Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: My first picture post: Bosham Harbour and the Blue Moon of January 2010  (Read 2464 times)
Sussex Landscapes
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28



WWW
« on: December 28, 2010, 10:44:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Ive not been a member here on LL forums very long, so thought i should at least share with you one of my favorite images for me of 2010.
With the end of the year is now fast approaching, and with little sight of any more camera trips, ive been playing around with some images from way back at the start of the year.
This image is one of the highlights of my photographic year, photographing the Blue Moon one day before i flew to Scotland. It also makes the short list along side four others in my 2010: A years review in Pictures & Words Blog on the website.

Unitl i reprocessed this image about 3 or 4 days ago, i had found it very hard to reintergrate the moon. After much trouble, it finally came good.
So, alomst 11.5 months on here is the final version of the Bosham Harbour Blue Moon.

Wishing you all a happy and prosperous photographic year in 2011,

simon
www.sussexlandscapephotography.co.uk
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2010, 11:10:17 AM »
ReplyReply

… Unitl i reprocessed this image about 3 or 4 days ago, i had found it very hard to reintergrate the moon. After much trouble, it finally came good…

Not sure about the "reintegration"… looks unnatural to me. One either sees gray shapes of the moon clearly or sees the strong white diffused glow… not both at the same time. This scene is a good candidate for two different exposures (one for the moon, the other for the foreground) and then blending the two. In this case, I would prefer a big white glowing blob to this frankenstein combo.

Compositionally speaking, the moon, and the image in general, are kind of too centrally positioned. The overall atmosphere is lovely, though.

My cantankerous blabbering shall not be construed as not wishing a happy new year to you too!  Smiley
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 11:45:55 AM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Sussex Landscapes
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28



WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2010, 03:23:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Not sure about the "reintegration"… looks unnatural to me. One either sees gray shapes of the moon clearly or sees the strong white diffused glow… not both at the same time. This scene is a good candidate for two different exposures (one for the moon, the other for the foreground) and then blending the two. In this case, I would prefer a big white glowing blob to this frankenstein combo.

Compositionally speaking, the moon, and the image in general, are kind of too centrally positioned. The overall atmosphere is lovely, though.

My cantankerous blabbering shall not be construed as not wishing a happy new year to you too!  Smiley
Wow, tough crowd here. Not being contankourous but;
clearly your eyes or moniter may need adjusting. there is clearly detail in the moon as can be seen from the `gray shapes` on its surface, and there is also a clear cloud halo around the moon giving a very bright diffuse glow, something which over here in the UK comes naturally with our cloudy skys.
this was the very good candidate you speak of for two different exposures to which this image emerges from. Given that the main scene is 16 secs at F11 and the moon was shot at 1sec thats a clear 15 stop D-range to deal with, no? Well, in this case i wanted to portray the secene as i witnessed it, not as a bright white blob.
 Compositionally speaking, I have to work with mother nature, and would of found it very difficult to of moved the setting moon, or perhaps rediverted the river. Given that this is one of the most photographed spots at this location, and as i know what distractions are either side of this image, i feel that the compo is spot on. Iam glad the atmosphere worked for you though.
Given your stern reply, i can see why this forum is not well supported, though i will perhaps try again another day with a better image.

simon
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4058



« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2010, 03:32:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Wow, tough crowd here. Not being contankourous but;
...
Given your stern reply, i can see why this forum is not well supported, though i will perhaps try again another day with a better image.
Simon,

The forum is very well supported: don't confuse quantity with quality. If you want dozens of "wow! great shot!" responses, go elsewhere. If you want genuine criticism, you're in the right place. You may or may not agree with what they say; I may or may not agree with what they say; but there are many pretty good photographers here and I for one have learned a good deal from their critiques of my shots and of other people's.

That said, I liked your photo but I agree with Slobodan that it would be better if the moon were less central.

Jeremy
Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2010, 03:41:34 PM »
ReplyReply

There are a number of people here with decades of photographic experience, and if you ask for their opinion, that's what you'll get.  If you don't want people to critique your work, either don't post your work or ask people not to comment on them.  One thing we all have to be aware of/ guard against is being too possessive of our own images.  You were there, and you know what time and effort you put into processing this image, so it had a 'story' for you that accompanies it.  Everyone else only gets the finished product, and the image has to stand on its own... or not.  

Bottom line, if you're shooting for a client, you need to present what your client expects.  If you're shooting for yourself, then you become your own client, and if you're happy with your work, then great!  We won't get into the old adage that everyone who works for him/herself has a fool for a boss.

However, everyone has an opinion, and if you listen to them you may find avenues or way of thought that you hadn't considered before.  That's not to say you have to agree with everyone, but you should at least respect their opinion.  I think Slobodan gave you some good suggestions to consider for upcoming work.  You don't have to hang out here very long to find a wide range of opinions on any given image.  Some people respond from a 'gut level, some from more technical considerations, and everything in between.  Every one of those answers is right - for the person who made the comment, at the time they made it.  Whether you take the time to consider what people have said and learn from it, or whether you choose to defend an entrenched position is up to you.

My $0.02

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
degrub
Guest
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2010, 04:22:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Simon,

i have always found that much dynamic range tough to deal with and get it to look "realistic".
i looked at your website and the version of the composition for this picture that you have under the "newspaper"  gallery and prefer that version since it seems more balanced.

Frank
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2010, 04:33:38 PM »
ReplyReply

... and the moon was shot at 1sec…

 Compositionally speaking, I have to work with mother nature, and would of found it very difficult to of moved the setting moon, or perhaps rediverted the river...

Disregarding the apparently hurt feelings and sarcasm, two things:

- care to post the 1 sec moon part?

- instead of huge celestial and earthly engineering, how about stepping a few steps to the right? Even cropping slightly differently might help.

« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 04:41:47 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2010, 04:39:37 PM »
ReplyReply

… the version of the composition for this picture that you have under the "newspaper"  gallery and prefer that version since it seems more balanced...

+1
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Sussex Landscapes
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28



WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2010, 03:48:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Morning Gentlemen,

I have just reread my relpy post, an would like to oppologies for the remarks made, had been a long day with man flu Smiley
Whilst i agree with many of the comments, unfortunaely not everything in nature works to a standard set of rules, and as we all knew we have to make sacrifices sometimes duing our photography. I am fully aware that the old rules of centered elements is disliked, sometimes we dont get options when we want to include certain features.
Many of you gave comments on the other version on my site, i too like the wider version, but again, other than some extra room around the sides, the main elements are stil centerd.

anyway, here is the moon image that was sued for the blending.
http://www.sussexlandscapephotography.co.uk/VU2R4253.jpg

cheers,
simon
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2804


« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2011, 04:25:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote

Given that the main scene is 16 secs at F11 and the moon was shot at 1sec thats a clear 15 stop D-range to deal with, no?

Unquote

Does the difference between 16 seconds and 1 second mean a difference in D range of 15 stops? I assume he means dynamic range? A new one on me but I am here to learn. The great thing about this forum is that you do learn, mostly by your mistakes rather than what knowledge you put into a post. Smiley
Logged

Lonnie Utah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 246


« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2011, 08:35:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote

Given that the main scene is 16 secs at F11 and the moon was shot at 1sec thats a clear 15 stop D-range to deal with, no?

Unquote

Does the difference between 16 seconds and 1 second mean a difference in D range of 15 stops?

By my count, it's only 5 stops, 1-2-4-8-16. 
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad