Oh, OK. I guess you live around 2-3 kilometers from the beach.
Mark
… I thought what I needed to do, is replace my “.dop” file with yours, then re-open the image, which will incorporate all your corrections.
Sure, when you replace your dop-file with mine (others), you’ll see what ‘we’ have done.
– Then, playing with ‘our’ settings, that is how you learn …
So, go back to those photos and try out yourself. Maybe you leave a comment, about what you found out, what you think, what you don’t like …
Just to continue posting doesn’t help you to improve (guess, you are serious about).
I didn’t realize this - I’ll try it later today. So, I can use a mask to cover a larger area, and then select an “eraser” (with adequate feathering) and correct what the first mask had done? So if I use a gradient mask to cover the sky, an it unintentionally covers other parts of the image, I can “erase” the effects of the gradient filter from those places?
That’s what I tried to do, but your way sounds much better.
Thank you - I need to learn “simple” first, before I work with “complicated”.
Did I read that right - the first time I might want to adjust white balance, PL4 will say it is at 5400, regardless of how it looks on my screen? Strange…
What a wonderful, wintery, beautiful, freezing, photogenic, uncomfortable place to go. I enjoyed watching the video, looking for things that might make a nice photo, but it looks like a VERY uncomfortable place to photograph. Need to keep camera warm enough so it works, need to prevent frostbite, need to stay warm or use an extra high shutter speed to take care of the “shivers”. On a day like that, I think my enthusiasm for photography would be overwhelmed by my desire to remain warm and comfortable. I wonder how this looks on a sunny, not-so-windy, day? I think you’re lucky to have access to this place, but maybe on a nicer day… 
Your illustrations made this infinitely easier. I’ve never (yet) tried any of that. I didn’t realize there even WAS an eraser. My PL4 mental “toolbox” is getting more and more stuffed with tools. That is wonderful! THANK YOU!!
@mikemyers – concerning your AF Nikkor 24mm f/2,8D etc
As you can see from here https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/f-mount/singlefocal/wide/af_24mmf_28d/index.htm or here https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/24mm-f28-afd.htm
your 24mm lens can be focused as close as 0,30 cm (~12").
– The report from ExifTool < Focus Distance 0,03m > is simply misleading, to say the least.
Checking your original photo _MJM2169 2020-12-25-Biscayne Jet Ski and Miami.nef you see,
that your lens is prone to some degree of Chromatic Aberation (see comment from @George).
I solved this problem (and more) in _MJM2169 2020-12-25-Biscayne Jet Ski and Miami.nef.dop
(20,9 KB)
– Your photo is sharp, otherwise all antennas, sailing boats and cranes wouldn’t be crisp enough
[depth of field at 0,30 cm / f8 never reach infinity].
Sunset pics are often counter light scenes. When important parts are not (cannot be) illuminated, present them as clear silhouettes as you did (compare to the difficult trial to bring back colour to your fisherman).
have fun, Wolfgang
Interesting - I will go back and see what you did.
Of the two images I did last night that I didn’t like, one of them is now fixed to where I think it’s acceptable. It was obvious I forgot to crop a little more off the top. I updated the “.dop” file below.
What bothered me was that I was shooting into the reflection of the sun, and everything was so bright, but my first attempt left things looking too dark. One more image to go.
L1002355 | 2021-02-07-Mt Sinai and Biscayne Bay.dng.dop (469.4 KB)
2pm Miami time - I lightened up the small boat and the people, and very slightly lightened the trees at the water’s edge.
Bummer - it’s not immediately obvious that the small boat and people are in focus, but everything else is not. Viewed in a large size, this is more obvious.
One more photo to edit, #2360.
I will mount the 24mm Nikon lens on my D750, and take a couple of photos at ISO 500, f/8, 5600K, exposure meter set to “averaging”.
Here are the two images:
The indicators on the Nikon told me that some areas of the first image were slightly over-exposed. That everything looks “dull”, is because that’s what I see looking out my window.
Hopefully the tools you use will find that both images “make sense”.
Based on suggestions from Joanna, the D750 is now in aperture priority mode, and auto-iso is de-activated. I had forgotten how much I enjoy the D750.
Done. Not sure about the airplane, probably distracting, but it is part of what I photographed.
L1002360 | 2021-02-07-Mt Sinai and Biscayne Bay.dng (26.8 MB)
L1002360 | 2021-02-07-Mt Sinai and Biscayne Bay.dng.dop (13.1 KB)
Hopefully the tools you use will find that both images “make sense”.
Sorry, I’m not interested in test shots. – Go back to the photos, ‘we’ already edited and learn from them.
To get a quick overview you can switch on Active corrections. Then deactivate this button and play with the tools listed before.
Will do, this evening.
When I get to see what “we” have done (you all get 99% of the credit, not me) I get the most satisfaction out of taking another photo, and using the things I’ve learned, edit it better than my previous attempt. As to the 24mm, I was starting to think that either the lens had a problem, or I had made a mistake.
Once you all show me something, and I see how it works, I immediately want to try it on a new image. Most of the time this works - ever so often I’m left scratching my head, until I figure out the reason.
It’s not you, it’s me. I can watch PhotoJoseph do something on my computer, pause the video, and try it on my own, quite often not getting the expected result. So I watch again, and try again. If it still doesn’t work, I play his video just a little, then do the exact same thing. Then repeat. The things you show me are similar - I need to think them through, and understand them. Once I know “why” you did it, it not only works for me, but it becomes part of my “toolbox”. As an example, to make an area lighter, I always used to use a tool to reduce the exposure. Then Joanna corrected me, do it by reducing the shadow slider. I’m not totally sure WHY it works differently, but it does seem more effective. Also, I used to use tools like a volume knob on my audio device. Now I use it so much more sparingly.
I’m still amazed by things that should be obvious. On my ASUS display, when something looks good in the evening, I know it’s good. By contrast, if I slide the image to my iMac, it rarely looks as good. Before PL4 and all of you, I never realized how important this is. So for all these years, when I thought I was making beautiful photographs on my screen, that might have all been for nothing.
In two weeks I expect to be using a Mac Mini that I’m getting from my nephew. The display will be the ASUS, calibrated. If my iMac becomes a second display for the Mini, it will also be calibrated.
Yes, lots of comments, but I keep at it until it (eventually) makes sense. Then I find new concepts, such as the “eraser” for local adjustments. I week ago I didn’t realize this. Pretty difficult to spell words correctly until you know the alphabet. 
One lesson I learned from that is to not even try next time. If something is pretty much in deep shadow, it’s a waste of time to struggle to make it look like it wasn’t in shadow. That photo is very frustrating to me. On the other hand, I never would have learned my lesson if I didn’t at least try. I guess it depends on how deep the shadow is. Then Joanna said it didn’t need to be brought back at all - she could see a little of the color without modifying it.
Maybe one of the reasons I often do shoot into the sun, is because I was told not to.
Regarding what you wrote up above, I guess my plan is to bring out the sunset colors, and ignore what’s in the shade - but in the image I did last night, maybe I brought them out too much. Last night, I thought it was fine. When I woke up, it looked “too colorful”. Maybe I have “selective memory”, and I “remember” what I wanted to see, not what I actually did see. But what I ended up last night is close to the way the sky looked to me… I kept taking photos, and the colors started fading from one photo to the next. The sky at the left has already faded somewhat, and that “fading” moved from left to right, until all the golden light had vanished…
I am thoroughly confused. I downloaded your “.dop” file, put it into my folder for PL4 and the image didn’t change - it was still my last view, with my watermark.
I deleted every file in that folder other than the “.nef” and again copied your “.dop” into the folder. Nothing changed.
I thought all I needed to do was replace my .dop file with yours. What am I missing? Your image is “lower” than mine, so it should be instantly obvious.
Once I replace my old “.dop” file with yours, do I need to do something else to get PL4 to recognize your “.dop” file?
Well, they look like reasonably well exposed ordinary photos.
No overt signs of over or under-exposure.
Did you mean to post the originals?
You may need to delete the database and cache. See my message here
Or this.
George
1 Like
i don’t know enough of this but is CA not a more object aura kind of thing?
a mis a linement of light? not a glow spread like this?
with a CA tool or manual?
i see that you leave the greenisch low left to mid left be present, (green bridgelight i think)
true as in it hide’s more trouble when raising.
Are you more like expose so it’s a silhouette in dark blackisch way or expose as much as possible to the right in order to have as much detail as you can get in the shadows?
(i gues that looking at it just with your eye’s they adjust and there was more to see then this.)
i use EV compensation in my camera to dail up the shadows as much as possible or use different exposures by hand or bracketting so i can choose at home.
what i find strange in this particular image is the colors in the water surface.
is this reflection or CA?
i made some, but the haze and dim diffused light makes it difficult to create enough contrast and thus detail. i have my first selection. (watch it in full on tv to see the flaws.)
my G80/pl12-60mm should handle this cold and snow. i used a plastic Zipback to switch lenses.
One thing i forgot was letting the system slowy warmup in the halway so there was some condens( like your glasses do when you walk inside) when i looked in the lens.
(there isn’t a vacuüm in there so it’s best to leave it in the transportbag for a wile so it can slower warming up.)
No harm done this time, no drops so no residu left.
wel i think i go back in the spring.(for reference )
some i like
i wasn’t cold good clothing and shoes. only walking through snow is heavy for the leggs and sitting down for months (covid rules) wasn’t a good preperation so to speak.
bad knees so i they reacted same as my muscles on the spot… auch. But no pain no gain… 
Yes!
… and when he took the photo with the fisherman, he better had taken care of the horizon line to avoid to ‘cut’ his neck. Instead, lower the camera to bring him up against the sky or raise the camera a bit to position the silhouette against the water while reducing the (empty) sky … for better composition.