Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Early morning light  (Read 2341 times)
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« on: July 04, 2009, 07:44:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Was out walking the dog this morning when I noticed the sun streaming through some early morning fog.  I ran back to the house to get a camera, but I wasn't quite fast enough to get the shot I wanted ... the wind picked up and the fog blew off just as I got ready ...

But my very first test shot turned out pretty well, I think.  I don't even know where the focus was, and I was set at ISO 800 when I wanted 200 ... but I think it works.

What do you think?

Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007


WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 04, 2009, 11:53:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Very nice.  I would have guessed Northern California vs. NY.  Quite interesting that the branches resolved themselves to a solid black band at the top to bracket the bottom shape, unless you did that in post  While it adds symmetry, I find the transition a little harsh, and might like to see a little of it cropped out at the top, or if you burned it in, a little less burning, especially on the left.  Great shot, either way.
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6561



WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2009, 11:58:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Jeremy, That's a splendid shot, but why were you walking the dog without your camera?

I'm sure people will suggest you need a lot of post-processing to make this picture good. After all, what's the point in owning Photoshop if you don't use it to modify every picture you shoot? This one's fine just as it is, and I don't think ISO 800 bothered it a bit.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2009, 12:31:33 PM by RSL » Logged

Ed Blagden
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 491



WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2009, 12:11:14 PM »
ReplyReply

That is just gorgeous... for me, the white leaves at the bottom of the frame make the shot.  Please don't touch this shot - it is perfect as it is.

You know what I thought when I looked at it for the first time?  What Lucy saw when she stepped out of the wardrobe for the first time into Narnia.  But maybe that's just me.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2009, 12:12:36 PM by Ed B » Logged

Visit my Flickr page
button
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2009, 12:20:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Jeremy, That's splendid shot, but why were you walking the dog without your camera?

I'm sure people will suggest you need a lot of post-processing to make this picture good.

Not me.    I don't see how you could improve it.  You captured  lots of interplay between the lines of the tree branches and light beams with a soothing upper 2/3 division, framed at the top and bottom with black.  The concavity of the dominant tree helps guide the eye from top to center right where the lines take the eye down a slide to the bottom left bright leaves.  These leaves act as a "stop", encouraging the eye to start at the top again.  Good shot!

John
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4123



« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2009, 01:24:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: button
Not me.    I don't see how you could improve it.  You captured  lots of interplay between the lines of the tree branches and light beams with a soothing upper 2/3 division, framed at the top and bottom with black.  The concavity of the dominant tree helps guide the eye from top to center right where the lines take the eye down a slide to the bottom left bright leaves.  These leaves act as a "stop", encouraging the eye to start at the top again.  Good shot!

John
I agree that it's a splendid shot, and like Russ I wouldn't fiddle with it using Photoshop. I would like to see a bit less of the solid black at the top, though. It makes the image seem slightly top heavy.

Jeremy
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2009, 07:20:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, all!  Now that the day is winding down and the kids are asleep, I'm back looking at this one again ... Most of my B&W's go from LR -> Nik's Silver Efex.  The earlier post was converted in LR.

I saved that off as a snapshot ... but wanted to give Silver Efex a spin with this one ... here's the result.

Any preference between the two?  I won't say which I like better at this point ...



Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #7 on: July 04, 2009, 07:22:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Colorwave
Very nice.  I would have guessed Northern California vs. NY.

Thanks!  

It is actually Northwestern CT - the foothills of the Berkshires.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8301



WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2009, 08:12:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jeremy Payne
I saved that off as a snapshot ... but wanted to give Silver Efex a spin with this one ... here's the result.

Any preference between the two?  I won't say which I like better at this point ...
I have a slight preference for the Silver Efex version.

But in either version, I agree with Kikashi that I would like to see less black at the top. I would crop down just into the lighter area near the center. I think the rest of the dark foliage up there gives enough of a frame without making it top-heavy.


Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6561



WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2009, 09:15:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Jeremy, I think I still like the first version. I use Silver EFEX for all my B&Ws nowadays, and I really like it, but in this case I like the way the fog fades the background better in the first version, though it's a close call. As I'm sure you know, Silver EFEX gives you almost unlimited control. You could make it do the same thing you did in Lightroom, but I think the Lightroom version is fine as it stands. I can't see how cropping is going to improve the picture. I like the way the branches meet in a canopy at the top. All in all it's a fine piece of work.
Logged

button
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 04, 2009, 09:43:51 PM »
ReplyReply

#1.  The increased contrast in #2 makes it too busy.

John
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 04, 2009, 09:55:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Only $.02, but I like everything about the second one better except the degree of blown out fog in the back right that Russ mentioned.  If you were to describe the difference in the foreground between the two, I would expect that I would go for the first one.  Something about the stronger light areas in the second foreground seems like it should break a rule or two, but really works for me when I see it.  The difference in the top of the shot is just what I was referring to earlier.  It is now a more subtle and textured transition to black.  I'd be delighted to print something like this nice and big.  Make sure you do, and be sure to thank the dog for understanding your need to suddenly return for your camera.
Logged

wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5807



WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 05, 2009, 12:56:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I prefer the original, but as has been suggested, I'd chop the top some.

Your camera.  Don't leave home without it.

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad