n00b confusion (histogram)

[pel]

Hi All,

First off, a little background info -

I've had an interest in photography for 20 odd years, but up until 6 months ago had only ever used "point & shoots". In conjunction with purchasing my first DSLR (Canon 350d), I took the OU - T189 Photography Course, which I found very rewarding.

I discovered this forum last week, and thro' scouting about, have found many threads/posts/users extremely informative. So feeling brave enough now, I'm taking the plunge with my first post

Now, to the question...

As part of the final assessment, a panel of 10 images are submitted. This was one of my 10.

Examiner's comments -

"The two boats suffered from underexposure (the right third of the histogram is empty). I wondered if you had checked the histogram after all your manipulations and conversion to b/w, there also seemed to be some digital artifacts in the sky."

Now, two things concerned me here.

1) As far as I was aware, from comments on the course, and my own individual research. The histogram of any given image doesn't have to be filling the whole graph, in order to produce a "pleasing picture?" Or am I wrong?

Obviously, we are dealing with something, somewhat subjective here, but following those comments, I returned to the image and lightened the picture. It just didn't look right to me.

2) The sky, in fact wasn't touched at all in PP, iirc. In fact, ironically, alot of cloning was carried out in the water & sand, bouys & gulls abound, were all removed. Even parts of the water line were adjusted. Anyone else see these "digital artifacts?"

Thanks for your time & any thoughts appreciated.

 

[markrichardson]

I think I tend to agree with your examiner that the boats seem a little underexposed - I think what you need is greater contrast throughout the image. On your specific questions:

1) Histograms (as with almost everything in photography!) are indeed subjective, and there's certainly no need to fill the whole graph. I suspect the point of his question was that if you looked at a histogram for this photo it would be pretty obvious that the boats are nowhere near white. If however, you like the tonal range as it stands then the histogram isn't going to tell you anything. (BTW, not sure if you're using a calibrated monitor, but it's possible that your monitor is displaying this picture brighter than others are seeing it. Using the histogram and other tools to 'edit by numbers' can help to ensure overall brightness is about right)

2) There are certainly some artifacts in the sky and I might have suspected some cloning or other editing - I suppose it's possible that it's just a result of the compression from when you saved it.

 

[Jelster]

I have to say that for a B&W image, there doesn't really seem to be enough contrast, it's grey with no black or white.

I just loaded the image into PS and did a curves adjustment, cutting off the unused part on the right of the histogram and personally I think it brightens up the whole image. You don't have the editor section ticked so I won't upload the modified file here.

And I see what he means by the sky. You could run a gaussian blur layer over the top of the sky and blend it in, losing what look to be artefacts.

Steve

 

[pel]

Cheers, for the comments guys.

Edit box now ticked... go ahead with the upload please Steve.

 

[Jelster]

I know it's a copy of a copy, I'm certainly no PS guru, and it was a 5 minute (less) fix...

It looks a little over-sharpened to me as it's got a few halo's, but at least now the whites are whiter...

Steve

 

[pel]

Cheers, for your input & time Steve.

Certainly some food for thought... & oversharpened?

Back to the drawing board, I guess.

 

[Jelster]

Cheers, for your input & time Steve.

Certainly some food for thought... & oversharpened?

Back to the drawing board, I guess.

The big difference is that the whites are "white". I love B&W images and have been pulled apart on here once or twice (or maybe more!) for not getting enough contrast and or getting the "whites white, & the blacks black". It can be quite difficult in the transition from colour to B&W and those that are good at it have learned the dark art that has eluded me....

Steve