Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: More from Bruce Peninsula National Park  (Read 2015 times)
luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1208



WWW
« on: August 01, 2014, 08:00:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Here are a few more to add to the four I posted previously...
All shot with a D800E on tripod; post-capture processing exclusively in Lightroom.

Still Water: 8:46pm; 30mm; ƒ16@30sec; +1EV; ISO 100 w/ B+W ND3.0
Storm's End: 5:54am; 18mm; ƒ16@25sec; –2⅓EV; ISO 100 w/ B+W ND3.0
The Trail: 18mm; 9:03pm; ƒ16@1/13; –1⅔EV; ISO 200
Horse Lake, Dawn: 6:02am; 35mm; ƒ11@1/10; –2EV; ISO 50

C&C&Qs welcome.

FWIW, I am greatly enjoying the AF-S Nikkor 18-35mm ƒ3.5-4.5 and am impressed with the image quality from such a lightweight lens (which is sure appreciated when backpacking!)
« Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 02:49:44 PM by luxborealis » Logged

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

Posts: 8219



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2014, 08:33:43 PM »
ReplyReply

They're all quite fine, as I would expect from you, Terry. But the first one just leaves me speechless. It is stunning in it's simple elegance.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

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

Posts: 1695


« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2014, 09:35:20 PM »
ReplyReply

For me, it's "The Trail".  Love to hear about the BW conversion process on this one.
Logged
Rajan Parrikar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 863



WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2014, 02:03:23 AM »
ReplyReply

The final "Horse Lake" for me, for the mood it evokes.
Logged

churly
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 563


« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2014, 06:34:26 AM »
ReplyReply

1 & 4 for me - especially 4.  The BW conversions in 2 & 3 seem contrived to me.  IMO you pushed them too far.
Chuck
Logged

Chuck Hurich
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 507



WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2014, 06:44:06 AM »
ReplyReply

All good, but I really like #1 - awesome. Cool

Are you throwing any sharpness away shooting  at f16 ?
The 28 1.8 is off it's game at 16 - just wondering how the zoom compares ?
Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2878


« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2014, 06:57:53 AM »
ReplyReply

#1 &#2 for me. My preferences are generally to have a little more contrast in scenes like these but tastes differ. Overall the four were worth posting and viewing. Smiley
Logged

luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1208



WWW
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2014, 07:45:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, all, for having a look and for your kind words.

Peter - The B&W conversion is fairly straightforward, but it really pushes LR to the limit and can, as Chuck pointed out, look a bit contrived. In LR, I convert to B&W and typically apply a slight warm/brown tone using a Split Toning of Highlight Hue 0, Sat 0; Balance of -50; Shadow Hue of 48, Sat 12. I will often check the "Auto" version, just to get a sense of what the LR algorithms "think" - often they are quite good. From there, I'll either go back to 0s or adjust the Exposure to levels which bring out detail, but also knowing what's coming next...

With B&Ws only, I often work backwards to the recommended "top down" method of adjustments. You have to remember, what I'm working towards is re-creating the "vision" or "visualization" of the scene I saw when I made the photo. While I am much more of a literal photographer than an imaginative one (I try to be true to the structure of the scene), I am also trying to convey more than just the scene – the light and the feeling that goes with it being there at that time.

So, for B&Ws,  I apply a Clarity adjustment of between 50 and 100, then I bring the Blacks up so there is just some clipping, then adjust the Shadows upwards to bring out detail as needed. I'll often give a similar treatment to the Highlights by raising the Whites as high as possible with perhaps just a small amount of clipping (if there were true whites in the scene), then adjust the Highlights downwards, typically to maximize the tonal separation in them. I then walk away from it and revisit the photo a few days later. Sometimes I'll make a print (using Moab Entrada Rag Natural, which needs a bit more contrast to sing) to check tones. Prints are my ultimate goal here. I've attached a Develop module Basic panel for "The Trail" (the original, not the one here).

Chuck - You're right, I did push the two B&Ws a bit far. As I said above, prints on Moab Entrada Rag Natural are my ultimate goal, so a boost in Contrast is needed. Both were high contrast situations with a real "edge" to them. My goal was to maintain that edginess. I also wanted to ensure the rock was more than just "there"; I wanted it to "speak", so I needed it to look more alive than dead. Bumping Clarity has a way of doing just that. I've gone back and tried the same shots with reduced Contrast, Shadows, Blacks and Clarity and while they look more realistic, to me the rock is not alive enough, it's too muddy (see attached). Perhaps there's a balance there I'm missing.

David - ƒ11 is the sweet spot with this lens (in fact, all of the Nikkors I own) and I try to make best use of it. Typically, however, I like to get in close and am pushing DoF to the limit so use ƒ16. To me, there are times when the gain in DoF outweighs the loss of overall acuity, especially when much of that loss (or all, perhaps) can be gained back in sharpening.

 
Logged

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

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2014, 08:26:26 AM »
ReplyReply

The first is quite a beautiful shot...and the tones...all the way round.
Logged

Brandt Bolding
www.brandtbolding.com
sdwilsonsct
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1699


« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2014, 09:51:36 AM »
ReplyReply

They're all quite fine, as I would expect from you, Terry. But the first one just leaves me speechless. It is stunning in it's simple elegance.


+1. + thanks for the B&W tutorial.
Logged

Ed B
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136


« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2014, 10:32:56 AM »
ReplyReply



David - ƒ11 is the sweet spot with this lens (in fact, all of the Nikkors I own) and I try to make best use of it. Typically, however, I like to get in close and am pushing DoF to the limit so use ƒ16. To me, there are times when the gain in DoF outweighs the loss of overall acuity, especially when much of that loss (or all, perhaps) can be gained back in sharpening.

 

Have you tried focus stacking? I've just started playing around with it and Photoshop makes it quite easy.
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1695


« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2014, 11:14:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, Terry, for your detailed description of BW conversion in Lightroom.  You skills as a photographer and educator are as usual very evident.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2984


« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2014, 12:37:54 PM »
ReplyReply

… ƒ11 is the sweet spot with this lens…

Are you talking about resolution? What makes you say that? (I'm just curious.)

fwiw - "The chart shows line widths per picture height (LW/PH)…"
Logged
Dave Pluimer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 159


WWW
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2014, 01:34:51 PM »
ReplyReply

I like #1 and #2.

In #2, I think you should consider working in a shot of the water (esp. in the bottom of the frame) of a shot in the 0.3-1.2s range. It's a little too clear for me. But, that long exposure did a splendid job on that sky.

Re: Isaac - they are referring to diffraction limited aperture (DLA). It refers to the smallest aperture before the sensor/lens combo starts going soft due to light bending (I'm paraphrasing). On most cameras you're looking at f/8. I try not to shoot past f/10. Link - http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
Logged
luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1208



WWW
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2014, 02:53:18 PM »
ReplyReply


In #2, I think you should consider working in a shot of the water (esp. in the bottom of the frame) of a shot in the 0.3-1.2s range. It's a little too clear for me. But, that long exposure did a splendid job on that sky.


Dave: Here is a similar frame made a bit earlier in the morning at 1.3sec. There is a bit more movement in the close-up water, but you're right about the added movement in the sky of the long exposure.
Logged

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

Posts: 2984


« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2014, 04:50:50 PM »
ReplyReply

On most cameras you're looking at f/8.

For that lens at 18mm, max resolution seems f/5.6 - f/8; but then there's DoF.
Logged
luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1208



WWW
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2014, 08:50:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for pointing that out, Isaac. While I don't doubt the findings of photozone.de, in practical use, the 18-35 easily outperforms my Nikkor 20mm ƒ2.8 and is a hair better than my Nikkor 24mm ƒ2.8D. I could never afford the Nikkor 24mm ƒ1.4G nor the Zeiss Distagon 21mm or 18mm (and hope to stay married!). However, if my clients start to complain about lack of sharpness, then I will re-consider Wink To me, the proof of the lens is in the prints

FWIW, over on DxOMark, the 18-35mm G earns a "29"; the Zeiss Distagon a "27" (along with the Nikkor 20mm D); the Nikkor 16-35 ƒ4 a "25"; the Zeiss Distagon 18mm ƒ3.5 a "24" and the Nikkor 17-35mm ƒ2.8 a "23" - all more expensive lenses with much better press - so I think I'm doing alright by this one.
Logged

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

Posts: 2984


« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2014, 10:31:24 PM »
ReplyReply

…lack of sharpness…

Maybe for some focal lengths that zoom is sharper more open than f/11: might be useful to know.
Logged
ckelly49
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #18 on: August 03, 2014, 10:22:56 AM »
ReplyReply

#1 is beautiful and very soothing, but best is show goes to Horse Lake for me.
Logged
Paulo Bizarro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1697


WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2014, 04:54:19 AM »
ReplyReply

What a fine set. For me #3 is exquisite, it makes me want to climb those steps.
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad