Muench Workshops Spring Fling! Critique Thread

DavidTO

The workshop in Santa Barbara, Spring Fling!, was a huge amount of fun, and we shot a ton of images. As a part of the workshop, each of the participants are going to be submitting up to 5 images for follow-up instruction and critique. The participants in the workshop have graciously agreed to have their critiques and continuing instruction take place right here in Dgrin!

Stay tuned as they submit their images and as Marc continues the instruction that began in Santa Barbara. We'll be covering composition, technique, post-processing, and whatever conversation the images inspire.

You're welcome to join in the conversation, just remember that the primary goal of this thread is to continue the conversation that began in Santa Barbara on the workshop.

It may take a bit for the the participants to get their images ready, and some need to register for Dgrin first, but this should prove to be a most interesting thread.

Stay tuned! More to come. :thumb

Tango

my one and only post to say... this is very exciting, i cant wait to see the images and C&C's

schmoo

I'll take the first bite since it's been almost a year since I had the benefit of a real Marc-critique and I think I could use it. :hide

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


I have trouble composing more "traditional" landscape photos (extreme wide angles, panos, etc) and if there's any important things to keep in mind about that, I probably could benefit from that as well.

(Great idea for the follow-up critique!)

Marc Muench

There is really nothing wrong with your sense of composition Schmoo
The traditional landscapes look is usually about a subject in nature like the tree image #5, which comes across very well IMO. The other composition working well here is the vertical beach image the corners are filled giving a second read to the horizon thus creating the ever so important depth. What I mean by that, is the subject is the rock in the FG which my eye goes to first - then the horizon. If you included more sky as in some of your other images the horizon gets lost and the depth is lost along with it.

So why does #1 work?

I believe people change everything in an image as does strong architectural lines. Here the depth is created by the wall and the scale diff in the person compared to the FG. Without the person the viewer has less to compare size to. The gradation in the dawn sky is also working here.

#5 works because of the dramatic size diff from the tree to the mountain and the viewer can easily comprehend the scale involved.

#4 needs to be cropped even though the person is there. I would because there is no strong FG to compare with the fisherman. Therefore less sky will help.

#2 Aint notin wrong with this one you filled the corners and the spiral adds the depth. Good choice of B&W as it adds a touch of confusion to the ceiling, cant tell if the light is a skylight or light

schmoo

Marc thanks so much for the feedback! I never thought about the fisherman photo that way but you're right about there being too much sky. Now that I see it that way i can't picture anything else.

#1 isn't my favorite photo but it seems to be the one people have mentioned to me the most so far. I just don't see the light as really working in favor of that image. The more I shoot the more I realize how magical the right light really is. That's one seemingly obvious thing that I've certainly picked up since Wild Utah I, heh.

Re: the tree, I admit I plunked the camera there because I saw you, Catherine and Val pointing in that direction. I figured what the hey, why not? Digital is cheap! But I never would have chosen to shoot that from there or risk the poison oak to trot under there. Once I stitched the two frames together it looked better, and I was surprised.

I guess it just goes to show that there really is a ton of value in shooting with others, to offer fresh eyes.

Thanks again!

Marc Muench

schmoo wrote:

Once I stitched the two frames together it looked better, and I was surprised.
Thanks again!

Did you stitch two shifted exposures or use the pano rail?

ian408

I've got a couple...

Roses


Lady On A Pier (Schmoo stole my idea )


Park Bench


Sunset


Sunrise



Thank you for your time

schmoo

Marc Muench wrote:

Did you stitch two shifted exposures or use the pano rail?

Two shifted exposures. I tried buying the pano kit tonight but RRS's website is full of Fail.

ian408

schmoo wrote:

Two shifted exposures. I tried buying the pano kit tonight but RRS's website is full of Fail.

Good excuse for a road trip

Marc Muench

schmoo wrote:

Two shifted exposures. I tried buying the pano kit tonight but RRS's website is full of Fail.

thumb

This is exactly what I had hoped you would say. IMO great landscape photography is about seeing the form of the subject, which in this case was the full spread of the Oaks canopy. You must have seeing this in order to go through the extra steps of shifting the lens to include it
The depth/scale can then be extra sauce

Tango

so much for my only post, question from the back row:

schmoo? shifted as in 24 t/s shifting while in portrait orientation? or something im not following? (if 24 t/s did you use any tilt? and if so what fstop did you decide? F8?)

Pindy

Here are mine. It's amazing how many significant failures there were that I thought had real potential through the viewfinder. I have a couple hundred exposures of "almosts". I thought a couple of the poppy ones were pretty successful, but the fisheye ones for example didn't feel like my idea, and I felt wouldn't garner as meaningful a critique. I would have put the poppy/lupine one up if there were a sixth choice.

Again, thanks Marc for your expertise and time.

schmoo

AaronNelson wrote:

so much for my only post, question from the back row:

schmoo? shifted as in 24 t/s shifting while in portrait orientation? or something im not following? (if 24 t/s did you use any tilt? and if so what fstop did you decide? F8?)

Hey Aaron,

When I set up a shot like that I set up the camera level and in landscape orientation and then use the TS lens shift to take two shots, one shifted slightly above default and only slightly below. PS will easily stitch those together and you can trim any odd edges off.

I have been playing with tilt a bit with this lens, but mostly for close-up shots to avoid the pseudo-lensbaby look and get better focus. Not for that photo I posted.

My EXIF data says I was at f/10 for that oak tree shot. I think this was because it was daylight and I heard the sweet spot for focus on the 24 TS was around f/9 or so. HTH!

Pindy wrote:

It's amazing how many significant failures there were that I thought had real potential through the viewfinder. I have a couple hundred exposures of "almosts".

AMEN! I hear that.

Pindy

schmoo wrote:

When I set up a shot like that I set up the camera level and in landscape orientation and then use the TS lens shift to take two shots, one shifted slightly above default and only slightly below. PS will easily stitch those together and you can trim any odd edges off.
.

I was eyeing those things the whole time. Instant, no-crop Hasselblad!

Marc Muench

ian408 wrote:

Roses


This came out very well with the selective focus. The colors are vibrant and the composition is nice. Do you notice how much grass is in the middle though? You might have improved the composition by getting a tad lower. And some gardening wouldn't hurt - little bud in FG




Great Idea
I would have cropped the still water out on the left as it is taking away from the lady and bird. Or include the end of the breakwater. It really is a great setting thoughthumb




I just dont see it? Maybe much less depth of field would have helped here. Tell me about this one.




You know how I feel about this one Great job Ian I noticed how much time you gave this shot and it really paid off for you. The crit I have is that the sky just between the two right palms is getting a tad light. This could be darkened by painting with a LARGE soft brush over one of the masks on the layer with the darker sky. This is where it may take some time to make sure the palms dont get any darker though.



Beautiful use of the time exposure, as it accentuates the shapes of the wet rocks and smooth sand. Light is the wonderful soft pre sunup glowthumb
Only gripe is the sand on the FG boulder which may be from foot prints, musta been Schmoo

Please post the cropped version of "the lady and her gull" and if you get time post another version of the sunset.

ian408

Thanks Marc.

My thought about the park bench make it a contemplative subject for both the mission and rose garden.

I'll have a go with your suggestions on the pier and the sunset point. Might be a while though.

Thank you for your help!

Pindy

Marc, you've one pending crit on your plate, sir. :cry

Marc Muench

Great composition!
And you shot this prior to the sun dipping too low, turning all the distant ridges into a black hole, so good timing as well. I would like it better served darker:D but especially the bottom of the image. This will help create more depth as well.



Another nice strong composition!
However, the right half of the pic is dark and I am not sure why I believe it would be much better to even out the light, let the viewers eye wonder out that way.
I would like to have seen the exposure much longer allowing the moving water to build up and create more mist.






Beautiful light but no interesting subject. I understand the boat is cool but that is an obvious normal boat with nothing to keep the imagination going.
The latter reflection in the BG and the water is incredible, so A+ for seeing the light



I do like the way you composed this The sky is extra special and the mustard field gives the needed color.


Great depth The black cliff on the right becomes very large in comparison to the boats and then it is easy to understand just how far away the distant bluff is because we know it is the same height as the closer one. The cloud becomes the added special effect creating the mood along with the colors.
I recall you spending time in this location but thinking you were going to shoot something totally diff. I do like this and it is good to see you adjusted on the fly

If you find the time to rework any of these please post em. Great images and especially good compositions.

Pindy

Marc Muench wrote:

I would like it better served darker:D but especially the bottom of the image. This will help create more depth as well.

How about this? I brought the exposure down 1 stop overall and gave the bottom an additional 1 stop grad ND in Lightroom. I think it's kinda cool:

However, the right half of the pic is dark and I am not sure why I believe it would be much better to even out the light, let the viewers eye wonder out that way.
I would like to have seen the exposure much longer allowing the moving water to build up and create more mist.

Yeah, not sure how or why the right fades out like that. I used the grad tool again to try to even it out. I totally agree with you on the longer shutter speed—I need to get me a serious neutral density filter. I battled with that a few times on our wekend. You know that yellow field we stopped at? I wanted wavy, blurred flowers blowing in the wind and couldn't make it happen. Here's a light-balanced version in any case:




I think you're quite right about the boat (a bit of a boring boat). I think I was too into the chevrons the reflections were making. Ooooooh—shiny:D

I recall you spending time in this location but thinking you were going to shoot something totally diff. I do like this and it is good to see you adjusted on the fly

I did start off with that wide composition, but wasn't confident enough with my photoshop/exposure blend job to include it: HERE

Again, thank you!

DavidTO

Pindy wrote:

I need to get me a serious neutral density filter. I battled with that a few times on our wekend. You know that yellow field we stopped at? I wanted wavy, blurred flowers blowing in the wind and couldn't make it happen.

Hmmm. I had one sitting in my bag unused right about that point.

Pindy

DavidTO wrote:

Hmmm. I had one sitting in my bag unused right about that point.

Was I in the moment? Why didn't I ask? I know I didn't ask on that bluff cause I had hiked up there alone. On the hill, I might've made a nice picture.

Marc Muench

Pindy wrote:

How about this? I brought the exposure down 1 stop overall and gave the bottom an additional 1 stop grad ND in Lightroom. I think it's kinda cool:




I did start off with that wide composition, but wasn't confident enough with my photoshop/exposure blend job to include it: HERE

Great move, now add some contrast to that same area in the bottom You want the highlights on the pine trees to shine


Great job on with the gradient tool on the beach scene

Pindy

Marc Muench wrote:

Great move, now add some contrast to that same area in the bottom You want the highlights on the pine trees to shine

Good advice! I painted some clarity on the trees in LR, which gave it a little twinkle without affecting the surrounding exposure.

Interestingly, I haven't been able to reproduce the artifacts we were seeing in ACR in your studio, when using the grad tool, for example. I haven't got anything other than extremely clean results, with no noise in LR 2.3. I'm viewing at 100%-400% to try to see it, so maybe it was only in ACR

Marc Muench

Pindy wrote:

Good advice! I painted some clarity on the trees in LR, which gave it a little twinkle without affecting the surrounding exposure.

Interestingly, I haven't been able to reproduce the artifacts we were seeing in ACR in your studio, when using the grad tool, for example. I haven't got anything other than extremely clean results, with no noise in LR 2.3. I'm viewing at 100%-400% to try to see it, so maybe it was only in ACR

Looks much better

The problem is with t he brush not the grad filter. I hope to post something on this when I get around to it.

ian408

Hey Marc, I hear there is fire again. Hope all is well.

doingcool

ian408 wrote:

I've got a couple...

Roses

Lady On A Pier (Schmoo stole my idea )

Park Bench

Sunset


Sunrise

Thank you for your time

did you use flash for the sunset shot?

ian408

doingcool wrote:

did you use flash for the sunset shot?

No flash was used for that shot. What I did was to shoot the sunset then make another exposure for the grass in the foreground (about 3 stops over). Using photoshop and layer masks, I brought the foreground out.

Pretty neat and it didn't take anything more than two exposures.

BenRG

schmoo

I know this spot is for Marc to comment, but fantastic work, Ben! The poppies look like they're just glowing, and you got a nice Muench Star on the sunrise shot.

BenRG

Thanks.

ian408

Hey Ben! I like the poppies as well. Cool!