Food Shutter Bug Club (Part 1)
Posted 13 October 2010 - 01:47 PM
Posted 13 October 2010 - 06:45 PM
... 1. When I adjust image size in Photoshop the pics are still fairly large. Is there a way to ultra-compress in Photoshop? ...
Holly, when you save your photo in Photoshop, don't you get the 'JPEG Options' dialogue ? Yes, you can use "Image - Image Size" to resize the whole picture. But the 'Quality' part of 'JPEG options', with the slider and the level number (1 to 12 ?), is I believe the same as the type of compression you're talking about.
Posted 13 October 2010 - 11:16 PM
Then, if you're posting to the web, go to the Image menu, choose Image Size, and change it to the size you desire: 72 dpi for the web, then whatever actual dimensions you want in pixels or inches or whatever dimension you want. Be sure to check the Resample box, along with the Constrain Proportions box.
Then, after it's been resampled, you may want to do some sharpening... or not...
Then, if you choose "File>>Save for Web & Devices" you'll get a dialog that allows you to choose the image type and tweak the amount of compression you want, giving you a before and after pane that shows the consequences of your choices, both visually and as a file size.
Also - regarding your white-balance issues - you'll have LOTS more control if you shoot RAW, and then upon opening the RAW file, use that dialog to adjust the color temperature until the whites are white. That gives you much more to tweak than the post-processing adjustments of levels, or curves, or color balance, or hue and saturation. The auto button often gets close, but you'll still usually want to tweak the blue-yellow (temperature) slider a bit, and then, you almost always need to adjust the exposure setting, and/or the black levels.
Of course it's even better to have the white balance set right in the camera, but the real-world lighting conditions don't always play along. You should try to avoid having different light sources with different color temperatures hitting your subject at the same time. If your plate is being lit by an incandescent lamp, but you're also sitting near the window, and it's simultaneously being lit by sunlight, you'll end up with parts of the shot too yellow or too blue, and there's no easy fix for that...
Edited by philadining, 13 October 2010 - 11:18 PM.
Posted 13 October 2010 - 11:55 PM
One of the prettier breakfasts -- from last week. Annatto rice, shrimp peas carrots scramble. I actually had breakfast first, then shot the photo with leftovers, so the eggs are overcooked/dry, and they don't have the nice steamy look. Annatto gives great color, though I'm not fond of the smell. Fortunately that goes away by the time it's served. The image itself is heavily cropped. It was taken with my new Sony NEX-5 and an antique Canon Serenar 50mm 1.9 lens, which arrived the night before. Wanted to try it out. Turns out it's very soft, which was expected, but it doesn't really work for macros: closest focal distance is ~3 feet.
Posted 13 October 2010 - 11:55 PM
For photo editing, I highly recommend Adobe Lightroom 3.2 -- there's really no better tool out there for photo editing. Not only feature-wise, but simplicity as well. Far better than Photoshop. And Lightroom handles RAWs better than even OEM software.
Edited by percival, 14 October 2010 - 12:01 AM.
Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:34 AM
Edited by Blether, 08 November 2010 - 09:36 AM.
Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:39 AM
Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:51 AM
Posted 30 January 2011 - 03:18 PM
The sun came out today so I thought I'd give this photo business a shot.
Tacos YET AGAIN. Will the madness never stop?!
Posted 23 March 2011 - 12:37 PM
I am considering upgrading to this lens and don't mind dropping some cash, but I figured I'd ask some of the other food photographers on eGullet which lenses they preferred to shoot with (or, if you have an opinion about the lens to which I linked).
Feel free to post a picture or two taken with your lens if you feel it would help illustrate the capabilities better.
Flickr: Link To My Account
Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:34 PM
^I was just wondering because it looked (to my eyes) like the brightness had been adjusted just a little, compared to SobaAddict70's picture of the scrambled eggs, which looks like the brightness (and maybe colour) has had more of an adjustment.
I love the composition of the photo (was that David Chang's recipe?). It seems to me that a lot of really talented chefs (pastry or savoury) tend to have excellent composition when it comes to photography. Makes sense if you think about the artistic side of cooking.
(I don't just mean professional chefs, but also home cooks/bakers, "serious" or otherwise.)
The brightness was adjusted a little bit but the color is as is. Lighting was from an overhead studio lamp. Those eggs really are that yellow. They're not from the supermarket.
Posted 23 March 2011 - 02:05 PM
I use my Compact-Macro Lens 50mm most of the time. Flickr stream here.
Is that a prime lens? In a lot of the food shots I am doing, I'm trying to get the entire plate of food in the frame while still sitting at the table. At 50 mm, I would've needed to back up a few feet in order to achieve that.
You have some nice photographs on your Flickr page.
Flickr: Link To My Account
Posted 23 March 2011 - 03:04 PM
[Moderator note: This topic continues here, Food Shutter Bug Club (Part 2)]
Edited by Mjx, 27 July 2014 - 02:56 AM.
Host note added.
blog: The Institute for Impure Science
Posted 13 June 2011 - 12:32 PM
I took the first photo off the cuff really, just before scrubbing these two hen crabs clean and dispatching them with a skewer. They were all tensed up and looked like they knew what was coming. Anyway I took one shot, light wasn't great and they were still moving a little, hence the shot was a little soft:
I don't usually do much post-processing, maybe just the odd brightening here and there but I thought this shot looked interesting. So I decided to apply some sharpening and up the contrast. It really surprised me how it made these creatures pop out of the picture. Especially the hairs on the legs, you really get a sense of the texture of the shell, don't you think?
These crabs were destined for linguine, but that's one thing I find tricky to get right on the plate/in the bowl. I made this dish twice in the past week and just can't decide which is the more appetising presentation and gave the better shot. The first dish had the linguine wrapped around a carving fork and placed carefully in a cheffy way into the bowl. This one was taken with flash bounced off the ceiling:
The second was taken with natural light and here the pasta was just dumped into the bowl for a more natural look:
So what do you think? I can't decide which shot I prefer, I'm not really that happy with either. Will a smaller or differently shaped bowl help perhaps, and is there anything else I can do with long pasta to get a better composed shot?
eG Foodblog: Cooking with Panda