You probably know the word lumen if you have been interested in the brightness of the light in a lightbulb or a flashlight. For my bicycle lights, I always study how many lumen they generate, as I want to be as visible as possible in the traffic. So the more lumen, the brighter the light is.
The luminance of the colors in an image is perhaps best illustrated using the sliders from Lightroom:
The luminance slider in Lightroom.
As you can see, the more luminance a given color has in the examples above, the more bright it appears to be.
The above sliders are “tweaks” you can make to the luminance in Lightroom, but in addition to this each color has an inherent level of luminance value. So blue is less bright than say yellow, just to pick two colors that luminance wise are at the opposite end of the scale. This is probably also why blue and yellow work well together as contrast colors – I often notice this when I see the Swedish flag.
Example with brightness changed in post processing. Before left, after right.
In the example above I have reduced the brightness of green and increased it for red, and as you can see it gives a very different expression. Had I reduced the exposure in Lightroom, the brightness of all colors would have been changed at the same time – here I can work with the brightness of each color and how bright they are individually.
To me hue is the same as color. It may not be entirely correct, but this definition works for me as a photographer using Lightroom and Photoshop.
The hue sliders in Lightroom.
To me hue is the color in its purest form. If you look at the sliders in the image above, I can take Magneta at the bottom to become red if I pull it to the right or more purple if I pull it to the left. This is changes to the color as such in its purest form. Notice that each color slider picks up where the previous left, if you go from top to bottom.
You can saturate the color more or less or change the luminance (add white), but this is a different dimension than the color as such. When you change the saturation or the luminance, the hue remains the same.
You probably think of monochrome as black and white and the shades of grey in between, i.e. that monochrome is the same as a black and white image. This is how it is often used, but monochrome means that only one color or hue is present in the image.
“Chromaticism” is the greek word for color. So monochromatic underlines that only one color is present. You can of course have different versions of that color by having different tints (adding white) and shades (adding grey/black) to the pure color (hue).
I think of monochrome and monochromatic as being one and the same, but this is not entirely correct. However, for practical purposes working as a photographer, I think this assumption works just fine.
In real life the colors here looked amazing, but it does not really come across in the image.
You can work to achieve monochromatic images by using colored filters or post processing the image or a bit of both. Personally, I use Lightroom to tweak my images to a monochromatic look.
Pulling a few sliders in Lightroom, it is possible to change the image to be (almost) monochromatic.
The reason for using a monochromatic color scheme is to simplify the image and take out some distractions. If you have a scene where there are many different colors, reducing the variety of colors down to monochromatic can help the viewer to see more of the structures and textures in the image, and help the scene appear more calm.
Pictures are by nature 2 dimensional, trying to capture a 3 dimensional world. Thinking in foreground, midground and background (or distance) when you compose your image, can help bring the illusion to life that the image has a third dimension. So putting something in the foreground to give a bit of edge or contrast relative to the subject (typically found in the midground) can help make your image appear more 3D like.
The moss and straws in the foreground serves as foreground attraction here. Some prefer the foreground to be tack sharp and have leading lines pulling the viewer into the scene – here it is more used as a way of framing.
Another role of the foreground can be to help bring the viewer closer to the scene.If you shoot a portrait of a person and the edge of the picture depicts a door, or if you shoot your subject through some vegetation, where the viewer almost feels like they are hiding somewhere and studying the subject.
The brutal stem here in the foreground brings the viewer closer to the scene relative to a composition where only trees in the distance were in the frame.The stems left and right not only frame the scene, but gives the illusion that you as a viewer stand next to the stems and look at the bridge in the distance.A more “classic” use of foreground attraction where it almost feels like the foam filled wave is about to pull you into the ocean again!
The point is not to put something in the foreground each and every time. When shooting silhouette photography for example, the whole point is to play with the picture being 2-dimensional! But you can use it as one of many tools in your toolbox, exactly when you see the need to make your D2 images appear more 3D-ish!
