Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sunser over Hanoi After the Rain.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Sunser over Hanoi After the Rain.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2015 at 13:28:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset over Hanoi
  • Umm... If you don't use auto WB, you need to use a 'preset' instead, which isn't necessary the correct option either. Setting WB manually in a RAW processor like Lightroom is much more likely to give you authentic colours. Are you not shooting in RAW? If not, you really should. Diliff (talk) 14:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I am shooting in RAW and am even discarding the JPG versions when importing the photos onto my library. I did this change of WB setting on the camera after noticing that the sky color was not consistent from one photo to the next when giving a first try at shooting this panorama. Still now, I see this issue while viewing the RAW photos in Lightroom, on top of having much paler colors in the sky. But the RAW photos that I took after disabling the automatic WB setting, which have the same Lightroom preset applied to them, don't have this issue and look much more vivid/authentic. As such, I'm not too sure what's happening but I conclude that disabling the automatic WB setting on the camera definitely has a positive effect, at least in this case :) -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 14:28, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you shoot RAW, then the WB setting in the camera has absolutely no effect on the RAW file. Normally it only affects JPGs. The WB setting is not 'solidified' until a JPG is created. Perhaps your RAW converter is using the camera's auto WB setting, but it would allow you to use any alternative WB setting when you process the RAW file and the camera's WB setting has no effect at all on that. Diliff (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diliff, the camera's chosen WB (and whether it was automatic or preset or custom) is saved in the RAW and used by all RAW converters as the default for processing. It also affects the embedded JPG preview, the image you see when chimping, and the histogram on your camera display. Yes you are free to change the WB in an authentic way that is not really possible once backed into the JPG. I'm curious you think this may only "perhaps" affect the converter -- perhaps you have your Lightroom set up to ignore this on import, or Canon doesn't save it? But Christopher, you are right that unless each frame in a panorama is consistent in temperature/tint then it won't stitch properly. As Diliff says, unless you use AWB then you yourself must choose how to interpret the temperature and tints on the scene. I think that unless you take great care, using manual WB will actually create a good deal of post-processing work as you have to fix all your indoor shots taken with "Cloudy" WB or all your outdoor shots taken with "Tungsten" WB. Most cameras do a pretty good job of this so I see no harm in leaving it on. You can always choose "Cloudy" later in Lightroom if you want. I use AWB but when I import a set that I want to make into a panorama, then I ensure they all have the same temperature and tint (pick one that looks right or the average value in the set). The other thing worth applying to all photos in your set is the same lens profile correction -- do this before exporting the TIFFs for panorama creation. -- Colin (talk) 17:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I said perhaps because it depends on your RAW converter, and your import settings (I don't set it to ignore the WB settings but the first thing I do when I open up an image is manually set the WB so the auto WB settings are almost irrelevant to me). Canon does embed the chosen in-camera WB settings, but the point is that regardless of what setting you use on your camera, you can (and normally, should) make any change you want when you process the RAW into a JPG. I just wanted to make sure that Christopher was aware that the in-camera WB settings are largely irrelevant in terms of processing RAW files. Yes, they might affect the default view when you first import the RAW file into a converter, but that's about it. No matter what WB settings your camera uses, you can change it later. That's the beauty of RAW. I just took issue with (or rather, I was concerned with) the statement that "disabling the automatic WB" with "no post-processing required" gives "authentic colours". Better to forget about in-camera WB and just adjust it manually later. Yes, it requires post-processing, but it's necessary. Neither auto-WB nor a preset will give accurate colours with regularity unless the lighting is very predictable and static. And then there's the question of what 'accurate colours' actually means, especially with something as inherently warm-tinted as a sunset... It's kind of a moot point. :-) Diliff (talk) 17:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The X100S is marketed as being able to render accurate colors when in JPG mode but so far my RAW photos weren't that accurate—by default—for such sunsets. I thought that this WB setting was maybe the key to unlock this trait without me doing some guesses in post-processing. I understand that I could have been wrong thinking this, and that I only have been lucky on that one. