Question why are some corals so bright?

[Dkuhlmann]

LOL I'm the wrong person to ask that question. You should ask it in the Photography forum here. But I believe that the biggest reason is that they are now taking the pictures of corals in RAW format instead of JPEG and RAW provides for better color manipulation. Still not sure as I have never worked with either program, but I did download Lightroom and will be getting taught how to use it in the next few weeks.

 

[jrp1588]

LOL I'm the wrong person to ask that question. You should ask it in the Photography forum here. But I believe that the biggest reason is that they are now taking the pictures of corals in RAW format instead of JPEG and RAW provides for better color manipulation. Still not sure as I have never worked with either program, but I did download Lightroom and will be getting taught how to use it in the next few weeks.

I'll look into it. Photoshop takes raw format as well. Doesn't matter since I don't have a camera that saves in raw.

 

[Dkuhlmann]

I know nothing about RAW format but the Canon EOS Rebel XTi 400D I just got does have the ability to save in RAW. I've not played with it yet but will be in the next few weeks.

Lightroom is from the same people that produce Photoshop.

 

[ricks49reef]

Why not call one of the Kardashians,they know all the secrets to making things look better than they are.

 

[mpderksen]

I know nothing about RAW format but the Canon EOS Rebel XTi 400D I just got does have the ability to save in RAW. I've not played with it yet but will be in the next few weeks.



Lightroom is from the same people that produce Photoshop.

Lightroom has a great photo organizer and few features than full Photoshop (layers?). I think it replaced Elements, but could be wrong. I have both (Creative Cloud subscription) and rarely need the power of full photoshop. My nephew can use PS to do amazing stuff, but the learning curve is too steep for me.

 

[dkeller_nc]

I'm a graphic designer, and I keep hearing about light room, but haven't gotten around to trying it. What makes it better than Photoshop?

If you're a photoshop user, there's no reason to mess with Lightroom. Lightroom has all of the same tools as in Photoshop, except they're "packaged" with an eye to post-processing of photos.

As a long-time PS user, I can certainly see why PS is intimidating to unintiated - very little of what you can do is obvious from the user interface.

 

[Timfish]

One thing to keep in mind is we are selecting corals that are more colorful, some varieties have multiple copies of genes that let them make more fluorescing protein than others

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mec.13041/pdf

There's still many questions but fluorescent proteins have at least four roles. A coral may use flourescing proteins on top of the zooxanthellae for photo protection or beside/underneath the zooxanthellae for photo enhancment. The fluorescing proteins may be used as part the corals immune system. They may also be used to deal with free radicals in the corals cells. (When fluorescing proteins are used for photo enhancement by reducing nutrients and reducing zooxanthellae a coral may appear brighter.)

http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/4244/
http://www.reef.edu.au/OHG/HG papers/Salih, Hoegh-Guldberg and Cox et al 1997 - fluoro.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1764454/
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25470724?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

When fluorescing proteins are being used for photo enhancement reducing the zooxantheallae will make the make the coral brighter. But the coral is not increasing it's fluorescing proteins. In this study looking at heat and cold stress shows that even though a coral can look brighter and have a measurable increase in brightness it can have in fact a reduction of fluorescing proteins.

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep01421

 

[jraker]

It is explained well in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYEnzkprH1E

Usually only very colorful videos are collected, and blue light also helps.

 

[theatrus]

If you're a photoshop user, there's no reason to mess with Lightroom. Lightroom has all of the same tools as in Photoshop, except they're "packaged" with an eye to post-processing of photos.



As a long-time PS user, I can certainly see why PS is intimidating to unintiated - very little of what you can do is obvious from the user interface.

There are a few key differences in Lightroom's image flow. Specifically, the entire image is always processed as a float32 per pixel, which avoids all risk of posterization or railing. Also, all manipulation starts from the mosaiced image sensor source up, so nothing is set in stone. It's Adobe Camera Raw, without ever baking any of the ACR settings as you would in PS. (Photoshop can also run in 32bpp, but users rarely do, and some tools become limited in this depth).

 

[dkeller_nc]

To be honest, I've never encountered an issue with posterization from the limits of 8-bit RGB files. But on the other hand, I tend not to make much in the way of extreme color shifts and other manipulations. And while I get the difference between PS and LR with respect to the original image file, I also don't concern myself with it because it's my habit to always save the original camera RAW file in a catalog and only save copies that have been manipulated in PS.

That said, if someone asked me "which should I get" and they've currently have neither, I'd tell them to get LR because of its cataloging capabilities, lower price, and ease of use. In fact, if I understand correctly, you can still purchase LR as a "owned" application, whereas you can't with PS - it now requires a per-month subscription.

 

[jrp1588]

There are a few key differences in Lightroom's image flow. Specifically, the entire image is always processed as a float32 per pixel, which avoids all risk of posterization or railing. Also, all manipulation starts from the mosaiced image sensor source up, so nothing is set in stone. It's Adobe Camera Raw, without ever baking any of the ACR settings as you would in PS. (Photoshop can also run in 32bpp, but users rarely do, and some tools become limited in this depth).

Well that's way over my head. I'm much more of an InDesign and illustrator user.