Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Moonrise over Manaslu - Nepal  (Read 10530 times)
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #20 on: April 22, 2012, 01:30:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Terry

Slobodan was completely entitled to have a different view from others, and to say so. This is not, or should not be, a place where one posts a picture and everyone replies "great shot" or "+1" (or though that seems to be the case these days).

I thought shadowblade's Dune picture was terrific, and said so, even though we have all seen a thousand dune shots already. That one was special - and I did say why I thought so, in some detail. In this case, even if the photographer did have to endure extreme discomfort in a remote location, this picture - as a picture - does nothing for me. It simply relies on a gimmick to grab our attention, a gimmick which has been so overdone (just like sunsets, sunrises, long exposures and misty water, foreground anchors -oh, and Yosemite from that particular viewpoint) that I have no interest in it.

Thank you, Slobodan, for having the courage of your convictions.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5548



WWW
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2012, 01:34:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Terry, I will not engage in a spitting match with you, i.e., will not comment on your assessment of my postings, nor the fact that you just called me "a stupid and inept person" (a.k.a. turkey), I think all that should be between you and your mother, or whoever raised you.

But I do want to address two points:

Quote
How can you criticize Mother Nature for having too many stars!!

I do not... I was referring to recording that many stars as star trails. I would definitely prefer to see them without the trails.

Another point is that I already expressed my admiration for two other Shadowblade's photographs on this forum. Thus my post was not a criticism of his photography, and not even of this particular photograph in general, but of one single element of it (I did say it "ruined a perfectly good photograph").
« Last Edit: April 22, 2012, 01:35:41 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

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

Posts: 965



WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2012, 02:26:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Slobodan was completely entitled to have a different view from others, and to say so.

That's what I said in my post: "Everyone is entitled to their opinion." I just chose to disagree with him and take him to task for it.

No, these forums shouldn't turn into a forum where everyone replies "great shot" or "+1". I just find that it too easy to simply criticize rather than provide critical input towards improvement. It is so easy to say "Yep, it's been done before" that even that comment is now "ubiquitous, cliche and kitsch".

My feeling is that we, as a community, would be better served by having constructive criticism, not criticism for the sake of criticism.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2012, 07:15:57 PM by luxborealis » Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1893


Editing Allowed


« Reply #23 on: April 22, 2012, 03:05:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Here is a similar shot without as many star trails from a photographer I greatly admire, Yan Zhang.

Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #24 on: April 22, 2012, 03:28:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Here is a similar shot without as many star trails from a photographer I greatly admire, Yan Zhang.

Hmmm.

So now we've got the foreground anchor, long exposure with the misty water, and the star trails . . .

Sorry, Chris, I just couldn't resist it  Wink

It is rather a nice picture.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
framah
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1177



« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2012, 05:00:54 PM »
ReplyReply


And...
Slobodan: "I also find the sheer amounts of it [star trails] in this particular photo rather excessive."
dreed: "The star trails are over done."
...to criticize the number of stars!! Give me a break - you guys need to get out more often! That's what the sky looks like in true wilderness away from noise polluted cities! How can you criticize Mother Nature for having too many stars!! Or perhaps you want the photographer to brush a few out!


This reminds me of the part in the movie Amadeus where the King tells Mozart that the piece has too many notes. Amadeus asks, "which ones would the King have me take out?"

I personally like the shot and can imagine the cold biting places that shouldn't be bitten!! Shocked
Logged

"It took a  lifetime of suffering and personal sacrifice to develop my keen aesthetic sense."
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2673


« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2012, 05:34:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Overdone was an incorrect term on my part. I should have said it was a shot recreated many times over.
I guess that's true of the star trail arcs.

so ask me again in a year.
Maybe arrange to buy it as your screen background, and reconsider after a year of daily viewing ;-)
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2673


« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2012, 06:05:41 PM »
ReplyReply

In this case, it wasn't posted in "User Critiques" but in a more general forum.

Well, if we're going to start taking the forum names and descriptions seriously - exactly which "technical and aesthetic issues" of "Landscape & Nature Photography" were discussed in the original posting? :-)

afaict some of the forum names and descriptions are not a good indication of what goes on in the discussion forum; so, as it seems to be what you'd really like to see, by all means campaign to have this forum renamed:

  • User Encouragement -  A "safe house" where user submitted photographs are approved and admired.

No, I'm not being sarcastic - so something less kindergarten:

  • Landscape & Nature Photography -  A "safe house" where user submitted photographs may be admired.

« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 11:56:01 AM by Isaac » Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2673


« Reply #28 on: April 22, 2012, 06:18:09 PM »
ReplyReply

No, these forums shouldn't turn into a forum whereeveryone replies "great shot" or "+1".
Obviously comments of that kind did precede Slobodan's comment - but you had nothing to say about them.

It is so easy to say "Yep, it's been done before" that even that comment is now "ubiquitous, cliche and kitsch".
The phrase might be a cliché but I don't see how the phrase could be kitsch.
Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 689


« Reply #29 on: April 22, 2012, 06:20:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I, for one, would like Shadowblade to tell us how he managed a 45-minute exposure (I assume, on a digital camera, but may have been with film – he doesn't say) without a level of noise that overwhelms the photo. As well, how is it that your batteries didn't give out at that temperature? On a manual, mechanical film camera, I can understand, but on a digital??

I was running at the extreme end of battery life in that temperature. I had a heat pack over the lens (to prevent fogging) while leaving the body in the cold, to minimise noise from heat. I also performed a dark frame subtraction on the final image.
Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 689


« Reply #30 on: April 22, 2012, 06:27:37 PM »
ReplyReply

I would have liked to take a photo with just the stars (no trails) and moonlit mountain, but, with the short exposure time required to avoid motion blurring of the stars at 100mm, this just wasn't possible. Also, a shot of the Milky Way at 100mm is somewhat less impressive than a wider vista taken at, say, 21mm.

In any case, the shot was never about the star trails - it was about the moonlit mountain. The trails, running in the direction that they are, were intended as a tool to help frame the mountain and provide balance to the shot (instead of a more-or-less detailless sky, as would have been the case if I had skipped the first 44 minutes prior to moonrise, then just exposed the moonlit mountain), rather than being the subject of the shot in their own right.

Also, this shot was taken in early 2009 - there seems to have been a proliferation of star trails shots since then, often with no point of interest other than the trails themselves, which has made star trails rather 'cliche' since then...
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2673


« Reply #31 on: April 22, 2012, 06:38:39 PM »
ReplyReply

In any case, the shot was never about the star trails - it was about the moonlit mountain.
fwiw on a small screen if I try to look just at the mountain, my eyes are pulled back to the star trails again and again - they're high-contrast high-attention. Maybe that's different with a large print, maybe there's more space between the individual star trails.
Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 689


« Reply #32 on: April 22, 2012, 06:45:37 PM »
ReplyReply

fwiw on a small screen if I try to look just at the mountain, my eyes are pulled back to the star trails again and again - they're high-contrast high-attention. Maybe that's different with a large print, maybe there's more space between the individual star trails.

Not so much on a 20x30" or 40x60" print - if I may say so, it looks fairly spectacular printed large on Bay Photo's MetalPrints.

The JPEG compression and inevitable sharpening associated with downsizing doesn't help the web image.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2673


« Reply #33 on: April 22, 2012, 07:25:20 PM »
ReplyReply

... looks fairly spectacular printed large ...
Hmmm, wait a minute, have you shown your work at "Palo Alto Festival of the Arts" or "Mountain View Art & Wine Festival"?
Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 689


« Reply #34 on: April 22, 2012, 07:29:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmmm, wait a minute, have you shown your work at "Palo Alto Festival of the Arts" or "Mountain View Art & Wine Festival"?

No - why?

I'm Australia-based, so never heard of those festivals.
Logged
Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 486


« Reply #35 on: April 23, 2012, 12:53:02 AM »
ReplyReply

I, for one, would like Shadowblade to tell us how he managed a 45-minute exposure (I assume, on a digital camera, but may have been with film – he doesn't say) without a level of noise that overwhelms the photo. As well, how is it that your batteries didn't give out at that temperature? On a manual, mechanical film camera, I can understand, but on a digital??

Same here, I think my digital cameras have a 30 sec B limit, and the batteries usually run out in less than an hour when doing time-lapse. Even in normal temperatures.
Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1213


« Reply #36 on: April 23, 2012, 01:25:56 AM »
ReplyReply

And...
Slobodan: "I also find the sheer amounts of it [star trails] in this particular photo rather excessive."
dreed: "The star trails are over done."
...to criticize the number of stars!! Give me a break - you guys need to get out more often! That's what the sky looks like in true wilderness away from noise polluted cities! How can you criticize Mother Nature for having too many stars!! Or perhaps you want the photographer to brush a few out!

Ah, you've misread what I was criticising.

I wasn't taking issue with the number of stars but the length of the star trails. When I'm in the wilderness and I look up at a dark sky, I don't see star trails, I see stars.

I suppose I'm increasingly less impressed with star trails and more impressed by star fields.
Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1213


« Reply #37 on: April 23, 2012, 01:28:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Hmmm, wait a minute, have you shown your work at "Palo Alto Festival of the Arts" or "Mountain View Art & Wine Festival"?

The same group of stalls are at both and at different cities on other weekends...

They're both in the San Francisco Bay Area and are neighbouring cities/neighbourhoods.

Think of them as being like a large Sunday market but only held one weekend a year (because the group of people that do them can't be at every location, every weekend.)
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 01:30:48 AM by dreed » Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1213


« Reply #38 on: April 23, 2012, 01:39:24 AM »
ReplyReply

In any case, the shot was never about the star trails - it was about the moonlit mountain. The trails, running in the direction that they are, were intended as a tool to help frame the mountain and provide balance to the shot (instead of a more-or-less detailless sky, as would have been the case if I had skipped the first 44 minutes prior to moonrise, then just exposed the moonlit mountain), rather than being the subject of the shot in their own right.

IMHO, the length of the star trails tip the balance away from the mountain... I don't think that it is a good mix.

I would have liked to have seen this with a 5 minute or shorter exposure time around the time of or just after the moonrise.

Or in other words, you should have done more experimentation with shutter time and how much detail you got from 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 minute shots around the time of moon rise.
Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 689


« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2012, 01:42:31 AM »
ReplyReply

IMHO, the length of the star trails tip the balance away from the mountain... I don't think that it is a good mix.

I would have liked to have seen this with a 5 minute or shorter exposure time around the time of or just after the moonrise.

Or in other words, you should have done more experimentation with shutter time and how much detail you got from 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 minute shots around the time of moon rise.

I've never been a fan of short trails - they look like an unintentional mistake, rather than an intentional exposure.

For me, it's either long trails, or no trails at all.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad