C&C Please

Greensquared

Hi all,

So here's my entry for LPS #11. I'd love to have input on how this photo could be made better. I truly appreciate your time and effort!

Emily

pyroPrints.com

I like it, but it's not very crisp. You shot it using a tripod? I'm no pro by any means, but I would try shooting this at 100 ISO and f/8.0 instead of f/4.0, and make sure your focus is right.

Greensquared

pyroPrints.com wrote:

I like it, but it's not very crisp. You shot it using a tripod? I'm no pro by any means, but I would try shooting this at 100 ISO and f/8.0 instead of f/4.0, and make sure your focus is right.

Really? I had read it was better to shoot as wide open as possible for landscapes for clarity. Guess not??

pyroPrints.com

Greensquared wrote:

Really? I had read it was better to shoot as wide open as possible for landscapes for clarity. Guess not??

I'm not a pro like I said before. Any of the pros would like to set us straight on this issue?

Pat664422

I'm not a pro, but I've read several times that depth of field is shorted with wide aperature and increases with a narrow aperature.

From wikipedia:

"For a given subject framing, the DOF is controlled by the lens f-number. Increasing the f-number (reducing the aperture diameter) increases the DOF"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field

There are also pictures taken of the same subject at different aperatures for illustration.

I would agree with Pyro's advice about shooting at f/8 or higher for better cripsness in landscapes. I also think that is also a great take on the machine theme and a beautiful scene.

Llywellyn

Greensquared wrote:

Really? I had read it was better to shoot as wide open as possible for landscapes for clarity. Guess not??

You want your depth of field (not aperture) to be as wide (or deep) as possible, which means closing down the aperture. Close it down and focus about 1/3 of the way into your scene to get everything sharp.

If you reshoot and reprocess, I would also blend the vignette a little more and avoid oversaturating the greens at the very top of the frame.

Very cool scene.

Greensquared

Distance from subject and lens focal length also contribute to DOF. If the above image isn't sharp, I do not believe that it is a DOF issue. Camera shake, ISO and/or dirty lens are more likely the problem. I will attempt a reshoot. It will do me good to try and get it perfect. I didn't actually think it was blurry, but I guess you have a better set of eyes Pyro!

Greensquared

Here's some info similar to what I'd read on diffraction and the inherent effect of stopping down too low. So, it would seem that f8 or wider would be a good aperture to use, but I may bracket on it just to experiment.

Here's some other info on the softening effects of diffraction.

Thanks, everyone, for your input. It's really helping me to put more thought into this image!

LiquidAir

Greensquared wrote:

Really? I had read it was better to shoot as wide open as possible for landscapes for clarity. Guess not??

Typically not. Most lenses are sharpest between f/8 and f/11, wide angle lenses often don't hit their peak corner to corner sharpness until f/16. When shooting landscapes, 99% of my shots use one of f/8, f/11, or f/16. All that said, lens sharpness is a nuance that is only really relavant if you are making big prints. Any good lens is sharp enough at all apertures to generate images which appear sharp at web resolution. If you see the softness at web resolution it is one of three things: camera shake, not enough DoF or a mis-focus.

As for your image, it feels a little off to me but it is hard to diagnose at this resolution. There could be some camera shake. The other issue I see is a dynamic range problem. Some of the details which are lit by direct sun have blown out a bit which may be part of what makes it look less than perfectly clear. I'd shoot this scene either early in the morning or late in the evening when it isn't getting any direct light. You'll absolutely need a tripod then becuase your shutter times will be long (maybe 1/4s or so).

Greensquared

LiquidAir wrote:

As for your image, it feels a little off to me but it is hard to diagnose at this resolution. There could be some camera shake. The other issue I see is a dynamic range problem. Some of the details which are lit by direct sun have blown out a bit which may be part of what makes it look less than perfectly clear. I'd shoot this scene either early in the morning or late in the evening when it isn't getting any direct light. You'll absolutely need a tripod then becuase your shutter times will be long (maybe 1/4s or so).

Thanks for this info. This area is closed except during the middle of the day. 5:30pm is about the latest I can shoot, and probably 8am or so in the morning. Is there anything else I can do?

LiquidAir

Greensquared wrote:

Thanks for this info. This area is closed except during the middle of the day. 5:30pm is about the latest I can shoot, and probably 8am or so in the morning. Is there anything else I can do?

A cloudy day would be perfect. If that seems unlikely, what I would probably do is blend two exposures in Photoshop. What you want to do is put the camera on a tripod and bracket; ideally using either a cable release or some sort of timer so you don't have to touch the camera between exposures. Your goal is to get one shot just like this one, and a second one underexposed by about 2 stops (that's a guess). If you get it right, you can layer the two exposures in photoshop and then use a paint brush in the layer mask like it was the burn tool to burn down the highlights. The wonderful thing about burning this way is, unlike using the normal burn tool, you recover blown out detail from the other exposure. My SF2 entry, Former Glory, was essentially done this way (albeit with very intricate layer mask). When I exposed for the sky, the boat was hopelessly dark so I shot a 6 exposure bracket and picked two primary exposures to blend: one for the boat and one for the sky.

As for diffraction softness: it is really a pretty subtle effect. You will need to use good tripod technique with mirror lockup and a timer or cable release to see it. If you aren't going to that much effort to shoot your landscapes, then it is not worth worrying about. Former Glory was shot at f/16 (to get enough depth of field) and it is sharp enough make a museum quality 16x24 print.

Greensquared

This is great, Ken, thank you. I had taken some shots when it was overcast, but there is a tremendous amount of noise on them and I'm not sure why with a 200 ISO. I'm going to reset my camera to factory default, clean up all my lenses and head back for a reshoot. I would love to attempt the layer mask you're referring to. Thanks a huge bunch!

LiquidAir

Greensquared wrote:

This is great, Ken, thank you. I had taken some shots when it was overcast, but there is a tremendous amount of noise on them and I'm not sure why with a 200 ISO. I'm going to reset my camera to factory default, clean up all my lenses and head back for a reshoot. I would love to attempt the layer mask you're referring to. Thanks a huge bunch!

Sure, no problem. I started getting serious about exposure blending about 3 months ago and have been practicing ever since. If your experience is like mine, your first few tries are likely to be a bit frustrating. That said, the particular image you are working on here looks like it ought relatively straightforward.

On another note, dirty lenses usually cause loss of contrast rather than blur. If your shots start looking washed out, particularly selectively washed out over parts of the frame, then it is time to clean the lens.

nelsonstuff

Greensquared wrote:

but there is a tremendous amount of noise on them and I'm not sure why with a 200 ISO.

Try setting your Nikon to "Canon Mode". That should take care of the noise issue.

Povertybarn

nelsonstuff wrote:

Try setting your Nikon to "Canon Mode". That should take care of the noise issue.

Don't forget to set it on ISO100 under the Canon options.

HoofClix

nelsonstuff wrote:

Try setting your Nikon to "Canon Mode". That should take care of the noise issue.

C'mon fellas, let's try to be helpful now..

Povertybarn wrote:

Don't forget to set it on ISO100 under the Canon options

Talking about focus and depth of field issues?

Emily, your D200 has ISO100, of course as you know, and there is no reason why you should be getting any appreciable noise at that ISO.. just follow Liquid Air's instructions on the post processing and you'll make this image impeccable.. Tripod / f8 or even f16, aperture priority, shutter release. If you have Nikon Capture Control, connect your laptop to your camera via usb and use the laptop to control the whole thing.. You also have a mirror lock-up function that will help..

Greensquared

HoofClix wrote:

C'mon fellas, let's try to be helpful now..


Talking about focus and depth of field issues?

Emily, your D200 has ISO100, of course as you know, and there is no reason why you should be getting any appreciable noise at that ISO.. just follow Liquid Air's instructions on the post processing and you'll make this image impeccable.. Tripod / f8 or even f16, aperture priority, shutter release. If you have Nikon Capture Control, connect your laptop to your camera via usb and use the laptop to control the whole thing.. You also have a mirror lock-up function that will help..

Thank you. I am going to attempt a reshoot. Is mirror lock up that big of a deal, or is it only likely to help with very long exposures?

HoofClix

I don't do tripod shots that often, but it is pretty significant. I'm not sure if it was Seastack or LiquidAir who even commented on it recently. I'd say read your instructions to learn how to use it, even if you don't use it this time, as when you get into the next SF, you'll be glad you know how to use it..

LiquidAir

Greensquared wrote:

Thank you. I am going to attempt a reshoot. Is mirror lock up that big of a deal, or is it only likely to help with very long exposures?

I haven't tested it in detail, but reports I have read say it helps the most for exposures between 1/60s and 2 seconds. Once you get longer than 2 seconds or so, the camera shake is too small a fraction of the total exposure duration to matter much. Of course it also matters how sturdy and heavy your tripod is. MLU helps quite a bit on a light carbon fiber tripod, but if you anchor your camera to a 50 pound granite block and it won't matter much. Personally, I try to use MLU whenever it is practical just to keep it part of my working habits. But then, my personal passion is taking shots I can make big prints from.

Cosmonaut

Greensquared wrote:

Really? I had read it was better to shoot as wide open as possible for landscapes for clarity. Guess not??

All lenses have a sweet spot. Most around f/8 to f/16. The longer you work with a lens the more you will get use to where it works best. For best sharpness focus one third the way into the shot. Check the link. Try shooting early in the morning or on a cloudy day. HDR might work too but any puff of wind or camera movement and the trees will lose sharpness. ISO200 will work good along with a sturdy tripod.
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2314.htm

Cosmo

pyroPrints.com

Greensquared wrote:

This area is closed except during the middle of the day.

don't tell me you're letting that stop you

Felicia

Ask the "powers that be" about getting "special dispensation" to shoot in the early morning or late evening. The worst they can say is no. Then if they say no, you dress in all black, wear face paint, sneak in at night by cutting a hole in the fence, bivouac in the woods, shoot as soon as you've got your light, and escape before anyone catches you...

I'M KIDDING!:lol4

pyroPrints.com

Felicia wrote:

Ask the "powers that be" about getting "special dispensation" to shoot in the early morning or late evening. The worst they can say is no. Then if they say no, you dress in all black, wear face paint, sneak in at night by cutting a hole in the fence, bivouac in the woods, shoot as soon as you've got your light, and escape before anyone catches you...

I'M KIDDING!:lol4

I'd do it. =c) UrbEx baby

LiquidAir

Many of the places I shoot are only open to cars from sunrise to sunset which means I end up hoofing it if I want to be there for prime light. I have, however, walked right by the park rangers as they were opening the gates without objection. There are some places that I'd like to shoot which are more difficult. In one case, I have a contact with one of the docents who I know has an interest in photography and I am working on arranging a special sunset photography tour.

Greensquared

Cosmonaut wrote:

All lenses have a sweet spot. Most around f/8 to f/16. The longer you work with a lens the more you will get use to where it works best. For best sharpness focus one third the way into the shot. Check the link. Try shooting early in the morning or on a cloudy day. HDR might work too but any puff of wind or camera movement and the trees will lose sharpness. ISO200 will work good along with a sturdy tripod.
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2314.htm

Cosmo

Thanks for this info!

Gary Glass

I suggest less pond, more trees. Open up the top of the frame. The reflection on the water is not that interesting, and very hackneyed. Make the mill your focus.

Greensquared

Gary Glass wrote:

I suggest less pond, more trees. Open up the top of the frame. The reflection on the water is not that interesting, and very hackneyed. Make the mill your focus.

Thanks Gary. This is one area I had also planned to consider in my reshoot.

richtersl

Greensquared wrote:

Hi all,

So here's my entry for LPS #11. I'd love to have input on how this photo could be made better. I truly appreciate your time and effort!

Emily

It's a very pretty place and I am reminded of a similar setting near my home. For an overall view like you have here, a shot with the leaves in full fall color would look gorgeous but we're a little too early in the season for that.

I feel that the overall view you have here loses the machinery meaning of the photo and may get you dinged for not hitting the theme. I'd be worried about a judge seeing "architecture" or "landscape" instead of "machine". Perhaps a reshoot with a closeup of the wheel or a shot of the workings inside the mill might represent the machinery aspect a bit better.

Greensquared

richtersl wrote:

It's a very pretty place and I am reminded of a similar setting near my home. For an overall view like you have here, a shot with the leaves in full fall color would look gorgeous but we're a little too early in the season for that.

I feel that the overall view you have here loses the machinery meaning of the photo and may get you dinged for not hitting the theme. I'd be worried about a judge seeing "architecture" or "landscape" instead of "machine". Perhaps a reshoot with a closeup of the wheel or a shot of the workings inside the mill might represent the machinery aspect a bit better.

Thanks for the comments. I agree that the theme is more subtle in this image. I hope I will be able to translate it well enough in the final presentation.

Pat664422

I agree with the comments about focusing more on the water wheel, and cropping out the reflection. But for for what it's worth, the moment I saw the initial version of your picture I immediately recognized the water wheel as the machine and thought it was a great take on the theme.

BistiArt

Good advice

LiquidAir wrote:

Typically not.
If you see the softness at web resolution it is one of three things: camera shake, not enough DoF or a mis-focus.

The other issue I see is a dynamic range problem. Some details lit by direct sun have blown out a bit which may be part of what makes it look less than perfectly clear.
I'd shoot this scene either early in the morning or late in the evening when it isn't getting any direct light. You'll absolutely need a tripod then becuase your shutter times will be long (maybe 1/4s or so).

Emily,

what Ken said...

Ken,

Thanks for the practical lessons and good, direct advice!