Garrapata Seascapes: Another try at long exposures

Stumblebum

This weekend we were supposed to get Stormy weather in Bay Area, CA. Was looking forward to it. Instead got summer like day, harsh light, but temp was not that high. Since I was there, I tried to correct mistakes from last time and still gave long exposures another shot. All criticism cherished! Conditions were not ideal, surf was low, and most of the sky was gray. Below are my attempts:

1) Sun pops out for a moment during sunset



2) Last moments before sun goes out



3) Attempt at blue-hour beginning post sunset



4) 3-minute exposure

Cornflake

I think they're very good and better than your first group. The composition in the third one appeals to me most, as it's reduced to essentials. The shadows on the rocks could stand to be lightened if your exposure allows. Good work!

anwmn1

I like the processing of these ones much more than your other series as they are much more subtle and believable.

I love the light on the foreground in the first one. Only take away is the banding you have going on in the distant rocks and most noticeably on the hills in top left. I would prefer a little DOF too as the foreground rocks lose detail as your eyes track up and to the left.

I really like the BW one as well. I think the small rocks do a great job of leading you out to the horizon and the fact that they are in a curve makes it even more appealing.

Stumblebum

REWORKED

1) Tried to get rid of banding on hill from top left and some more details in rock on top left



2) Brightened shadows

Stumblebum

Cornflake wrote: »

I think they're very good and better than your first group. The composition in the third one appeals to me most, as it's reduced to essentials. The shadows on the rocks could stand to be lightened if your exposure allows. Good work!

Thanks Don! I was unhappy with original one but could not figure out what was wrong. Whether I got there or not, I like the reworked version more!

anwmn1 wrote: »

I like the processing of these ones much more than your other series as they are much more subtle and believable.

I love the light on the foreground in the first one. Only take away is the banding you have going on in the distant rocks and most noticeably on the hills in top left. I would prefer a little DOF too as the foreground rocks lose detail as your eyes track up and to the left.

I really like the BW one as well. I think the small rocks do a great job of leading you out to the horizon and the fact that they are in a curve makes it even more appealing.

Thanks Aaron! I can't do pixel level stuff as PS allows, but I did best I could do with what I know, LR, to get rid of the band over the hill. Personally prefer the reworked version!

THANK YOU MAESTROS!

Vycor

Look good. Are you using a filter or anything? How long was the exposure on the first few shots?

Stumblebum

Vycor wrote: »

Look good. Are you using a filter or anything? How long was the exposure on the first few shots?

Thanks. I am using Tiffen Variable density ND filter. It can give 1-6 f-stops. There are more expensive ones out there, but price and performance work for me with Tiffen. All exposures except last one are 30 seconds with ISO-100. Cheers!

Vycor

I've been meaning for years to get a ND filter... maybe i'll look at getting one finally

Stumblebum

Vycor wrote: »

I've been meaning for years to get a ND filter... maybe i'll look at getting one finally

Based on the experience so far I would say when you make your investment, consider buy a graduated density filter that can attach to variable ND filter. The bright areas become too hot and that may prevent that from happening and keeping light in all areas of the frame even. It may or may not work but worth consideration. Finally, still need good solid light to get long crisp exposures. Before trying I thought any light would get the job done, and for me that is not the case.

anwmn1

Stumblebum wrote: »

Thanks Don! I was unhappy with original one but could not figure out what was wrong. Whether I got there or not, I like the reworked version more!



Thanks Aaron! I can't do pixel level stuff as PS allows, but I did best I could do with what I know, LR, to get rid of the band over the hill. Personally prefer the reworked version!

THANK YOU MAESTROS!

Nice edit. They look much better.

What lens were you using and what is your EXIF for #1?

Stumblebum

anwmn1 wrote: »

Nice edit. They look much better.

What lens were you using and what is your EXIF for #1?

Thanks Aaron! Much appreciate your help!

Lens: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM.

EXIF:

Camera Canon EOS 5D Mark III
ISO 100
Focal Length 18mm
Aperture f/16
Exposure Time 30s (30/1)
Exposure Program manual
Exposure Bias 0 EV
Exposure Mode manual
White Balance auto

Cornflake

I agree that the edits are significant improvements. Good work.

Alpha_Plus

I agree. Improved results! Well done

I like #3 the most, but I probably would had brightened the shadows just a touch

Stumblebum

Cornflake wrote: »

I agree that the edits are significant improvements. Good work.

Thanks Don! Sincerely appreciate all the help!

Alpha_Plus wrote: »

I agree. Improved results! Well done

I like #3 the most, but I probably would had brightened the shadows just a touch

Thanks Karl! For reworked version, based on suggestion above I did brighten the shadows. There maybe some more room to brighten them further. I was concerned that it would change the mood of picture which was pretty dark around the time I took it. Cheers!

Eia

Yes to the reworked! Makes the difference!