When put next to each other, complementary colors gives the biggest contrast and – for reasons beyond me – are an appealing combination to the human eye. You can use this knowledge if you work in a studio where the combination of the color of the models clothing and the color of the backdrop can be matched as complementary colors. Or you can use it in post to say do split toning to the highlights and lows using two complementary colors to do so.
The color wheel here as a screen shot from Lightroom.
Complementary colors sit exactly opposite each other in the color wheel, so if you follow the edge of the color wheel through all 360 degrees, you will find all the possible combinations. However, many of these are gradual changes from one color to another, so a more “black and white” presentation of the complementary colors could be:
Red and green
Yellow and violet
Orange and blue
Some photographers like Finn Beales are able to color grade their entire image portfolios in a consistent way and clearly using their knowledge of color science in general and complementary colors in particular. If you can follow this lead, it could be a way for you to develop a portfolio of images that stands out from the crowd and enables you to brand your work so it is easy to recognize.
Split toning is simply to apply different colors to the highlights and lows in the image. You are changing the original colors based on the intensity of the light. Subject to the colors chosen, the emotional response to an image pre and post split toning can be very different.
The original image without split toning.
I see many photographers using split toning to get a distinct look to their images so the color profile is consistent throughout their portfolio. I am no master here and my colors are all over the place, but when reading the book by Finn, I could clearly see how strong a tool color grading in general and split toning in particular is. So if you have the energy and the discipline, split toning is a great tool for making your images distinct and different than most of what you find on say Instagram.
Red-orange applied to the highlights. Blues added to the lows. Notice how especially the branch over the waster pops out much more in this version.
I apply split toning when working in Lightroom, and Lightroom even allows you to add 3 levels of toning: high, mids and lows. But in the example above I have just used highs and lows. The colors used are blue for the lows and a red-orange one for the highs.
It is not a coincidence that I have used orange and blue. These two colors sit opposite each other on the color wheel and are thus complementary colors. Complementary colors create the biggest contrast, and as you probably know, contrast draws attention. In addition, complementary colors apparently are pleasing to the eye – I have no idea why, but judging from my own experience it sounds about right.
Some years back when I bought my copy of the Nikon D4, I did consider the Nikon D4s, but decided to go with the D4. I have since then made a few videos over at my channel about my experience with the D4 and over there I have several times got the question: Frederik, why did you go with the Nikon D4 and not the D4S? Clearly, the D4S is a better camera, seems to be the thinking behind the question.
My beloved Nikon D4.
Service
The D4S is a better camera than the Nikon D4, no doubt about it. It is also a younger camera, released in 2014 and produced all the way to 2016, when it was replaced by the D5. And this is probably one of the first differences between the cameras: because the D4S is younger, you can probably still get it serviced by Nikon. There is no official policy from Nikon on this matter, but word on the street is that Nikon will service and offer spare parts to cameras until they are 10 years old. And hence the D4S clearly has a better chance of being serviced today should something happen to it, rather than the D4.
The age is reflected in another difference: the price. At the introduction, the D4S was around 500 USD more expensive than the D4, but the relative difference now between the two is much bigger than that. The D4S price for a used copy is significantly more expensive, and I cannot imagine it is all related to the technical improvements. It has to be because photographers also factor in that if the camera breaks down or needs service, then the D4 is a dead end whereas the D4S still is “live”.
That said, with an expected shutter count around 400.000 and the knowledge that Nikon cameras often go way beyond the expected shutter count, I doubt that I will ever see the end of my D4. But it is of course a risk that I cannot get it serviced or repaired, if need be.
If you shoot a lot in low light, you’ll love the fact that the buttons are backlit. And the small LCD enables you to see and set the ISO, white balance and image quality easily.
EXPEED
One of the major upgrades from the D4 to the D4S is the processor capacity, and the EXPEED 3 is replaced by the EXPEED 4 – about 1/3rd more computing capacity in the D4S.
I think this is one of the reasons why the D4S spec sheet wise is better when it comes to FPS and a more advanced auto focus system. The increased computing power simply gave the engineers at Nikon more headroom to develop the software in the AF system. And this could be important to you, but it is not important to me, as I am mainly an outdoor photographer. If portraiture or street photography is you line of business, then the improvements in the AF system could be vital for you.
There are other updates like a wider ISO range, a stronger battery and slightly redesigned joysticks for better comfort. But again, I think I’ll be fine without these improvements.
Conclusion
There are other differences between the D4 and the D4S and the intention was not to list them all. If you want to see a full spec compare, it is right here.
The D4 was one of the very best cameras the camera industry could offer approx. 10 years ago, and to me choosing between the D4 and the D4S is a bit like choosing between Bentley and Rolls Royce. Both are amazing!
The point is that the improvements made going from the D4 to the D4S simply was not important to me, and with the (in relative terms) significant price difference between the two cameras, my choice was easy.
But this shoe fits my foot. That does not mean it will fit yours. Your criteria are probably different and hence you will need to make your own assessment when choosing between the D4 and the D4S. But I hope my story here has helped you get a little closer to making the decision that is right for you.
I think the best way to describe color saturation is that a completely desaturated image is a black and white image! So the intensity of the color is the saturation. And a color that is completely desaturated is just a shade of grey.
The more grey you add to a color, the less saturated it is. (This is probably not technically correct, but I find it to be a good pragmatic way to think of it).
The saturation slider in Lightroom, here in the middle. Notice the value all to the left (grey).
The saturation of a color in real life is a given, but you can tweak the saturation of a color in post processing. The above I have cut from the post processing tool Lightroom, where the slider in the middle – in this example – allows you to take the intensity of the red color from grey (all the way to the left) to a very intense red (all the way to the right).
As colors speaks to and invoke our emotions, desaturating an image can make it more subtle and calm. So if you want the structures and textures to play a bigger role in your image, taking the saturation down can change the balance in what elements in your picture that dominates.
You can also use saturation to change the balance between different colors, so if you have a red field of flowers on a green bed of branches and leaves, you may want to desaturate the green color a bit to give room for the red flowers shine (relatively) more.
Banding is when the gradual transition from light to dark is not represented in a smooth and gradual way in the image, but rather abrupt changes from one level to another. It often happens in bands, just like you can see a height curve on a map. So that beautiful setting sun is not so beautiful, as the sky above it is shown as bands of red, orange and yellow!
Left: Exported with a image quality of 10%, right: ditto at 100%. The banding is visible in the image left as lines tilting to the left.
On this homepage you will find a lot of banding going on, and that is because I have to export the images highly compressed to support fast load time.
Banding is not for colors only. Here the same image as before, but zoomed in a bit more ad converted to B&W. Banding is just as visible in the shades of grey as it is in colors.
So banding is very often caused by compression, i.e. that a JPG image is throwing away too much information as it compresses the file to save space. Being a bit of a photo nerd, I often notice banding then I watch a movie on my 48″ LG TV, and I think the banding also here is caused by compression.
Banding is easy to see when a color is transitioning slowly from dark to light, but it is just as noticeable in black and white (see above).
Resolution
Banding is not because the image has too little resolution, but because the information stored to reproduce each pixel is too little. So a fix can be to make sure the images are stored with 16-bits of information per channel rather than 8-bits, i.e. to shoot in RAW or TIFF formats and make sure the information per channel is 16-bits. However, the issue with banding is often not at the source, but when exporting it to JPGs and my best advice here is to go as light as possible with the compression.
Another fix is to introduce a bit of noise when editing the image, so the noise acts as details added to the image and hence softens the transition along the banding. This can be a good strategy if your image is created with too little information per pixel.
You can get into some very technical discussion around banding and why it happens and some photographers are very frustrated to find banding in their prints that is not on screen etc. I am no expert here and do not have all the answers. My ambition here was just to give some insights to what banding is and a few high level fixes should it come your way.
