Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Please give your criticism  (Read 3494 times)
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« on: October 12, 2011, 06:13:35 PM »
ReplyReply

The first photograph I've attached was taken by a semi professional photographer, he's sold quite a few prints of this shot. His is the cloudless sky the first image. Mine was taken on a later year and I fully admit I copied his shot (I can't afford his work). I didn't set out to copy it but I was walking along saw the location and shot it the next day.

My shot with the clouds is the first hand processed HDR I've ever done. I've been studying Matt Kloskowski's book on Photoshop Layers.

Can I ask what you folks think of mine, I'm working on a poor quality laptop so can't be too sure if the colors are good or even if it's sharp. If it's ok I'd quite like to print it, this would make two firsts, my first hand HDR and my first print !

Incidentally the mountain is Cerro Fitz Roy in southern Patagonia, for me one of the most beautiful mountains in the world.


Thanks you.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8075



WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2011, 10:09:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I like it. And I wouldn't have guessed that it was HDR. It works for me.

And IMHO yours with the clouds is more interesting than the blue sky one.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

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

Posts: 4058



« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2011, 02:20:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree with Eric: yours is the more interesting shot, by far. I'm tempted to wonder why HDR was necessary, though: the scene doesn't immediately look as if it has greater dynamic range than a sensor could handle.

Jeremy
Logged
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2011, 05:08:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you both for taking the time to reply, I also thought mine was a better shot. I think I have slightly better foreground fall colors and yes the sky makes a more interesting image. It's just a shame I didn't see the composition myself. I think it did need HDR because of the range of light between snow and foreground.

I many have to get it printed now.
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1036


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2011, 07:48:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Being mister opposite as per usual, I prefer the first and original (semi-pro) image I am afraid, there is a lot more colour and higher degree of detail in the foreground trees and the mountains etc and as such, the image in general has far more depth to it and a feeling of being complete - yes I agree it would have been even better with something interesting happening in the sky, but none the less, the first image is definitely a more accomplished image in my opinion.

The second image (your image) isn't at all bad though and is a fair stab at what you were trying to achieve, so well done for that. I also suspect the first image was taken on either film or his res/hi spec digital camera, with a high spec lens etc, because the level of detail in the first image compared to your second image (good as it is) is substantially different and probably the main the reason I think the first image looks much the better of the two.

I wonder as you had the opportunity to take your image with clouds in the sky and I can only assume the other one didn't, that if you could have waited for the clouds to form into a more pleasing shape that replicated or accentuated the shape of the mountains better?

Dave (UK)
« Last Edit: October 13, 2011, 08:01:15 AM by Dave (UK) » Logged

Fine Art Photography on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2011, 08:45:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Dave UK,

I met the photographer, he had an old series Canon DSLR, I can't remember which one I think it was a 1D, so pretty ancient. I used a Canon 5D2 with a 24-105 L lens. I hear what you say about waiting for the clouds to clear. I was at this location for three months. The first was spent finding locations, the second month (Feb) you couldn't see the mountain in all 30 days because it was covered in cloud. Even in March during the autumn the mountain was only visible a few day's in the month. The autumn colours that year died ever so quickly when a cold snap hit, in fact the day before I took this shot there was a lot of snow about. Shortly after taking this shot I literally ran to another location got a shot and then watched as the clouds enveloped the mountain. A few days later the colours were all gone.

Logged
armand
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 964



« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2011, 10:47:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that the sharp edges/spikes of the mountains actually add a lot to the picture, and while clouds in the sky are often better than a clear sky, here it would have been helpful if they would replicate/accentuate those edges, as Dave said above, instead of hiding them.
I like them both, but prefer the one where you can see more of the mountains.

PS. one of explanations re the difference in colors might be the use of a polarizer ?
Logged
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2011, 11:37:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes I quite agree, I can't remember why I didn't use a polariser, I hope I didn't sound ungrateful Dave, your criticism is very much appreciated and I too feel my shot lacks the colour and detail. I don't  really know why, I shot it at the same time of year and the rising sun was not blanketed by haze so why don't I have that detail and colour. Is there something I could do in PP, I'm really a beginner with PP. As I explained this is my first stab at processing two images by hand in Layers. I shot this in RAW iso 100, f18 and bracketed three images.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6045


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2011, 11:55:05 AM »
ReplyReply

... why don't I have that detail and colour [?]...f18...

There you go... that is most likely the answer.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6419



WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2011, 12:39:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Also, HDR doesn't help with sharpness, and tone mapping in HDR affects colors. But Slobodan may be able to fix it, Fairyanne. He's really good at that.

Slobodan, Haven't yet taken time out from packing for Florida to tell you: After an hour or so's work with the adjustment brush, grads, Photoshop enhancements, and a couple Viveza mods I finally got a PSD from the DNG at least as good, and maybe even better than the silk purse you made out of that sow's ear JPEG. It's been a long time since I worked that long with a shot, but it's also been a long time since I did a serious landscape. You saw the shortcomings right away, and after you made the changes I saw them too. I made a 13 x 19 on Hot Press Bright with my 3880 that's stunning. Thanks for the pointers.
Logged

Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1567


WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 13, 2011, 12:41:00 PM »
ReplyReply

A bit of cloud would add interest to the first shot, but even so, I prefer that one to your's - the light is simply better
Logged

fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2011, 01:39:50 PM »
ReplyReply

The first photograph I've attached was taken by a semi professional photographer, he's sold quite a few prints of this shot. His is the cloudless sky the first image. Mine was taken on a later year and I fully admit I copied his shot (I can't afford his work). I didn't set out to copy it but I was walking along saw the location and shot it the next day.

My shot with the clouds is the first hand processed HDR I've ever done. I've been studying Matt Kloskowski's book on Photoshop Layers.

Can I ask what you folks think of mine, I'm working on a poor quality laptop so can't be too sure if the colors are good or even if it's sharp. If it's ok I'd quite like to print it, this would make two firsts, my first hand HDR and my first print !

Incidentally the mountain is Cerro Fitz Roy in southern Patagonia, for me one of the most beautiful mountains in the world.


Thanks you.
The first one has much better perspective being shot with a telephoto and it has better control of perspective by being shot from higher up, it keeps the mountain in contact with the forest and thus it "communicates" the place better to the potential visitor, it relates them! The second one its been shot with a wider lens, from a lower level and thus increases the distance of the mountain from the forest, it differentiates them! The second one, tries to take advantage of the happening... but the foreground is distractive, ....too much info. It should have been shot past the forest and only concentrate to the mountain. Nothing that strikes me from an artistic point of view in both of them, but the first one, being technically correct, could be used as a good promotional photo professionally. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Logged
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #12 on: October 14, 2011, 06:32:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I've gone through my files and found one series of shots at f13 I'll play with that and see if the detail and colour improve but to be honest I can't tell any difference.

All the images were shot at 70mm. I didn't use a wide angle lens as Theodoros suggests. Theodoros my image looks only slightly lower, I was aware of the height issue at the time but I couldn't get further back because there's a river. I went to the opposite bank but the angle is all wrong. Even stood in the river it's wrong because the banks drop down too much. So I must have shot it from the same spot therefore with the same focal length (more or less). I have a Feisol tripod with a 59'' height, that's pretty high, but yes the other shot does show ever so slightly more mountain than foreground.

And to RSL, this isn't strictly speaking an HDR, there's no tone mapping I just blended the best attributes from two exposures in Layers.
I'm pretty disappointed with my photography, even attempting to copy someone's work (pretty low I know) I still get crap shots. Although as Theodoros points out there's nothing that strikes him in an artistic point of view from either image.
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1036


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 14, 2011, 07:57:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes I quite agree, I can't remember why I didn't use a polariser, I hope I didn't sound ungrateful Dave, your criticism is very much appreciated

Don't worry and no you don't sound ungrateful at all.

Using a polariser might well have worked to bump up the colours and darkened down the sky, but a word of warning - I find using polarisers can kill just as many images as they enhance, so for me, if I have to use one and I prefer not to, then I always try to dial it back to about half its maximum strength, or at least until I can see through the viewfinder, that the sky is as equally dark/light right across the frame as it can be. I really do not like the dark blue left or right corners I see in some images, where the photographer has simply stuck on a polariser, whacked it up to the max and fired off a shot – but maybe that’s just me. Also as I do quite a lot of pano stitching these days, then trying to stitch a sequence of incorrectly polarised images can be a total nightmare and lead to major disappointments.

If your colours are not popping as much as you would like and you would still prefer to "do it all in-camera”, then may I suggest you look towards buying a colour intensifying filter? I know Singh Ray sell these http://www.singh-ray.com/colorintens.html, but for the lens you mention, you will need the 77mm version and they are quite expensive, especially if you then have them shipped over to the UK from the States and add on the extra and punitive import duties, I know because I have done this, but I am sure that there must be a cheaper alternative out there somewhere by now.

Dave (UK)


« Last Edit: October 14, 2011, 08:02:38 AM by Dave (UK) » Logged

Fine Art Photography on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #14 on: October 14, 2011, 11:00:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Dave,

I've made both those mistakes you mention. I've over polarised and I once left the polariser on when I did a pano, I ruined that pano', it had dark bands running down the image. I made 38 return visits attempting to get a nice sky like in the first pano' but never got the shot. I won't make that mistake again!

I didn't say anything about doing the work in camera. I alway shoot in RAW, the only thing I do in camera is the odd shot with a ND and a polariser and like you I back it off so as not to get that over dark sky.

I'm going to try to process the F13 soon and will post that.

Andy
Logged
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 780



WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 14, 2011, 11:09:43 AM »
ReplyReply

I think the pro's shot would be more salable. The composition is near perfect, the colors saturated enough for the art show market, and the mountains are the clear focal point in their majesty. A bit postcardish but highly commercial. Your shot could be more interesting from a different perspective because the clouds are a great plus in that they occur infrequently.  But for me the foreground and the trees fight for attention and seem, on the monitor I have today, to be washed out.
Logged
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #16 on: October 14, 2011, 11:21:33 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree the colours are pale. I just hope I can do something in PP to make my shot look more impressive. Obviously I didn't use a polariser so I can't change that but is there something I can do to make the colours pop?

At present I've just added a bit of saturation to the foreground with the Sponge tool in Photoshop. Then added a bit of sharpening. Please if anyone can suggest some magic I'd love to hear.
Logged
sanfairyanne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


« Reply #17 on: October 14, 2011, 11:29:16 AM »
ReplyReply

I put this one together quickly, it was shot at f13 instead of f18. I blended a bit of light from the original shot onto this image then altered the hue in the colours of the foreground. I'm really just playing around, I'm a beginner in all aspects taking photographs and doing PP.

Again any advice would be hugely appreciated, you can have all the books in the world but they can never tell you what to do to a specific picture.
Logged
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 780



WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 14, 2011, 11:39:12 AM »
ReplyReply

For me you improved it. You'll get lots of other opinions on that. My best advice is to listen to all and then do what your eye and brain likes. Art is never a consensus thing.
Logged
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1567


WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 14, 2011, 11:43:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Definitely an improvement
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad