Sigma DP2 Merrill color photos, please!

A few from my new DP2M. First one is with external Nissin flash bounced.

1)

SDIM0234.jpg


2)

SDIM0240.jpg
 
GaryLH said:
Nice set, Jon.. Backpacking?.. The first one makes me want to be there just enjoying the view..

Gary
Click to expand...

Yup, Gary, those are from a 3-week thru hike of the Pyrenees that I did last August. There are many many more, from that hike and many others that I've been doing. I have to get more motivated to upload and share here.
 
imho, one has to be really careful with processing the Merrill files and use a 'light touch' especially with sharpening. As is evident with some of the images here, they can take on a 'crunchy' look that to me is bordering on kind of weird. They can end up looking more like 'electronic technical drawings' and not photographs. Sometimes I think people get obsessed with the detail and micro-contrast and kind of overdo it.

But if handled well the files can take on a film-like appearance. And best of all, the Merrill files are great for printing (where one needs to 'over sharpen' in comparison for making files for monitor viewing.) I find Merrill files that are printed (either ink or RA-4 Lightjet/Lambda) can look really spectacular.
 
VertovSvilova said:
imho, one has to be really careful with processing the Merrill files and use a 'light touch' especially with sharpening. As is evident with some of the images here, they can take on a 'crunchy' look that to me is bordering on kind of weird. They can end up looking more like 'electronic technical drawings' and not photographs. Sometimes I think people get obsessed with the detail and micro-contrast and kind of overdo it.

But if handled well the files can take on a film-like appearance. And best of all, the Merrill files are great for printing (where one needs to 'over sharpen' in comparison for making files for monitor viewing.) I find Merrill files that are printed (either ink or RA-4 Lightjet/Lambda) can look really spectacular.
Click to expand...

You might be talking about anybody, but I will take the ball. For the record, no sharpening whatsoever, beyond Flickr's internal parameters, was applied to the files I posted here.

Two of the images (first one in post #147, and the one in post #150) are multiple exposure HDR. Perhaps a little too much for some tastes.

For still life/landscape, I often do like tonal contrast for the texture it brings out. It was actually one of the reasons that led me to decide that I personally prefer the output of the Merrill to that of the M9, when I had both.

As for prints: those that I've made from Merrill images processed in this way definitely look more organic--and spectacular--than what you see here.
 
Don`t think that I sharpen mine either ...maybe I need to check the settings in the software.

A one is tempting Jon ....
My only problem with them is the totally inadequate scale information provided.
Its not accurate enough to ensure precise manual focusing.

The AF is ,of course ,way to slow for what I`d really like to use them for.
 
Michael Markey said:
Don`t think that I sharpen mine either ...maybe I need to check the settings in the software.
Click to expand...

Just curious but are you reducing sharpening in SPP? The default sharpening is way too much and it seems one is much better off when being sure to reduce the default to around -7 or so. A couple of years ago Imaging Resource did a close evaluation of this and concluded: "We weren't really able to extract any more resolution using Sigma's Photo Pro RAW converter at default settings mainly because of its overly aggressive sharpening." It's that 'aggressive' sharpening (the default setting) that can make the X3F files of the Merrill take on that 'crunchy' over baked technical appearance (a lot of aliasing.)
 
VertovSvilova said:
Just curious but are you reducing sharpening in SPP? The default sharpening is way too much and it seems one is much better off when being sure to reduce the default to around -7 or so. A couple of years ago Imaging Resource did a close evaluation of this and concluded: "We weren't really able to extract any more resolution using Sigma's Photo Pro RAW converter at default settings mainly because of its overly aggressive sharpening." It's that 'aggressive' sharpening (the default setting) that can make the X3F files of the Merrill take on that 'crunchy' over baked technical appearance (a lot of aliasing.)
Click to expand...



I usually have it set to neutral .
 
I went back and reconverted one of those images above with the sheep. There isn't a great deal of difference at any viewing ratio between 0 sharpening and -0.7 in SPP.

The real difference comes in the contrast that I applied during PP of the TIFF files. For the first time, I did everything in a batch, and it looks like this resulted in some images that have had too much contrast applied. The sheep image in question for instance looks better with less "aggressive" use of the contrast sliders (I'm using three of them, divided into midtone, highlight, and shadow(.

Thanks for the heads up.
 
Michael Markey said:
A one is tempting Jon ....
My only problem with them is the totally inadequate scale information provided.
Its not accurate enough to ensure precise manual focusing.

The AF is ,of course ,way to slow for what I`d really like to use them for.
Click to expand...

One doesn't get the Merrills for their ergonomics :p
 
noimmunity said:
I went back and reconverted one of those images above with the sheep. There isn't a great deal of difference at any viewing ratio between 0 sharpening and -0.7 in SPP.

The real difference comes in the contrast that I applied during PP of the TIFF files. For the first time, I did everything in a batch, and it looks like this resulted in some images that have had too much contrast applied. The sheep image in question for instance looks better with less "aggressive" use of the contrast sliders (I'm using three of them, divided into midtone, highlight, and shadow(.

Thanks for the heads up.
Click to expand...

I `ve just done the the same and saw little difference when the sharpness was reduced to -0.7.
 
Jon,
That is a nice set.. The first one looks like the fellow was saying back off or I'll head butt u :p

Gary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom