David Clapp review of the GF1

Discussion in 'Scenic, Architecture, and Travel' started by soundimageplus, Feb 4, 2010.

  1. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    782
    Feb 2, 2010
    Worcestershire
    • Like Like x 8
  2. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Amazing

    I saw this review a week ago and can only say - Wow those are some incredible images.

    My initial thoughts about the GF1 being able to almost match the Canon 5D for quality have been vindicated in his images and associated comments and it goes a long way in making me feel happier in my purchase.

    Great review of a great camera!
     
  3. matmcdermott

    matmcdermott Mu-43 Regular Charter Member

    I have to say that I bought the GF1 as a backup with video for my Leica M8 + 28 Summicron combo, and while in dim lighting the M8 is faster the work with and for pixel peeping the Leica wins by a small margin, at 1/7th the price and a smaller size for now at least the GF1 is my main camera. It's really pretty amazing.
     
  4. goldenlight

    goldenlight Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Jan 30, 2010
    Essex
    Real Name:
    John
    Well, if it's good enough for him......:biggrin:
     
  5. chrisman

    chrisman Mu-43 Rookie Charter Member

    10
    Jan 13, 2010
    Sydney, Australia
    An excellent article. Just goes to show what can be done with a good camera (does not have to be the most expensive, flashy etc), excellent technique and a good 'photographic eye'.

    I've got the camera - where do I get the rest!!!

    Chris
     
  6. tad

    tad New to Mu-43

    Wow, a wonderful preview about GF1, thank you so much.
     
  7. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator Moderator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
  8. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    As an adage to my previous comments about his review, I would be interested to see what his workflow is for his Raw images.
     
  9. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    782
    Feb 2, 2010
    Worcestershire
    Workflow

    One thing he does, that I do know about, is that he shoots the same image at different exposures and combines them in Photoshop. These are not HDR images. He would use the sky from one image, the foreground from another for example. In this way he gets a well-exposed image, without the artificiality of HDR or Grad. filters. His sunsets are a good example.

    http://www.davidclapp.co.uk/image_gallery.php?image_subcat=The%20Sea%20-%20Horizontal
     
  10. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Interesting - and I can see what you mean... he must have some excellent selection/blending tools - you can't see the join :wink:

    Cheers

    Brian
     
  11. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    782
    Feb 2, 2010
    Worcestershire
    Blending

    Its much easier than you think. Provided you have identical images at different exposures, the tripod is obviously essential here, its relatively easy once you've done it a few times.
    Its a case of placing the images one on top of the other and "rubbing out" the bits you don't want and then leaving what you do want and flattening the image.
    With Photoshop you can adjust the texture and shape of your "rubber" and even the opacity to selectively remove or just lighten sections of the image.
    Plus the "dodge and burn" tools in the latest Photoshop now work very well.

    There's also a technique I got from a Digital re-toucher which works very well on single images, shot in "difficult light" which I put on my blog.
    http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/2010/01/exposure.html

    This can be seen as a digital version of the old Ansel Adams film Zone system where exposure and development were linked. Its also a bit like the old maxim of "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights"

    I've always been surprised that more people don't "balance" their exposures more, as there are lots of ways to do it, without resorting to HDR which is often hideous and very artificial in a lot of cases. I've only ever seen a few examples of it looking natural.

    I can't actually remember the issue but David Clapp explained his methods in a copy of Amateur Photographer a while ago.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  12. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Thanks soundimageplus,

    regarding this quote from your blog :

    "His basic idea was that for digital raw files you should always shoot with slight overexposure.
    The reason for this was that raw files have 1 to 1 1/2 stops of latitude for highlights."

    I think that I'd disagree here - what I prefer to do, is to set
    * Colour tone Natural
    * Contrast -2
    * Sharpening -2
    * Saturation -2
    * Gradation Normal

    And this gives me a very neutral jpeg for in-camera previewing... as well as a histogram / auto exposure which most closely matches that of the raw file.

    I then expose to the right (where more colour data is stored), making sure not to clip highlights.

    The biggest problem with blown highlights is the transition from some colour to white - some raw converters are better than others in providing smooth transitions.

    Cheers

    Brian
     
  13. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    782
    Feb 2, 2010
    Worcestershire
    Exposure

    It does depend on the amount of "overexposure" and the ability of the sensor to handle it. I don't find I can rely on a camera preview to let me know information I have (or don't have) in the file. In tricky situations I will always bracket to give me options.
    It all depends on the dynamic range. I'm reasonably good at predicting how much difference there is, but far from getting it right 100%. Purists would tell me that I should be working taking spot readings from the lightest and darkest sections of the image, but I usually have neither the time nor the inclination to do that.
    After working with a camera for a while I can see how it renders various situations & usually work out some strategy to deal with exposure problems that might occur.
    Heres an example, with the .jpg straight from the camera and the result I got from working on the raw file. You won't see it from the images posted here but the original is "noise-free" in the shadows and the highlights have restored well.
    M4/3 does have less dynamic range than full frame sensors, but it can cope, provided its not pushed to far.
    These were taken on a GF1 with the 20mm f/1.7.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 6
  14. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    That would be a great image for our Lightzone workshop... thanks for sharing.

    My point was, that the histogram and highlight/shadow clipping views are based on the in-camera jpeg.

    The in-camera jpeg is created using the in-camera settings (contrast, saturation, sharpening, gradation etc) - and this can be brought much closer to a true representation of the raw file by reducing contrast, sharpening, saturation to the minimum.

    Give it a try - you should find it takes a lot of guesswork out of your exposure assessment in the field.

    Cheers

    Brian
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    782
    Feb 2, 2010
    Worcestershire
    That is pretty much how I have my jpgs set & while I agree with you that its a fair representation of a lot of pictures, there's always the tendency for a lot of cameras to deal with very contrasty scenes in an "auto exposure" way. I've had jpg images that are wildly off from a "flat" i.e. everything zeroed out, raw file.
     
  16. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Yes, it's crazy that the histogram and highlight/shadow clipping views are generated from the jpeg when shooting raw.

    That should really be addressed.

    Cheers

    Brian
     
  17. pointoneeight

    pointoneeight Mu-43 Regular

    86
    Feb 11, 2010
    Brighton, UK
    Thanks for the tips and techniques in this thread in addition to the original link posted. The information on your soundimageplus blog was one of the main factors which led me to chose the GF1 back in November.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Thanks Soundimageplus,

    I must play more with bracketing which is easy in the GF1 - you can set the camera to take up to 7 different exposures of the same image at varying EV's.

    I am not a fan of HDR as it is too easy to make it look "plastic" and false.

    This thread has made me realise even more that maybe I do need to invest in a remore release rather than use the self timer, especially when bracketing.

    Thanks for a great post with valuable discussions.
     
  19. pointoneeight

    pointoneeight Mu-43 Regular

    86
    Feb 11, 2010
    Brighton, UK
    I can recommend the JJC timer remote controller if you are after something with a extra functionality. Was only $30 inc p&p! bargin :)

    http://www.jjc.cc/products/TM-D.htm
     
  20. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Thanks Pointoneeight,

    I have just had a look at the site and unfortunately the release does not appear to be available for the GF1.

    Ian