limitations. that said, my main reason for avoiding is effort. Effortless is what I prefer as well. Then again, adjusting contrast doesn't take much time. The left side required two mouse clicks to darken the backcloth beyond showing the cat hair, my goal was to keep the wood natural. As said, I added 10 notches of contrast and lowered brightness by the same amount. It looked basically the same with just adding 15-20 notches of contrast. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted July 30, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2023 33 minutes ago, Bizman62 said: Effortless is what I prefer as well. Then again, adjusting contrast doesn't take much time. The left side required two mouse clicks to darken the backcloth beyond showing the cat hair, my goal was to keep the wood natural. As said, I added 10 notches of contrast and lowered brightness by the same amount. It looked basically the same with just adding 15-20 notches of contrast. dang... how far did you zoom in to see cat hair (or are my eyes just really THAT bad lol! I know it was there... I do have 6 cats... but I didn't think it was so obvious lol! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottR Posted July 30, 2023 Report Share Posted July 30, 2023 Damn me Mike that looks amazing! I love all the contouring you did (of course). Really, really, really superlative job! SR 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizman62 Posted July 31, 2023 Report Share Posted July 31, 2023 10 hours ago, mistermikev said: dang... how far did you zoom in to see cat hair (or are my eyes just really THAT bad lol! I know it was there... I do have 6 cats... but I didn't think it was so obvious lol! Well, I do have my browser set at 110% and I have a 30" monitor and I use +1 reading glasses. The cat hair are visible without any zooming in that very photo I adjusted. Being a nitpicky old fart I've learned where to look! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henrim Posted July 31, 2023 Report Share Posted July 31, 2023 Pics are fine. I don’t want to get too deep into studio photography but since there is discussion about the black background I think I can say a word about it. In studio if you want a black background you almost never use a black backdrop. As we know the brightness of the light decreases as the inverse square of the distance. So to achieve a very dark background you can use a light colored backdrop as long as the object to be photographed is well separated from the background. This way the blacks get less murky and you can light the sides and the back of the object. This gives a good edge separation and brings out the form better. Also you don’t have any cat hairs or wrinkles in the picture. Of course this means that you have to support the guitar somehow and you need some space too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted July 31, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2023 12 hours ago, ScottR said: Damn me Mike that looks amazing! I love all the contouring you did (of course). Really, really, really superlative job! SR thank you scott. was a heck of a journey! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted July 31, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2023 3 hours ago, Bizman62 said: Well, I do have my browser set at 110% and I have a 30" monitor and I use +1 reading glasses. The cat hair are visible without any zooming in that very photo I adjusted. Being a nitpicky old fart I've learned where to look! right on, given the number of cats in my house... I guess there's gonna be cat hair in my future pics! perhaps I should have switched to the faux leather background. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted July 31, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2023 2 hours ago, henrim said: Pics are fine. I don’t want to get too deep into studio photography but since there is discussion about the black background I think I can say a word about it. In studio if you want a black background you almost never use a black backdrop. As we know the brightness of the light decreases as the inverse square of the distance. So to achieve a very dark background you can use a light colored backdrop as long as the object to be photographed is well separated from the background. This way the blacks get less murky and you can light the sides and the back of the object. This gives a good edge separation and brings out the form better. Also you don’t have any cat hairs or wrinkles in the picture. Of course this means that you have to support the guitar somehow and you need some space too. well, the guitar here is elevated 1' off the background using bench buscuits... but probably more would be better. Have oft thought about using 100lb test fishing line and hanging it in front of a window... might try that sometime. have also considered a green backdrop... but that means some def post work. thanks for the replies everyone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted August 2, 2023 Report Share Posted August 2, 2023 That is breathtaking @mistermikev It is off the scale. If you haven't already done so, I think you should put it forward to No Treble in their 'Bass of the Week' feature. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted August 2, 2023 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Andyjr1515 said: That is breathtaking @mistermikev It is off the scale. If you haven't already done so, I think you should put it forward to No Treble in their 'Bass of the Week' feature. thank you! that means the world to me. I appreciate the vote of confidence too!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGTay Posted September 19, 2023 Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 https://www.notreble.com/buzz/2023/09/18/bass-of-the-week-mister-mikev-fish-on-bass/ Congrats @mistermikev 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted September 19, 2023 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 52 minutes ago, JGTay said: https://www.notreble.com/buzz/2023/09/18/bass-of-the-week-mister-mikev-fish-on-bass/ Congrats @mistermikev ty. I think @Andyjr1515 ? maybe mentioned it to me... that I should submit... and at the time I was a bit embarrassed that I had submitted a couple weeks before and never heard anything... so assumed I lost. Then out of the blue I got an email. very nice surprise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted September 19, 2023 Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 Absolutely flippin' excellent. I knew they would love it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted September 19, 2023 Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 ...and this has to be one of the best bass-of-the-week winners for years!! Those photos are superb. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted September 19, 2023 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 8 minutes ago, Andyjr1515 said: ...and this has to be one of the best bass-of-the-week winners for years!! Those photos are superb. well that's nice to hear even if it isn't true. yourself included, I'm just honored to be among so many builds I've admired! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted September 19, 2023 Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 36 minutes ago, mistermikev said: well that's nice to hear even if it isn't true. Trust me, my comments are not flattery...that's a bass that would stop the traffic 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted September 19, 2023 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2023 14 minutes ago, Andyjr1515 said: Trust me, my comments are not flattery...that's a bass that would stop the traffic thank you, means the world to me coming from such an accomplished bass builder yourself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottR Posted September 20, 2023 Report Share Posted September 20, 2023 Very cool. Congrats Mike! SR 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted September 20, 2023 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2023 32 minutes ago, ScottR said: Very cool. Congrats Mike! SR thank you sir!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizman62 Posted October 7, 2023 Report Share Posted October 7, 2023 Congrats for another well earned GOTM! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiKro Posted October 7, 2023 Report Share Posted October 7, 2023 Congrats Mike!!! Well done. mk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted October 8, 2023 Report Share Posted October 8, 2023 Congrats! Amazing build 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermikev Posted October 8, 2023 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2023 19 hours ago, Bizman62 said: Congrats for another well earned GOTM! thank you biz! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.