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assume your camera has various processing modes for its JPGs (with names like Standard, Natural, Vivid, Portrait). So what you see on your JPG does depend on what mode you've picked. Similarly, Lightroom/CameraRAW has several modes. The default is "Adobe Standard" which is supposed to be a calibrated neutral. Often there are other profiles available that are designed to more closely match the manufacturer's profiles (Sony's "Standard", is different to Adobe's). I don't know if these are available for Fuji but you may prefer them if available. See Adjust the color calibration for your camera and How to Get Accurate Fuji Colors in Lightroom. I see from this second article, that only the temperature/tint is transmitted from Fuji RAW to Lightroom, not the name of the white balance preset used. For the panoramas, the vital thing is that each frame has the same settings (whether done in the camera or in Lightroom doesn't matter), but the "correct" temperature for a sunset photo is really personal. -- Colin (talk) 07:46, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ignore the marketing, some cameras might be better than others at estimating the WB but you can only really be sure of it being neutralised in situations where there is only a single light source with a consistent WB temperature and a truly grey object that you can use to base your WB from. In any other complex situation like sunsets and scenes with multiple light sources (eg sunlight, incandescent lights, fluorescent lights, sodium lights), you can never truly get a neutral WB for all of them. Sometimes you simply don't want to either. As Colin says, your choice of WB for many scenes is not about 'correct' WB, it's about personal choice. For a sunset, you typically want warm hues, you don't want to neutralise them. Other scenes don't look very good if you don't completely neutralise the warm or cool hue. That's why manual adjustment of WB is crucial. Don't rely on your camera's WB settings whether it be auto or a preset. Use them as a starting point if you want, but use your own judgement when processing the RAW files to find what looks best for the scene. Diliff (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Please correct the typo in the filename. Daniel Case (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • They're water tanks. Probably to provide reliable water pressure? Hanoi is very flat - on a river delta, so I'm guessing the municipal water supply doesn't come from the mountains, and would require local water towers, or tanks on top of individual buildings. Diliff (talk) 19:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, they are water tanks but I had no idea what they were doing up there on each building of Vietnam until Diliff's explanation :) On a side note, it's not possible to see it on this photo but some terraces/balconies are surrounded with a mesh/grid. Why? So they can put some chicken there. With all these roosters shouting all day long, it's like living in a farm. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diliff, thank's for the explanation but lots of places are very flat and get water from low (including London). We have municipal water towers to supply the even pressure to our taps. I don't know why you would need a private personal version, unless the water supply was so erratic that you wanted to hoard some water for yourself. -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colin, I know we have water towers in London. I was just guessing that their water supply pressure is not reliable enough, I don't know for sure. But that's generally why people have water towers on top of the building. I did also find this article which suggests that it could be either because the maximum height of the water towers is less than the buildings, or because of the limitations of the building's plumbing. Diliff (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's funny you say that because, when checking the photo preview on my camera, I was so happy to see that the sky colors were identical but it's only later on that I regretted to not have also compared the colors/luminosity of the buildings. The sun was already below the horizon when the photo was taken though, so maybe the grayness is fair enough? I'll try to pay more attention next time. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 01:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's funny that KoH says the buildings have a 'greyness'. I'd say they are very strongly tinted blue actually, not grey. It relates to what I was talking about above in the WB discussion. You have set the WB for the sunset, at the expense of the foreground shadow detail, which has resulted in very cool tones in the shadows. Not that you did anything wrong. You could manually reduce the saturation of the blues to compensate but that would only make it more grey, not less. If you use Lightroom, you could also 'paint' a warm WB adjustment over the shadows to compensate. Diliff (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect he means that the buildings are rather desaturated, rather than that they are neutral grey (they aren't, but are blueish). The red roofs for example, are not vivid, which they would be in daylight. -- Colin (talk) 10:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Sunser_over_Hanoi_After_the_Rain.jpg&oldid=163266189"