First images for feedback / critique....

[fudsylow]

I have thick skin, so please be honest, and let me know how I can improve these images.....

Both shot D800E with 24/2.8D lens. The river image was a single frame, and the panorama was a stitched blend of 9 across...

Hope to hear from some of you awesome photographers with some great tips... I am not looking for pats on the back. Honest constructive advice would be really welcomed.

Thanks !!!

[RSL]

Hi Fuds, and welcome to LuLa. I think both pictures are good cracks at landscape, but both need to have their low tones expanded -- especially the pano. I get the feeling that the histograms for both would look like the devil's head with horns: peaks at both ends and a valley in between. Here's an example of what I'm talking about. I can't carry it as far as I'd like to because I'm working with a .9 mpx,72 ppi JPEG instead of a 36 mpx 240 or 300 ppi NEF. I don't know what you're using for post-processing software, but if it's Photoshop, tone mapping like this is pretty easy, especially on your original raw.

You probably can get even better tips from some of the awesome photographers on LuLa.

[RobbieV]

To me, they lack a sort of character or meaning. They are nice-enough, but...safe?  Perhaps viewing them larger would help but compositionally there isn't much to draw me in. I'm not a fan of the lens flare either. I find it distracting in this example.

Processing wise, I agree with Russ.

[fudsylow]

Thanks guys...
Appreciate the feedback.....
Now that I look in to the river one, I see what you mean about the dark shadows....
The lens flare was difficult to shoot, as it was straight in to the sun.....
Thanks again for the pointers !

[RedwoodGuy]

I think the first one would be better if there was something at the end of the road. It's a nice idea, and there's a good lead in, but there's no pay off at the end. Also, the trees on the right become too dense, too monotone. More interest would happen if there was some light in there, or something of more detail and contrast. I don't think there is enough story in this picture, and there is no "rare" geography. Nice water and trees. Needs a stronger subject and perspective about the subject.

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

Welcome to LuLa Fuds.

Image #1 has a very curious effect that has stumped me as to just how you did it. The trees and the grass on the left are leaning way over to the left at quite an angle, which is usually an effect of going for an extreme wide angle shot and moving the centre of the lens too far away from the centre or horizon line of the shot, I understand that, I have done it many times myself. So the trees to the right should be leaning way over to the right in the equal and opposite direction, but they are in fact also leaning over at an acute angle to the left...? Not a criticism, I just wondered how you did it. I can only assume that the horizon in the original shot out of the camera was so far off level, that you had to tweak the image by using parallel distortion or extreme warping or something. Also there appears to have been a quite substantial crop applied to remove the original top two thirds of the image.

On the images and content: the images are nice but safe as Robbie points out, but image #1 lacks a good focal point. Adam Barker talks about teasers and pleasers, a teaser is an image that successfully leads you into it, but doesn't take you anywhere definitive or interesting. Whereas a pleaser leads you in and through the picture, to then arrive at something interesting, a focal point. Image #1 is a teaser, it leads you in successfully (in a weird and wonky severely leaning over to the left kind of way) but it doesn't take you anywhere interesting, there is no pay off.

Image #2 is sort of the opposite, as you now you have a really good and dominant focal point, the sun, but nothing to lead you towards it, as the depth and direction of the canyon pulls you to the left and away from the focal point and then out of the shot.

You want the lead in of image #1 and the pay off focal point as seen in image #2.

So two images with quite good photographic elements within both of them, but a more complete and satisfying image would have been created if these aspects where combined into one image I think.

Dave

[fudsylow]

Thanks guys... appreciate the feedback.

Dave, not sure about the leaning trees.. I didn't warp them, or anything like that... here is the original, sooc jpg, resized only. No editing etc... so I trust that you can see that it was just my editing to colours etc, that I changed... (still learning landscape editing and I admit I have a looooooooong way to go !)...

Not sure about the level.. don't think it is too far off.. maybe it was just an odd combination of nature's trees leaning over, and the angle I shot it all at ?

Cheers
Fudsy.