Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: B/W comments please  (Read 1008 times)
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 751



WWW
« on: April 16, 2012, 06:38:21 PM »
ReplyReply

This is one of my favorites from last week. Very overcast day. I chose b/w for this one. Your opinions are appreciated.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2068


« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2012, 06:43:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Impressive image!

I just wish I had been there to get a feel for the mood of the place.


Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Michael H. Cothran
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2012, 09:50:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Works for me. Great processing.
Logged
Sareesh Sudhakaran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 547


WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2012, 10:08:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Love the way the shape of the water body complements the rock.
Logged

Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2012, 12:19:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I think you nailed it, both technically and compositionally. The B&W tonality is quite beautiful.
Logged
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 751



WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2012, 01:43:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I was so disappointed when I arrived at the ocean that day. After driving 750 miles to get there I was thinking I had wasted my time. Lots of cloud cover and no real color that jumped out at me. And the constant threat of rain arguing for me to get off the beach and back into the car. This was not your post card picture-perfect day. But the ocean is a strangely powerful place to be. As I waited for the occasional rays of light to peek through, lots of potential compositions began to take shape. Maybe the sound of the surf drowns out the distractions and demands you concentrate only on what's in front of you. I spent about two hours at this spot and got two shots that were well worth my time getting there. We should pray for crappy weather more often. Here's the other one that I count as a keeper from that day.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7870



WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2012, 02:31:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Both of them are excellent.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2012, 02:40:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Both of them are excellent.

+1

You're doing very well if you can get two keepers from one landscape shoot. I can't tell you how many times I've dragged my gear out to the middle of nowhere and had nothing to show for it at the end of the day.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 02:43:22 PM by popnfresh » Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3930



« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2012, 03:03:14 PM »
ReplyReply

They're both very good indeed. B&W is without doubt a superb way of getting keepers from an overcast day.

Jeremy
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2012, 05:45:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Very nice, I really like both shots but the second one is defintely a keeper. The B&W conversion really works well and adds to their appeal and I also agree that low light is good light.

These images have a nice ultra wide angle feel to them, can I ask what lens?

Dave
Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 751



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 20, 2012, 06:04:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The lens is Canon EF zoom 16-35. Both shots are at 16mm. Both are stitched from 2 shots each.
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2012, 06:49:21 PM »
ReplyReply

The lens is Canon EF zoom 16-35. Both shots are at 16mm. Both are stitched from 2 shots each.

Ah. I have one of those also and have not used it as much as I ought to and I must admit I have never thought of using it for stitching, but I certainly will be doing now.

Thanks.

Dave
Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 751



WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2012, 07:09:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Dave, you've got to get real creative when using 16mm for stitching. I use the content aware fill with great abandon to fill or create image where the stitching software leaves things blank. I also will distort the horizon back to level if need be. Thanks to Photoshop, the drama the 16mm offers can be maintained without the usual tell-tale distortions the wide lens creates.
Logged
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2012, 08:39:02 PM »
ReplyReply

With all due respect, I feel that both images are way over-processed - at least that's how they look to me. Within 1/2 millisecond my brain said "Photoshop." Nothing wrong with PS, of course, but when overdone it takes the image too far from reality. The subject matter and composition are fine, but the tonality just looks phony and overdone.
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1328


« Reply #14 on: April 22, 2012, 03:46:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I like your first picture very much.  Because of the curves in the foreground the composition is much more dynamic than your 2nd picture.  I also think your treatment of the tonal range produces excitement and shows off the turmoil in the sky and water.  The coarse textures in the land add to the interest.  The only thing that suggests overprocessing to me is the graininess noticeable most in the sky, which I get sometimes in Silver Efex Pro when I try for more structure (local contrast) than the exposure wants.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad