Post Storm Juvie

Sometimes it is good to know the power of software.  I've often heard in discussions with other photographers that the better the original image, the better the post image.  The more you have to 'edit' the shot, the more you lose in quality.  I'll go for that.
But sometimes I can put myself in a position where a 'save' is needed.   Happens more than one would think.
When I arrived at the Refuge last weekend, the first thing I did is take a test shot or two to get my settings close to what I need.  Usually I don't have to make many changes after that during the visit.  And this time I followed the process.  And it worked until...
On entrance to the park, the first chance at wildlife is driving north.  The wildlife is usually on the right, east.  Into the morning sun.  Birds in the trees at his point early in the morning are not a good shot.  But I was there well after sunrise and this wasn't an issue.  But with the storm passing, the sun still wasn't in a favorable position and created a very flat sky.  Welcome to mid-Michigan.  But the Juvie in the trees like this is not something witnessed every day.  Got to make it work.
Usually, this isn't a problem.  Until it is.
A copy of the original RAW image:

That's a mess.
Forensic photography indicates the light is bad, the sky is flat and worst of all the EV was set at -1.  A holdover setting from the previous week.  The camera was metered on an unusually dark bird, in darker than normal light with an EV of -1.  It ain't the camera's fault.
But what is life without a challenge?
To save the image, I need to lighten the subject, the trees and try to get some definition in the sky.
First, to lighten the bird is easy.  ACR does a good job.  But when the bird is lightened the sky looks worse, if possible.  After a while, playing around with the settings I determined that the bird was worth saving but the sky had to go.
To split the sky from the bird, I usually turn away from PS.  I've been a big fan of the Topaz AI products lately and I planned to use their Mask program.  I tried for an hour to get that to work without success.  I've used it before on simple photos.  This should be simple, the sky is one colored.  Match the color, press a button and the sky should be erased.  Didn't work that way.  So turned to On One.  
The On One masking is simple, fast, intuitive and it works.  I used On One a number of years ago but found their software with each passing 'upgrade' put more of a load on my PC.  I've upgraded to a PC built for photography, and I tried the application the day after I fired the PC up.  And it still did not work well.  There were some other issues that I would call personal issues that moved me on to Topaz.  
The one aspect of On One that I liked in the past was their masking process.  That was going to save this image.
The bird is wet, after the passing storm.  Feathers are everywhere.  Not an easy mask.  

I was able to remove the image sky in less than five minutes.
One of the personal issues I have with On One is the file management.  It took longer to get a file that PS liked than it did to remove the sky.  Again, what is life without a challenge?
Then I needed to find a sky that wasn't too different from the original, but had some definition.  One thing I'm in the habit of doing is taking plain sky shots.  I like to get a lot of clouds in the shots.  I'm sure I can find something that will be a close match.  And I think I did.
In the end, this is what I came up with.

Post Storm Juvie

NIKON D500 Ver.1.20/200.0-500.0 mm f/5.6

720 mm, 1/1000 sec, f/5.6, ISO 160 (AUTO)

EV -1, MANUAL Mode, Size DX

That bird was still drenched, as was its buddies in nearby trees.  I might have added a bit more light than was there, but the wet feathers on the wing and body is something you don't see every day.  Usually the birds are a nice brown and fluffy all the way around.
And most importantly, this photo has an element that seems to be my trademark.  A branch in the way of a subject.  Its removal would be the next project.

ISO Invariance

What in the wild world of sports is ISO invariance?
Definition, pulled from the web: The short answer is that ISO invariance means that a camera will produce the exact same image quality by staying at ISO (or whatever the base ISO is on the camera) and dramatically underexposing the photo and then brightening it up again in Lightroom, as if you had shot the camera at the proper ISO in the first place.
That would have been helpful to know.
Some time ago, a little over four years now, I had a post about shooting to the dark side.  Essentially, for all the wrong reasons and probably doing it wrong, I was on to something.  And I didn't know why.  My life is a blast!
I've often thought/known you can play with exposure settings in ACR, increasing or decreasing by what appears to be 5 stops.  Assuming you are using a RAW file.  For some action shots that I wanted to HDR, I'd make my own exposure range.  Wasn't always as good as taking three or five independent shots, but in a pinch I could get good results.
Back in the day when I thought shooting dark was the right thing to do, I was taking an ordinary day and using the exposure compensation to darken the image.  Clearly not understanding anything, I was kind of doing it right.
Since the MIHA shoot, I've been thinking on how to get better quality images either through software or new hardware like a faster lens.  So now there is another option, technique.  And it has a name.  Frigg'n awesome.
So here's how it will go.  At the MIHA for me to shoot, without flash, a 1/500 sec shot at something around f/5.6 that would be in the area of ISO 10,000.  Cleanable, but would clearly like to be a lot lower.  Knowing that I can add exposure of 5 stops, that would mean I could set my ISO at 640 and still save the image.  OK, that's to the edge but you get the point.  Shots I took at the MIHA at 1000 ISO were more than OK and cleaned up very easily.
So tomorrow there is another horse event close to home.  Seriously, less than 5 miles from the house.  It will be indoors.  Hopefully warmer than the MIHA, but the light will be bad - or worse.  So if I can remember what I learned today I have something to work on.
So the plan will be to initially set the camera to 1/500, f/5.6 and auto ISO.  If the metered ISO is around 10,000  I'll set the fixed ISO at 1200 - and start working my way to ISO 800.  See what happens.
With any luck, I'll learn something about this invariance thingie.  And something more about the horse world.  I should probably learn to spell equestrian. 

High ISO Shooting (Try it)

I came back from the MIHA event this past weekend with two thoughts.
First, I should have dressed warmer.  A few days later, I'm still trying to kick the cold.
Next, I really wanted to solve the shooting action pictures indoors.  Without flash.
Prior to this event, my idea of high ISO was anything north of 800.  I was stuck in the 35 mm film days.  Was.  No more.
If I left the event with no usable pictures, but a better understanding of the ISO and a slew of shots with different settings for analysis - success.
In the end, I shot a few at 12,800 ISO.  Usable?  I'd have to define the term.  I will say that most of the shots at 10,000 are usable.  I have them as backgrounds on the 23 inch monitors.  Very usable.  Sure, I can see the imperfections.  (I'm looking for them.)  Yes, all things being equal, I would love the same result at 100 ISO.  But, isn't going to happen.  Probably not even with professional equipment.  But with what I am using, 10,000 in that arena can work.
I'm guessing any parent would love to have these shots on their PC, but not the 72 inch TV.  But the monitor is very usable.  Tablets and smaller, very usable.
I'm not sure a print will do well.  And I'm too cheap to throw away ink on testing a 11x14 print.  I'll cross that bridge when I need to.
So for giggles, here is the original shot at 100%.  Noise and all.
The stats: D500, 1/500 sec, f/5.6, ISO 10000.  (EV +2)
This is the original image, 100% background layer.

Using PS ACR Luminance and Detail - 70%

(Oh yea, the dude had to go.)  PS ACR helps a little.  What I've found with ACR, is it does a great job with noise under 1,000.  But this is heavy duty stuff.  I am a big fan of the Topaz AI line, and a lot had to do with this.

That is a lot of help.  It's not perfect, but for me and the pictures I took at this event, it is a lot of help.  I don't know what help a flash would be, but I'm not going to find out.  
I'm not saying everyone's equipment will get the same results.  Not sure the D7200 would do this well.  But I should have tried it anyway, just to see its capabilities.  Could I get this with ISO 8000? Would that mean only 1/200 sec speed?(Reason to go again?)
Great day to find out what lies in the ISOs past 1000.  It's not that scary.  

Batching

Last weekend's adventure to the horse farm and the Eventing practice grossed over 500 images.  
And I said I'd share them.
First step, get it a manageable number.  Down to 100, check.
Next, apply the necessary basic edits.  How to do basic edits for over 100 images?  I shot JPGs, but I don't do any in camera effects and the images really don't come out so well.  Not good enough to show.  With my name on it.  
For the RAW files I figured out how create a pre-set in ACR.  The important part was to set the light levels levels to AUTO.  It is doable.  And I added my usual starting points.  And I could do multiples.  Like 30 at a time.  Like in 3 minutes.  There is a time saver.
From that point, I needed to save the altered RAW files to a JPG format.  Found how to do that.  From there I had to touch up about half of the images for things like leveling and some additional light leveling work.
In all, about two hours of work.  Not bad.  Better than the camera JPG route.  At this pint, I can't see any reason to shoot JPG format any more.
Now for the dispersal.  I like Dropbox.  I have a few of the Club members doing a test of the page and download.  I should be able to send out the notices tomorrow that the images are ready.
Not only was the adventure fun, but I backed into some learning as well.
I need to get out more.

RAW Processing in Elements

In Saturday's trip to a farm for the Horse Eventing, I had a few conversations about shooting a RAW image as opposed to JPG.  One of the points of the discussion was centered around time and knowledge to process the image file.
I'm going to go through a very basic process to process a RAW file into an image in Elements.  This is Elements 14 and ACR 9.5.   Sorry, but that is the last version I have.  The current version should be similar.
By default, when a RAW file is opened in Elements, the Adobe Camera RAW plugin should open.
This image was shot with a -1 EV compensation because there will be areas of blown pixels.  If there was no compensation, the dark horse saddle pad would be blown white  where I know it was green.  The histogram is left which indicates the image is dark overall and we'd like to correct it.
What follows is Kurt's quick edit.
First select AUTO.  That selection will get is to what Adobe thinks are 'balanced' light levels.

When that is done, there are two real changes made.  The histogram shows that light levels are moving to a more even level.  And the saddle pad is beginning  to show blown (Red) levels.  The pad is now white instead of a shade of light green.
Leave it alone for now, there are other edits that are still to come.

Next step is to set Clarity, Vibrance and Saturation.  RAW file are somewhat bland by nature.  I have my starting points.

I set my Clairity and Vibrance values to 20 and Saturation to 10.  When that happens, the saddle pad increases the blown area.  
At this point my basic edits are done.  Other edits if necessary can be done depending on what I what to do with the image.  
But for this image, I would want to work on the saddle pad.  And in this case the edit is simple, use the Whites slider.

I moved the Whites slider from 10 to 17 and the saddle pad color has returned.
From here, click on the Open Copy button and that will open the file in Elements.  From there, accomplish your edits or save the image as .
For the most part after a few times through, this doesn't take that long.  I usually don't like to spend more than a minute or two on basic edits.  And it think it is worth it over that a camera will do.
This is the camera JPG.

I think my process is overall a better image.  The saddle pad is still problematic, but with a little extra effort I cold get more green out of it.  And since it is a RAW file, the information is there, just need to unlock it.
That's the quick process.

Williamsburg Governor's Palace - North Side

At last night's photo club meeting I volunteered to do a demo on Adobe Camera Raw (ACR).  We have some new members who don't understand what it does, other than it annoys them.  We have members who use PS and Elements, so this 'discussion' will be beneficial to both groups.  My 'discussion' will be in essentially five weeks.  Unlike my school days, I will try to prepare more than a day out.
Since any chat about ACR on its own might take 20-30 minutes, I'll have to do some demoing.  That can fill up the other 90 minutes.
Tonight I was looking for RAW file images to use.  My criteria was to have some dynamic range, but not outrageous.  For the club, I want to use a somewhat realistic image not one that was deliberately taken to prove a point.
This is a photograph of the Governor's Palace in Williamsburg, Virginia.  Most people approach the Palace from the south side, main entrance.  Apparently I got lost and found my way to the lesser known north side.
I like this landscape shot.  Nice carpet of grass, bricks for detail, a not very common gold seal on the doorway and most importantly a sky that I won't have to replace.  There is a landscape dude that will have to be dealt with by some form of removal or crop.  We'll go for removal because I like a challenge, plus for the club I have cred that needs a bolster every now and then.
Here is the original image.

May 19, 2016 - I did have the D7200 at that time.  The lens is my 18-200.  ISO 400, f/11, 1/250 sec, 38 mm.

First step - open RAW image file in ACR.

There are two settings in ACR that I know of that are not available once the image is imported to PS.  I need to make my selections here.  I also do my initial light level sets.

First I will set the profile to Adobe Landscape.  For my light levels, I just hit the Auto setting.  First pass, I'll detail it later.

In this image, that is not so necessary, but is some other darker images this step will at least let me see what is there.  

The options that are not available later are the lens corrections.  I need to set them now.

I want to use this options to remove chromatic aberrations and enable profile corrections.  (It will change the image!)

From here I will take the corrections and open PS.

PS will open with the image as the Background layer.  As practice, I never work on the background layer, so I make a copy layer using the shortcut Ctrl+J.  Layer 1 is created.  Again as practice, I make Layer 1 a Smart Object.  This will allow me to make changes at a later time if necessary.

At this time I will open the RAW Editor Filter.  This is ACR inside PS, except for the two parameters I've already changed in Lens Correction.  I'll use the shortcut Shift+Ctrl+A to open the editor.

From here, I'll set the temperature and tint levels.  For this shot, I'll bump the temperature a bit, to give the illusion of some sun light.

I'll also move the other light levels as necessary.  I want a good photograph with a good sky.  No blown pixels, some (small) black areas are OK.  I'll also set my Clarity, Dehaze, Vibrance and Saturation.

When the colors and light levels are set, I move to sharpening.  For this, I generally use the heavy preset.

From here, I'll move to the Transform section.  Because I've already it the image with Lens Correction, there won't be much change unless the level is off.  I start off with the 'waffle' selection.  Unless I'm off at an extreme angle this will do the trick.

Nothing can ruin a good photo like spots.  Dirty lens, dust on the sensor, even a small flying critter will subconsciously catch an eye.  I always check for spots in the sky.  ACR makes this really easy to do with the spot removal tool and the Visualize Spots option checked.

No odd images in the sky.

Last stop in ACR is the Adjustment brush.  I didn't make any spot changes.  Usually when I do, it will be to over or under expose a small area.  There are some dark areas in the image, but non that I want to tackle.

At this point the image is basically done.

For the final touch, I need to remove the lawn service dude.  It would easy to crop the image and remove him.  But the Content Aware Fill option worked really well.  I did some touch up cloning along the brick wall just for fun and practice.  I also removed the top of the lightning rod that extends out of the picture.  Personal preference, not real fond of items that extend out of the photo if I can avoid it.  I'll finish by cropping it to 1920x1080 and adding the frame.

Fun image to work on.  Little bits of everything.

When is 300mm really 600mm?

One of the requirements I wanted to get with the new lens was a 400mm focal length.  I have a 200 mm lens and with the D7200's trick of changing the image area, I could get to 350 mm.
The math in all this is mind boggling.
First starting with the lens.  Nothing changes in the lens.  70-300 full frame is, well, 70-300.  However, being a full frame lens it is primarily built for a full frame body/sensor.  And simply when it hits a smaller sensor, some of the light is lost around the edges.  What's that you say, some lens will get soft around the edges?  This is a cure.  Expense, but a cure.  Best I can say if you're really interested, google FX lens on DX body.  There's all sorts of people who can 'splain it better than me but in the end for Nikon there is an approximately 1.5x bump for the lens. 
So by Nikon's definition, my 70 - 300 has an equivalent focal length of 105 to 450.  Out of the box.  PFM (Pure Magic).
To get me the rest of the way, the D7200 has a cute little setting called Image Area.  This option disables some of the sensor and in the same manner as above gives the illusion of more zoom in the lens.  There is a cost, such as pixel count as represented by the reduced file size - but hey I'm an amateur and this is a hobby.  The photos are still awesome.
In the end, does anyone really know what the focal length is?  The bigger the number, the bigger the object in the field of view is.  More/bigger is better, right?  Sometimes yes, sometimes no but I'd rather have it and not need it.  Or at least have the option to use it.
So, how does the camera react to this.
This set of shots was taken in Port Huron.  One of the river vessels passed under the Blue Water bridge.  If I had to guess, the vessel was a mile away.
First image with Nikon's DX Image Size.

Focal Length in 35mm is 450.  The Image area is set to DX.  Note the lens is 70-300,

Next shot less than a minute later.  The Image Area was set to 1.3.  Focal Length in 35mm is 600.

The particulars are shown.  1/800 sec, f/8, ISO800, Manual Mode

Both shots are hand held.  Enlarged, both shots are very clear.  (OK, not as fast as aircraft, but when in Rome...)

DMRRC 2017 Visit Prep

My photo club field trip to the DMRRC is this week.  Time to get ready.

Last year I had new camera, and a new strategy.  This year if something goes wrong, I don't have those excuses.

This year I am using new software for my remote tethering.  I've been working with it for a few months so that can't be too much of an excuse.

There could be a new and unexpected twist.  I'm comfortable with the D7200 and the Helicon Remote software.  I haven't worked that much with the D90 and the software, so was down in the dungeon putting that configuration through its paces.

The D90 is not wi-fi capable, so had to use USB cable.  Not a big issue.  What I did discover is that in some configurations the Remote software will not save to the camera.  The table I'm using has about 6 GB of space available - I need to save to the camera or at the very least save to the tablet's external card.  If I changed the my thoughts and had all the images sent to the tablet, either USB or wi-fi, that adds a lot of time to the shooting process.  I do like the idea of sending a image tot he tablet, only for verification.  But i want the RAW image to stay on the camera, both for speed considerations and file size.

Fortunately there is a setting on the Remote software as to what to do with the image(s).  This setting will send the JPG image to the tablet and will save the RAW image to the camera.  I tested on both the D90 and the D7200 and it worked well.  Cuts the stacking process by more than 50%.  Huge.

The next change will be I will start off using the 85 mm lens (AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR

85mm f/3.5G ED VR).  The lens I used last year, my go to 18-200 did are real nice job.  I thought i would use it again.  But as i was int he dungeon for a few hours, I decided to see if there was a difference in the lens with respect to clarity.  yea, I know.  With a prime lens I should always get better clarity.  I just didn't know how much.  And now I know.

The subject is the underside of a PC disk drive, the circuit board.  This looks like a really good subject for focus stacking.

Both shots are 30 shot stacks.  For the display, the area that is shown is at 100% magnification.  i tried to get as many environmental settings as close as possible.  The camera and the subject were not intentionally moved.  Both shots were with the D7200.  ISO is 100.

The first shot is with the 18-200 lens.  The focal length turned out to be 150mm.  This is f/6.3 at 1/25 second.

Reality is, this isn't all that bad.  (Or so I thought.)  I accept the challenges of small sensors and some what limited lenses.  Unless I'm going to enlarge this to a wall sized photo, this will look good.

Until.

This is the 85mm prime lens.  Same speed and f/stop.  Same number of photos in the stack.

Based on this information, I will start with the 85mm lens - until it doesn't work.

I will do more prep this week.

Back to the Detroit Model Railroad Club - 2017

In a few weeks, my Photo Club will be heading out to the DMRRC for a return visit.  Personally, I had a lot of fun last year.  The DMRRC members who were out that night were just wonderful.  Like most places as soon as I left when we were done, I know I left so many shots out there.  Fortunately, I get another crack at them.

Last year I worked with focus stacking.  While most of my shots lacked train aesthetics, but technically they were good.

I've been asked by the Club to lead a discussion in our next meeting about the photo shoot.  Most of our members are outdoor photographers and being inside is a stretch.  

From talking with Club members after the 2016 visit, many said they didn't understand why the shots appeared out of focus.  That seemed to be the number one challenge.

I've been out to the DMRRC a few times in the last weeks.  I was in with the paying public, I didn't have the freedom to do focus stacking in these visits - as well as the trains were now in motion.  Well, this stinks.

In my first visit this year, I shot maybe 300 images - and only two came out that were any good.  And guess what - they were all fuzzy - like out of focus.  And then it hit me what the problem was.  Depth of Field.  I could usually find some point that was sharp - just not the point I wanted.

Unless this engine is getting ready to hit a fog bank, the focus starts to come in about two to three inches behind the front of the unit.  This is a clear miss on my part.  I'll bet I hit the front with the focus point and as I moved the camera back to center the subject, I held on the focus and it moved.  Rookie mistakes.......  Well that mystery solved.  But this illustrates how shallow the depth of filed can be.

So....  Speaking of Depth of Field, working inside is a real challenge.  The lighting isn't too bad but far from ideal.  You are shooting short distances to subject with high lens mm settings.  For example, if you shoot f/8 at 30 inches to subject with an 85mm lens - your DOF is essentially one inch.  Which coincidentally is just about right on for the image above. 

So the first points to the club are this.  Be sure of your focus point and have a strategy to deal with Depth of Field.  

One of the environmental factors is the subjects will more than likely not be moving.  They will be staged as requested.  So the speed question is reduced.  Even better if you bring a tripod.  I used a bean bag on the track last year.

Also, I will be focus stacking again this year.  I've gone over this with the Club a few times, hope they stayed awake.

Next up:  Increasing ISO if necessary.  (And it might be.)

Toy RC Helicopter

This weekend's subject was photo stacking a smaller subject than the Walking Shoes projects.  I have a small, very small, RC helicopter I bought a few years ago to keep me occupied for a Christmas Day.  The Cats were not amused.
The toy has been sitting on the shelf since then.
Before I get into the toy, I thought a look into what I am now calling the dungeon.  I've set aside a corner in our basement for my photographic equipment.  I have two tables set up - one has the mat cutting equipment and the other is the table top studio.

So far, the single lighting source into the umbrella is doing the trick.  I have been very happy with the results.  That tip alone was well worth the gas money to Procam and back.
On to the helicopter.
The goal was to test the Helicon Remote (PC) and Focus programs with something other than the default settings.
Over the course of the day, I found out a few things that sound like I should have known them before today, but like most things I have learned I needed to see it for myself.
The first thing I figured out, is don't be so fast to jump to a RAW format.  As RAW files are larger, guess what?  Yep - they take longer to process.  That probably cost me a hour.  Lesson learned, unless there is a reason for RAW format or you are just testing go with a medium JPG format.
Another lesson, it appears that the smaller f/stop (larger opening) doesn't always mean a clearer product.  i found in the course of the shooting that for some reason, the tail section would never come out clear when I was shooting f/2.  Not sure if it was the complexity of the section, or the backdrop or a combination of the two.  I would see clear shots in the stack, but in the processing it never came out.  I'm sure there is a way to clean that up, but that is time I'd rather not take.  When I shot a stack at f/4.5 and f/8 the tail section came in very nicely.  Lesson learned, if you have the time take multiple sets with different aperture settings.  I believe it can make a difference.
Next lesson, complex subjects can be frustrating.  I'll define complex as having multiple points of focus that overlap.  In this case, I spent a lot of time moving the rotor blades so they didn't overlap the body.  The more independent each element, the better.  It took me a while to get this straight, and coupled with the RAW image lesson, there was a lot of time consumed.  Lesson learned, practice, practice, practice.  Note: I always go back to my first stacking adventure, the DMRRC shoot.  These were not so much complex shots, for the most part the scenery was uncomplicated.  There was depth, but none of it was overlapping.
And probably the last lesson for the day, when it comes to rendering the photos there is always room for improvement.  In this case, methods A and B worked best when the radius and smoothing values were set to 1.  And while that was fun trying to figure those settings - option C worked the best with no extra effort.  The Helicon vendor website said that most of the default settings would work most of the time.  Don't believe it - explore.
So on to the Helicopter, again.
Using two different DOF web calculators with the following:  Camera D7200 crop sensor, distance to subject of 24 inches with 50 mm lens set to f/8 gives me a DOF of just under 2 inches.  The helicopter is 7 inches long, plus maybe 2.5 inches for the front rotor blade.  Something isn't going to fit.
This is one of the mid-photos in the stack where the focus is just forward of the rotor.

The front looks OK, but from roughly half way back on the tail the sharpness is fading.

With a 16 shot photostack, this is the image:

And a close up of the tail section:

The tail section is sharp all the way through.

So that is the stack part - done in JPG.

And the Blog version:

As this project was done in JPG, I'm stuck with the coloring of the backdrop and soften the object shadow a bit.  Still in the learning process.

Walking Shoes II

Had a really good photo related day on Saturday.  I started with a few hours at ProCam in Livonia for their Demo Days event.  I had a few subjects to address while I was there - and all were taken care of.
First, I had the sensors cleaned on the D90 and D7200.  Pretty reasonable price and they did it while I was there.
Next I wanted to see what the Nikon 200-500 lens really looked and felt like.  I did.  Yea, I could have bugged the store people about it at any other time, but on Saturday I could bug the Nikon Rep.  It's bigger and heavier than I thought.  What I found out is I need to include in that purchase price a mono-pod.  The lens is coming in at around 5 pounds, its not a real mobile thing.  Good information.  Still in the running.
I'll get to the walking shoes.
I also needed to chat with someone about lighting for the downstairs studio, aka Grandpa's (Munster) laboratory or dungeon.  In the first effort with the walking shoes (Walking Shoes) I thought the subject was OK, but the environment was not.  I was mostly concerned with correcting the shadows cast on the backdrop.  The first thing I could correct was moving the backdrop back a bit, and that's easy to do.  But that might not be enough, I needed to get to the light source.  So I needed to chat with someone about the dungeon lighting.
Seriously, I'll get to the walking shoes.
I found a sales rep for Westcott, a seller of studio lighting materials.  Condensing the story, he said I had everything pretty much all wrong.  (I take things like this well, as I hear it a lot.)  I had used two table lamps on the previous walking shoes photo.  The light was OK - but I did get unwanted shadows.
The sales rep's suggestion was to use the modeling light on one of my White Lightnings into an umbrella to expand the light source and see what that does.  Go down to one light?  Less is better, right?
I was all for that - I already have the stuff.  No extra $$$s necessary.
Now to the walking shoes.
I set up the environment so the backdrop was more relaxed and back off the subject.  I used one overhead light with the full power of the modeling light into an umbrella.
I used a nine shot photostack.  I changed the defaults on the Helicon program to take two shots per focus step instead of one.  More is better, right?
And one other teenie weenie change, I returned to processing RAW files.  (I was playing with JPGs earlier because in the stacking learning curve, I didn't want to confuse any issues.)
On the previous project, the light temperature from the table top lamps came out pretty close to what I would want.  In this new set up, not even close.

Looks like a bizarre autumn warming filter was used.  There's some heavy tungsten temps.  Maybe some white reflection from the umbrella as well.  For reference, the backdrop is black.  Seriously.
Maybe I've lived under a rock for most my photographic journey, but I've never really had to play with white balance before.  I remember trying to find a neutral spot on photographs and identifying it to Lightroom in hopes of making a difference I couldn't see.  But in this case, I need to do something.  So in PS raw editor, moved the WB from AS SHOT to AUTO.  Bingo!  I was in the ball park.  It was that easy.
After I hit it with the WB change, I applied a custom color profile file I created for the studio.
So, here are the vitals:  I used the D90 with a 50mm prime lens.  ISO was set to 200, Aperture was f/2.8, speed was 1/6 second.  I used Helicon Remote to calculate and manage the shots.  I used Helicon Focus to merge the nine shots.  

I hit it with a bit of NIK's HDR filters and Glow.  (Hey, it's still me.)  On the original file, you can increases to 100% and it is tack sharp everywhere, even in the color transition areas.  I attribute that improvement over the previous version of Walking Shoes to doubling the number of shots per focus step in Helicon Remote.
The walking shoes set up was a fun learning experience.  This project is closed.  Time to move on.

The White Barn

This is a barn in the Saginaw area.  I was out driving around and the sunlight and sky seem to be calling me.  This barn is photographed often by our Club, so it is not entirely unknown to me.  I've seen many shots at different times of year.  I think this has many possibilities.
First, I've started taking both RAW and JPG files.  I quit taking JPGs a few years ago, but now I have plenty of disk in the camera.  More information, even if it is not used ain't all that bad.

The RAW image:

The white siding is very close to being blown out.  On the histogram, that is represented by indications on the right and the warning symbol.  There just isn't a whole lot to deal with and the side is white so I'm expecting just a bit.

The Original Nikon JPG

By the histogram, it looks like the RGBs were reduced pretty evenly and added some dark blue.
Its OK, but not to my tastes.  First the golden vegetation has real possibilities.  I like yellows.  But I need more definition and a touch of saturation.  I think the real center of the picture is the white siding of the barn.  Again, more definition of the weathering.  And to finish up, the green on the tree and silo ivy is just plain boring, just some saturation.  Also, if I can do something with the sky in terms of clearing up the dull blue, that will be a bonus.

Now that I'm getting very comfortable Photoshop, I'm getting a solid workflow to 'prep' the image.  I start with the RAW filter.  In the RAW filter, I use the Transform tool to set the overall picture horizontal and vertical elements and correct for camera distortion.  Sounds busy, but I pretty much let PS do all the work.

In this case, there was some adjustment.

My next set of adjustments came from On One.  I tried the NIK adjustments and nothing suited me. In On One, I used Dynamic Contrast and Grunge filters.

On One Adjustments:

Now we're starting to get somewhere.  Starting at the top, the sky/clouds are starting to get some edge to them.  The tress and ivy have a lighter color and you can see much more definition.The flat white on the barn side is disappearing.  Not yet where I want it, but it is a start.  And as a bonus, I'm seeing some definition in the roof and silo.  The histogram is showing the image darkened a bit so I'll want to recover some overall light.  I used the RAW filter again to bump up the yellows and greens just a bit.

The Final Image:

I think I got what I wanted.  The sky has some definition, without looking too altered.  The tree and ivy have more color and definition.  The white barn siding isn't so bright, looks more weathered and detailed.  And the gold sea looks a lot more detailed.

High ISO Shots

My next big photo op is roughly one year away.  I am heading west with a few friends to attend the Reno airshow.  As in Reno, Nevada.  Wow, I have some work to do!
First, this takes me a bit out of my element.  I like nice static subjects.  If I miss it, I can go back.  I'm not much for one and dones.
I've been looking at web sites for aviation photography and a few things I've learned.  One is I'll need to go shopping for something more powerful than my 200mm lens.  Doable.
I'll also need to be able to take shots at 1/2000.  The guideline for taking photos of prop driven aircraft is 1/40 to 1/125.  The blur of the prop makes the shot.  But for jets and very distant shots with longer focal distances, the higher speeds are essential.
One option to achieving higher speeds is to open up the lens' F/stop.  I'm real comfortable at F11.  I'll go to F/8 if I need to but that's about my limit.
Another option is to increase the ISO.  Being brought up in the 35mm days, 100, 400 and 800 are my familiar numbers.  The advertising on my D7200 says I should be able to get up to 1600 without too much issue.
OK, let's find out.
I've seen a number of sites that demo ISO noise effects.  Mostly the changes are in the area of color and definition, plus the introduction of 'noise'.  I should be able to compensate for definition to keep away from a really soft look.  I should be able to saturate as necessary for color.  The noise?  We'll have to see.
Now what I really need is a subject.  And as luck would have it, the snowmobile races that I went to last year - were going on today.  This is as close to air races as I'm going to get today.
To get where I want to go, I'm using Manual Mode.  I have the lens set at F11 and the speed at 1/1000.  I took a few evaluation shots and found that when shooting in the sunlight, 1/1250 painted a very nice histogram.  With a year to prep, I have one data point.

ISO 1,000
Speed  1/1250
Aperture  F11
Mode Manual
Focal Length  27mm
(Just in case you missed it before.)

The JPG that Nikon created was OK.  On the RAW image, which is the one above, all I did was let Photoshop add some depth and I added just a bit of green saturation for the grass.

First test passed.  I think the image is fine.  Next test - will the D90 do as well?  (It's going out west too!)