Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: China Camp Pier  (Read 4380 times)
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 998


WWW
« on: June 25, 2008, 11:39:59 AM »
ReplyReply

C & C welcomed.  This is a first stab at a more interpretive style for me.

Contax 645.  35mm, f8, 1/125 sec, ISO 100.  P30 back.

Thanks,
Ron H.

[attachment=7223:attachment]
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 11:44:18 AM by Colorwave » Logged

peteh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2008, 09:00:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
C & C welcomed.  This is a first stab at a more interpretive style for me.

Contax 645.  35mm, f8, 1/125 sec, ISO 100.  P30 back.

Thanks,
Ron H.

[attachment=7223:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I live in Santa Rosa, Is China Camp back off 101 going South by Black Point?
Logged
Richowens
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 839



« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2008, 09:31:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Ron,
 I have a weakness for old piers and this one is no exception, I like it.

Pete,
Yeah, just go south to San Rafael and turn left.  

China Camp State Park is out on the point just east of Terra Linda/San Rafael, can't remember the turnoff. Haven't been there in 15 years. In my case Google and Garmin are my friends.


Rich
Logged

Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 998


WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2008, 11:16:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Jeff is right.  Take the South San Pedro exit off of 101 and take it all the way to the bay (about 10 minutes).  It was a fishing village for Chinese immigrants from about 1860.  They conveniently tie the replica junk you see in my shot at the pier in the summer.
-Ron H.
Logged

peteh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201


WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2008, 05:55:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Jeff is right.  Take the South San Pedro exit off of 101 and take it all the way to the bay (about 10 minutes).  It was a fishing village for Chinese immigrants from about 1860.  They conveniently tie the replica junk you see in my shot at the pier in the summer.
-Ron H.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203734\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Have not been back there in years.Had to look at the Google Sat. View to see where it was.I have a TOM TOM that works good, I think I'll go there this weekend.

How did you Process the image,I'm a sucker for B&W with some Color in it!.
By the way, did not look like a Junk to me.In fact, I did not see it before you said it was there ! Sometimes I look at the overall shot then have to go back and look at the real fine points.This smoke up here in SR is Bad!Playing with my eyes!
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 998


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2008, 06:32:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have not been back there in years.Had to look at the Google Sat. View to see where it was.I have a TOM TOM that works good, I think I'll go there this weekend.

How did you Process the image,I'm a sucker for B&W with some Color in it!.
By the way, did not look like a Junk to me.In fact, I did not see it before you said it was there ! Sometimes I look at the overall shot then have to go back and look at the real fine points.This smoke up here in SR is Bad!Playing with my eyes!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203871\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
peteh-

You are right about the smoke these days.  California has a long summer ahead of it if it is burning this much in June.

Regarding my post approach, it is primarily three layers.  For the base layer, I used the B&W filter to drain the color in a controlled way.  Over that is a duplicate of that layer that I gave a fairly strong gaussian blur.  That layer was set to normal mode, but had a layer mask that I painted on to selectively control the blur/depth of field.  The third layer was my original color shot, slightly mucked with, colorwise, with a little bit of blur on a layer set for color blend.  Other than that, I had a curves adjustment layer and that was pretty much it, from a technique standpoint.  The sky had some nice elements that worked with the diagonal composition, but needed some help to give it a bit more detail in the upper region and a bit more color at the horizon, so there was a little more pixel pushing than just the three layers.

I don't like it particularly much when I see this reduced version in my browser window, even with color managed Safari and a web friendly sRGB profile.  The original is in ProPhoto and much, much richer.  I tried to compensate a little for how it displayed online, but did not get it as close as I would like.  The consolation is that I printed it with my Z3100 at 36" wide on Photo Rag paper and really like it.  The ironic part is that had I only seen this on LL, I'm not sure I would have felt enough to post a comment.

Thanks,
Ron
Logged

peteh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201


WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2008, 08:31:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
peteh-

You are right about the smoke these days.  California has a long summer ahead of it if it is burning this much in June.

Regarding my post approach, it is primarily three layers.  For the base layer, I used the B&W filter to drain the color in a controlled way.  Over that is a duplicate of that layer that I gave a fairly strong gaussian blur.  That layer was set to normal mode, but had a layer mask that I painted on to selectively control the blur/depth of field.  The third layer was my original color shot, slightly mucked with, colorwise, with a little bit of blur on a layer set for color blend.  Other than that, I had a curves adjustment layer and that was pretty much it, from a technique standpoint.  The sky had some nice elements that worked with the diagonal composition, but needed some help to give it a bit more detail in the upper region and a bit more color at the horizon, so there was a little more pixel pushing than just the three layers.

I don't like it particularly much when I see this reduced version in my browser window, even with color managed Safari and a web friendly sRGB profile.  The original is in ProPhoto and much, much richer.  I tried to compensate a little for how it displayed online, but did not get it as close as I would like.  The consolation is that I printed it with my Z3100 at 36" wide on Photo Rag paper and really like it.  The ironic part is that had I only seen this on LL, I'm not sure I would have felt enough to post a comment.

Thanks,
Ron
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203875\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It looks real nice on a Apple Pro running under boocamp and IE.I should just run Apple as Apple.But am kinda weird about windows,I started out with DOS HELL and still run the stupid stuff, I have a Z3100ps GP 24in.Just got a Speedmat 40x60 mat cutter.Am framing my Jack Russell Terrier,"The Most Photographed Dog In the World"She's old but trustworthy!
It's young in the fire season, for here and scary ! Makes for great sunset shots though, if we don't all catch fire first!
It's not looking good right now.
Logged
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #7 on: June 27, 2008, 01:43:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice composition, nice light. A little too heavy on the soft focus for my taste, though.
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 998


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 27, 2008, 05:31:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Nice composition, nice light. A little too heavy on the soft focus for my taste, though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204045\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for the feedback, pop'n.  As I mentioned, this is not typical fare for me, and I'm not normally one for too much mush myself.  There is quite a lot more detail in a large version of this shot, but the small version in particular seems to lack a little oomph of some sort.  Perhaps it is more of a setting without a subject.  Any takers for a sad clown and his circus dog, fishing off of the pier?  I'm sure I've got one of those around here somewhere that I can strip in.
-Ron H.
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad