MG Char's Zaku II 2.0 (with a Sony α7 IV)

First of all, apologies to ohai for the filesize on this post.

I love the Zaku II. Probably my favorite mobile suit design, besides maybe the Barbatos Lupus. The MG Zaku II 2.0 is a fantastic rendition of the suit, and definitely worth getting.

I borrowed my friend's Sony α7 IV mirrorless camera and took some (unfortunately not bright enough) pictures in a lightbox.

@gunpla

#gunpla #gundam #universalcentury #mastergrade #modelkits #mecha #plamo

It’s post like this that are the reason I’m on the fediverse.
Grandpa is still my favorite but I reallyyyyy love this one. Still need to finally assemble one. Awesome work and the photo is great
@Marshezezz Grandpa is growing on me. When I first got into gunpla and Gundam in general my opinion of the RX-78-2 was ... not kind. Now I'm actually looking forward to assembling the RG Ver 2.0.

Flubbing the lightbox exposure is no big deal since you can fix it in post. I do it all the time. Most competent image editors will have a tool that allows you to set the white point by poking some particular part of the image.

You can also be a titanic stickler like yours truly and knock out any vagaries in the background with a mask.

Here you go:

@dual_sport_dork That looks great, thank you. These pictures are actually after I tried to fix them in Darktable. It was even darker with the default adjustments. I'll have to play around with the raw images again and see how I'd get closer to yours.

I don’t know from Darktable because believe it or not, I basically never use it.

(I am of the opinion that obsessive insistence on RAW development boils down to hipster posing, only because “everyone knows” that Real Pros Only Edit RAW. Bullshit. You are holding in your hands a $2200 piece of photography equipment designed by extremely serious and very talented engineers that’s jam packed with dedicated, purpose-built image processing chips specifically tuned to work in concert with the hardware in your camera and output final images already processed for you, all of the above backed by decades of experience. But no, some dweeb on Youtube tells you he knows better. Rant concludes.)

Anyway, what I did was take Corel PhotoPaint’s white point tool and stab approximately here:

Then I turned brightness down -10, and contrast up +5, based purely on speculation:

Then I punched vibrance up +5, and decided that looks pretty good:

Then I negative masked the background with the “magic wand” (i.e. color similarity) mask tool. There were also a couple of crumbs around the foot in the lower right I had to mask off by hand:

Feather the mask by a wide radius (I used 300px) so that knocking out the background will not leave any harsh edges:

Then invert the mask and delete it, whilst your background color is set to pure white:

Et voila. These are heavily downscaled. You get the idea.

The reason for using a negative mask (i.e. you mask off as if to exclude the subject, then feather, then invert) is so that the edges of the image don’t also become mask edges, which results in a highly amateur looking and distinctive square vignette around the corners, which you then then have to airbrush out. Fuck all that noise; do your mask backwards, then invert it. I learned this the hard way, many years ago.

You could probably do the same in GIMP, if you were committed to figuring out just where the hell it hides all the requisite tools, or which of them inexplicably require an external plugin. I already have a Corel license due to work. Therefore, the hell with it.

Apropos of nothing, just now I tried playing around with Darktable’s white point tool (located in, apparently, the rgb levels module). I can’t tell if it’s busted, or if it just doesn’t work the way I expect it to. Part of this is no doubt due to the mantra that “Darktable is not a creative tool,” but is instead intended for correction. It’s not an image editor. But we are significantly altering the aesthetic of an image for artistic purposes; that’s creativity. Not to mention the inevitable removal of dust, fingerprints, blemishes on your backdrop surface, etc. At least that’s what I always wind up having to do, which means you need to fire up a real image editor anyway.

You can achieve similar results in Darktable by messing around with the exposure slider located, appropriately enough, in the exposure module while optimally keeping the overexposure warning (press O on your keyboard) enabled. But this is imprecise and annoying, and difficult to make consistent. Not to worry; someone will surely come along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong, and point out the correct six or seven ways an individual might accomplish half of this, along with the nine or ten ways they’ll have to do the other half.

Darktable is also, if you ask me, the sibling poster child to everything wrong with open source UI design right there alongside GIMP. Why for the love of all that is holy, for instance, are so many things expressed in numeric values that you can’t type in, and only manipulate via sliders? Why is the reset button so hard to find? I could go on forever. The world would be a better place if people could see their way clear to not parroting to newcomers that they absolutely “must” shoot RAW and use Darktable when all they really wanted to do was take acceptable pictures of their models or knives or whatever.

(using my Lemmy account because Mastodon doesn’t handle large posts very well)

Thank you for the info. I’d never even heard of Corel Photo-Paint. My main reason to use RAW images is because my personal camera is not a $2,200 piece of equipment; it is an entry-level Nikon from 2012. The images it produces alongside the RAW ones are like 1 MB jpegs (from what I remember). That said, I definitely need to refine my image workflow.

As much as this sounds like heresy, if you have a vaguely recent phone you may find that it does a better job for close-in stuff like this than a crusty old DSLR. Not better than a shiny new DLSR or mirrorless, probably, but compared to what you’ve got you’ll probably be surprised. If you have an Android phone in particular you can use Open Camera which gives you a wide array of manual controls and options probably well above and beyond what your phone’s stock camera app offers you, and it can also do bracketing — not just exposure but also focus bracketing. You may find this helpful.

Many of the advantages of a DLSR are moot and/or the disadvantages of a phone’s camera mitigated, because you’re taking a photo of a stationary subject all at the same distance in very controlled lighting conditions, and probably off of a tripod. So having a massive sensor with low light capability, a versatile array of interchangeable lenses for different situations, optical stabilization, etc. all really don’t matter. Exposure consistency matters, and being able to get as many sharp pixels across your subject as possible.

It’s been a while since I gave Open Camera a try. My main issue with using my phone for these pictures was just getting the thing to focus where I wanted it and not make everything yellow in my work’s less-than-optimal lighting. I’ll have to experiment some with focus and/or exposure bracketing in Open Camera and see if that gets me closer to where I want.

Thank you again!

Absolutely. I’m always stoked to help a fellow nerd.

Open Camera has manual white balance settings you can use to compensate for wonky lighting, and as you know you can also always twiddle with that in postprocessing. You can also manually focus with a slider. I used it extensively before I shelled out for my Canon R10, and many of my knife reviews up until last year were shot exclusively on my dinkum Moto G5. I did find it immensely helpful to use a 3D printed clamp thingy to affix my phone to a tripod so it wasn’t jiggling around.