Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited August 19, 2009
You get to go again:D
Yes it is better I added three more changes though,
made a mask of the center and lightened
I made another mask of the clouds and darkened, then finally cropped a bit more from the bottom.
I used the linear gradient tool for the clouds mask,
I tried to keep the horizon from the center of the frame but in this case the sunlit hill becomes the focal point and not the horizon. Therefore the horizon close to the center is not as intrusive.
You are more than welcome.Thank you for choosing it.
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited August 24, 2009
I chose this for the amazing job processing the sky!
However, there are two parts I am not crazy about.
Technically; the dark edges of the burn are showing in the Cottonwood tree.
Subjectively; I would call this a case of the wrong technique. I believe the sky is part of a "glorious" landscape, with soft, warm and inviting subjects in the foreground. The suns rays would top off the inviting subject below with the inspiring light from above. BUT, the gritty and dark road below with the barbed wire fence is anything but inviting
For this foreground, I would choose some dark brooding sky with little color.
Here is what I would suggest.
Technically;
If you are working on blending two exposures into one scene, sky and earth. Pick a scene with a simple foreground like out in the middle of this field.
Then be careful to exclude trees you can see through as they become very difficult to blend.
It appears you have done a good job blending the two exp in the mountains but you may want to darken the bottom of the mountains a bit more just so the blend gradation is not as obvious.
Subjectivity; Consider the subject and the mood you are trying to set it in!
This cropping isolates the rays and sky, takes away the emphasis on the Cottonwood and uses the fence in a more subtle way.
Marc,
Thank you for the critique, this was shot on my way up the 395 and this amazing light developed. I quickly looked for some kind of foreground. While on photography trips I usually carry my camera with 24-105 upfront but this time I had my 24t/s and couldn't get to my other lenses. So i took a few shots handheld at iso 1600 and the light disappeared. By the way I was really amazed at how nice iso 1600 is with the 5D M2. Your crop looks and feels much better. I was thinking too much about using the fence, when it reality what drew me to the scene was the light.
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited August 25, 2009
I have been up that highway about 100,000 times and not seen such a great sky, great timing. On the other hand, I have seen light like that in many parking lots :cry
I agree that the high ISO of the new cameras is incredible. So few landscape photographers use anything past 400 I think it is difficult to reprogram our habits. I also think, landscape photos and noise are like cats and dogs, or so most think so.
A little noise wont hurt! There has always been a laundry list of reasons why not to take a picture, especially landscapes. It is the anal retentive mind that wins in such cases. The problem with this self imposed list of restrictions becomes evident when we are confronted with rare opportunities in brief moments. What do we do? Hand hold or dig for the tripod, set up the cable release and reprogram the camera for optimal low noise settings?
I have learned over the years that priorities in a time warp should be second nature. Making a sound decision on subject and composition out ways many technical aspects IMO However, I take what I can get. Some technical aspects can not be ignored, FOCUS always helps:D
I think you understand what was unusual about this scene, the light not the fence Now when your given that gift again, I hope you dont get arrested for trespassing
Sorry for getting back so late I was on vacation. So this is one of my first images I took with a point and shoot camera. I wasn't really thinking and liked the way the path looked, very mysterious and such.
This is sutro baths in San Francisco, CA. The light source to the left is from the cliff house restuarant. They used to be natural swimming pools that filled up with salt water back in the early 20th century.
I am intrigued to look at this image long enough to figure it out, but like a closed gas station in the middle of the desert there is nothing to keep me around.
The stars are wonderful.
The exposure is fine.
It appears to be a bit noisy and light is creeping in from the source on the right, maybe there is a way to flag the lens during the exposure?
The POV is too low, hiding what could be valuable information in front of the distant rocks.
The horizon is dividing the composition.
Is this a swimming pool overlooking the ocean?
If it is a swimming pool why is the edge so very rough?
What is the light from on the distant rocks?
I am very curious to know what is going on. Can you get back to this location?
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited August 27, 2009
Glad to see you made it back from vacation
Your two images are sure interesting, I hope you try the baths again, as that has much potential. If you do, use the lowest ISO on the best camera you can get your hands on.
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited August 31, 2009
The colors work well, nice warm tree trunk, white rocks complemented by the blue sky.
Exposure and Processing looks good, nice detail in the distant back-lit mountain and good sunstar.
I would prefer if the sunspots were cloned out, or simply cloned out the "color" This can be done in PS by changing the clone tool prefs to "color"
You are sooooo close with this image
However, I believe no Cigar:cry
I want to see more of the trunk.
By including more of the FG or trunk, the emphasis on the white and less interesting rocks would be decreased. The sun has become your subject, sort of! leaving nothing else to WOW me. You have captured an image at the perfect time with great light, all in a wonderful location, but forgot to compose a subject.
I broke the image down into its four sections by dividing them with red lines. Here you see how the sun is the only element interacting with the other sections. I think your main subject should take charge of the composition and interact with the rest of the scene, something the branches of this tree could have possibly done.
BTW, I am not necessarily recommending a wider angle lens. Simply moving back and around would most likely done the trick.
Hello Marc,
All points well taken, with this trip I was trying to create an original composition of a well known place, of course a likable one as well. This was taken at the very peak of the Patriarch Grove on the south end. After getting to the top, the only tree up there was this one and the shape didn't seem too interesting so my thought was for the sun to be the subject (as the brightest part of the photo)projecting the light and exposing the texture of the worn tree. I liked the idea of creating the layers of sky, shadows, white rocks as a kind of visual pattern as a secondary subject. After reading your comments I can see that I did not have a single strong subject from the start.
Here is the tree from another angle (unprocessed jpeg). Thanks for the photoshop tip as well, your processing knowledge is incredible. Thanks again for this service.
I liked the idea of creating the layers of sky, shadows, white rocks as a kind of visual pattern as a secondary subject.
I agree with this, and think had there been more trunk it would have helped to make it the background design it should be. Looks like you were prepared for everything but the last tree
I cant tell you how many times I have hiked over a hill, around a corner, into another canyon, behind yet another tree in the search of the perfect tree, to only find, well, nothing But it is all good!
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 3, 2009
I like what you did in post but feel the light is still too smokey.
However, I choose this image because of its composition
I copped it down to get the flares out as well take away the distant hazy cliffs.
Although, I believe it is missing the dynamic bands of lighter granite on the cliffs to the right. This is a unusual quality of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison which you included so well in your original comp. Looks to me like you found a great shot and therefore NEED to go back no matter the cost:D in better light
Just remember to hold your hand out in front of the lens to block the light. Most think that you must block the entire front element of the lens but.......... Often, when my hand gets in the field of view when attempting to shade the lens, I hold it so my hand only blocks the middle of the front element on the lens. This will cut much of the nasty haze and flares.
The bright street lamp in the upper left corner
The composition
The street lamp might become an issue if you could not position the camera so it is out of frame.
However, by moving the POV you may solve both the street lamp problem as well as the compositional issue. I have drawn two lines in yellow to exaggerate what I believe are dominant compositional lines distracting from the skyline, reflection and walkway. What I believe would help is to join the three subjects, water, skyline and walkway by breaking up the borders between them "yellow lines" with elements in the frame. Maybe lowering the POV would force the chain up into the skyline a bit breaking up the horizontal line?
What I like in this image is the exposure and the colors.
A second try...
I had a chance to revisit this site a bit earlier and hunted about to try to get a better composition with improved angles. I pulled out my iPhone and looked up this post to try to guide me in the reshoot (this thread is invaluable). This is the best of the bunch. A bit earlier as I said so the sky has some more color and the buildings have fewer lights on. In comparing to the prior, I think I took this one too early (damn mosquitos kept me from staying much longer). I managed a shot that was wider and did not have the distracting light but decided to crop more aggressively to get the building under construction out of the image while keeping the cobblestone path and chain in frame.
I hope I hit most of the critiques posted above.
E
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 16, 2009
This is not too early
I like a bit of color behind the buildings. However, if you like the sky darker you could always mask and darken it.
I think you have done a great job composing the shot. The only part I like better on the first image is the blue cast on the sidewalk. However, I believe what you have done here is fantasticthumb
I like a bit of color behind the buildings. However, if you like the sky darker you could always mask and darken it.
I think you have done a great job composing the shot. The only part I like better on the first image is the blue cast on the sidewalk. However, I believe what you have done here is fantasticthumb
Thank you Marc
Greatly appreciate the comments. I'm only bothered by the fewer lights on in the buildings and the concurrent drop in reflected colors. I plan to revisit this and my other Muench University shot at least a few more times to try to perfect them.
I was able to take your advice on another Muench Univ shot and use it 'in the field' when shooting Nubble light in Maine. Just wanted to thank you for the invaluable advice you offer as it helps push me as a photographer.
E
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 22, 2009
Exposure looks good
Color balance looks good
Depth of field looks good
Composition is great
I am soooo glad the shutter speed is fast enough to freeze the water covering the rock turning it into what appears like gel. This is the best part of the image
The problem with this image is that there is too much contrast in certain areas. It looks as though the scene has a very high dynamic range, but also the post processing method induced even more contrast.
The simplest way to correct this file would be to lower the contrast overall.
Because the contrast is good in certain areas such as the water in the center of the image, that could be added later.
The very best way to handle this scene would be to have taken a several separate exposure for the highlights and shadows. Because the water is moving, I would use some manual masking of the bracketed exposures to compile the best exposures in certain regions.
I do like this image because of the very well timed exposure capturing the foam covering the rocks with just a bit of the rock exposed. The composition appears carefully chosen with the round boulder in the FG.
Hi Marc, thanks for the critique. I've reworked it a little by selectively lowering the contrast and highlights in the areas you pointed out. I also did a 5x7 crop to get rid of a portion of the clipping. Here is the result:
EDIT: as an aside the reason I darkened the rocks in the background was I thought it would give a better sense of depth and draw more attention to the rock lower right and water over the rock lower left as that was the main subject of the comp. I can see that the contrast was a bit much. I am interested to hear if the newer version works for you. Thanks!
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 22, 2009
Very nice work Chris
I agree with the decision to crop. However, there is one spot still bothering me. I would like to see the wave the same luminosity from FG to BG and the FG should be as bright as the BG.
Regarding your reasoning for darkening the distant rocks, I agree that you want the FG rock to be the main subject but, what was not working is more contrast in the distance than the FG. That always wins the war of compromises in my book. Contrast always attracts our attention, so reducing it is just a powerful as adding it, when it comes to guiding the viewers eye.
Thanks Marc. I made one more series of (subtle) changes based on your recs. I tried to better match the luminosity of the waves FG to BG, took down the cyan in the sky a little, and removed (what appeared to my eyes) a slight bluish hue of the water. May be difficult to notice because they were small moves. Thanks for your help!
Thanks Marc. I made one more series of (subtle) changes based on your recs. I tried to better match the luminosity of the waves FG to BG, took down the cyan in the sky a little, and removed (what appeared to my eyes) a slight bluish hue of the water. May be difficult to notice because they were small moves. Thanks for your help!
Great work Chris
When your in this situation in the future just remember to shoot one more exposure for the highlights. In this composition it would have been fairly simple to combine the sky manually.
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 28, 2009
What a cool image
Well exposed
Well composed
Fun post processing
Was there steam rising from the snow causing the suns rays, or was that added in post?
Because this is obviously a digitally generated effect, the sky is the limit with regards to moving pixels. I would have removed the picnic tables, leaving the viewer with a bit more mystery.
However, I am all ears if you have a good reason for combining this tree with the effect and the tables.
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited October 27, 2009
I am drawn into this image. Great composition and interesting light.
I do believe there are several things that would improve it even more.
First crop some sky out and darken what is left. Everyone knows what sky looks like and the stone fences below appear more interesting to me anyway. Maybe you took another with more base?
Darken the entire scene. I believe this will add some drama and help guide the viewer to the lake. However, what you might have to do is NOT darken the distant mountain as much as the rest of the image.
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited November 2, 2009
Nice soft sun light.
Good colors.
Post processing looks accurate.
However, the composition is a bit tight and split down the middle.
I do like the way you filled the frame. What may have helped this composition is some element linking the two halves together. It could have been a tree, dead branch, or even grass if you placed the camera much lower
I also think some more space on the right would have provided additional depth.
Nice soft sun light.
Good colors.
Post processing looks accurate.
However, the composition is a bit tight and split down the middle.
I do like the way you filled the frame. What may have helped this composition is some element linking the two halves together. It could have been a tree, dead branch, or even grass if you placed the camera much lower<img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/ne_nau.gif" border="0" alt="" >
I also think some more space on the right would have provided additional depth.
Is this the full frame?
Marc,
<o:p> </o:p>
Thank you for the critique. The photo is full frame. I did not think about it at the time, but I understand what you mean when you say the composition is tight and split down the middle. Obviously, I am very much an amateur and, on that occasion, I was using a wide-angle lens for the first time. It was a rented lens and I was trying to see what it could do.
<o:p> </o:p>
There was no tree or branch in the immediate area, but in the future I’ll remember to try a lower position of the camera relative to the to the ground in order to make the composition work. I am typically attracted to subjects because of color and often I am attracted to buildings in decline. I’ll be back in the area of that barn in a few weeks. Although the time of year will be different, I’ll try to use what you suggest and see if I can get a better shot. I enjoy viewing the photos of others and I am learning much from what you suggest.
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited November 18, 2009
The stacked ridges and pink clouds are nice.
The light is soft making the mood a bit somber and dark.
I noticed your other posts in the gallery and would like to make a few suggestions based on all three of the images.
Here are the other two images
1, your going to some great locations.
2, your exposures are accurate.
3, the colors look accurate.
4, the crops look good, and/or your composing well.
However, even though you are doing all these things well, something is missing!
Consider three things before turning on the camera. What is your subject. What should the light be. How will you compose the subject in the light.
You seam to have enough technical ability to focus on these elements now.
If you cant pre-visualize a subject, then skip that step for now and concentrate on light. Directional light will help shape the natural contours of the landscape. Shadows are your friend
In my opinion your ability to compose looks good, spend some time looking at the same subject in different light, even if the subject is a simple tree. The objective is to only study the light and how it changes the shape, feel and mood of the tree.
The stacked ridges and pink clouds are nice.
The light is soft making the mood a bit somber and dark.
I noticed your other posts in the gallery and would like to make a few suggestions based on all three of the images.
Here are the other two images
1, your going to some great locations.
2, your exposures are accurate.
3, the colors look accurate.
4, the crops look good, and/or your composing well.
However, even though you are doing all these things well, something is missing!
Consider three things before turning on the camera. What is your subject. What should the light be. How will you compose the subject in the light.
You seam to have enough technical ability to focus on these elements now.
If you cant pre-visualize a subject, then skip that step for now and concentrate on light. Directional light will help shape the natural contours of the landscape. Shadows are your friend
In my opinion your ability to compose looks good, spend some time looking at the same subject in different light, even if the subject is a simple tree. The objective is to only study the light and how it changes the shape, feel and mood of the tree.
Thank you for posting your images
Thanks much for your time and critique. Your comments are spot on to what I suspected. I am encouraged that I have managed to learn some of the technicalities of the "process". Unfortunately, all of my submissions were taken while on group tours. Your comments may have pushed me more toward spending time in one locale as opposed to seeing how many places I can visit in a limited amount of time. Thanks to sites such as Digital Grin and some others, I have more desire to grow photographically and less desire to fill pages in my passport. Again, thanks for your insights.
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited November 19, 2009
Oh what a nice subject
And this is telling, at least in my mind I'll explain below.
The composition is great.
The focal length is good.
The long exposure helps by softening much of the composition.
The sky is too light.
What I mean by "telling" is, the natural story of this coast is revealed in this image. I wont go into the natural story in great lengths as you can find it here.But, I will say that what sets this coast apart from others I have visited is the geometric granite slabs that break off and through time are tumbled into perfect little bowling balls and left in certain bays. This phenomena is IN YOUR FACE in this image.
I would like to see the sky a bit darker but otherwise great job
Oh what a nice subject
And this is telling, at least in my mind I'll explain below.
The composition is great.
The focal length is good.
The long exposure helps by softening much of the composition.
The sky is too light.
What I mean by "telling" is, the natural story of this coast is revealed in this image. I wont go into the natural story in great lengths as you can find it here.But, I will say that what sets this coast apart from others I have visited is the geometric granite slabs that break off and through time are tumbled into perfect little bowling balls and left in certain bays. This phenomena is IN YOUR FACE in this image.
I would like to see the sky a bit darker but otherwise great job
I really appreciate your critique and will work on darkening the sky this weekend. When I saw this boulder, it was amazing to imagine how long it had been rolled around in its shoreline rock tumbler. Thanks for the link on the geological specifics.
It was such a pleasure to get a taste of your instruction while on the Digital Grin Shootout. I'd recommend anyone interested in landscape photography sign up for one of your trips.
Marc,
<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p>
Thank you for the critique. The photo is full frame. I did not think about it at the time, but I understand what you mean when you say the composition is tight and split down the middle. Obviously, I am very much an amateur and, on that occasion, I was using a wide-angle lens for the first time. It was a rented lens and I was trying to see what it could do.
<o:p></o:p>
There was no tree or branch in the immediate area, but in the future I’ll remember to try a lower position of the camera relative to the to the ground in order to make the composition work. I am typically attracted to subjects because of color and often I am attracted to buildings in decline. I’ll be back in the area of that barn in a few weeks. Although the time of year will be different, I’ll try to use what you suggest and see if I can get a better shot. I enjoy viewing the photos of others and I am learning much from what you suggest.
I attempted the shot one more time, but the light and conditions were totally different. Basically, the area was a mud hole with a major pit with water where I stood a few months ago. I attempted to get more depth in the photo, but I realize the shot has compositional problems.
Comments
East coast copy.jpg
Yes it is better
made a mask of the center and lightened
I made another mask of the clouds and darkened, then finally cropped a bit more from the bottom.
I used the linear gradient tool for the clouds mask,
I tried to keep the horizon from the center of the frame but in this case the sunlit hill becomes the focal point and not the horizon. Therefore the horizon close to the center is not as intrusive.
Thank you for another interesting image
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
You are more than welcome.Thank you for choosing it.
I chose this for the amazing job processing the sky!
However, there are two parts I am not crazy about.
Technically; the dark edges of the burn are showing in the Cottonwood tree.
Subjectively; I would call this a case of the wrong technique. I believe the sky is part of a "glorious" landscape, with soft, warm and inviting subjects in the foreground. The suns rays would top off the inviting subject below with the inspiring light from above. BUT, the gritty and dark road below with the barbed wire fence is anything but inviting
For this foreground, I would choose some dark brooding sky with little color.
Here is what I would suggest.
Technically;
If you are working on blending two exposures into one scene, sky and earth. Pick a scene with a simple foreground like out in the middle of this field.
Then be careful to exclude trees you can see through as they become very difficult to blend.
It appears you have done a good job blending the two exp in the mountains
Subjectivity; Consider the subject and the mood you are trying to set it in!
This cropping isolates the rays and sky, takes away the emphasis on the Cottonwood and uses the fence in a more subtle way.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Thank you for the critique, this was shot on my way up the 395 and this amazing light developed. I quickly looked for some kind of foreground. While on photography trips I usually carry my camera with 24-105 upfront but this time I had my 24t/s and couldn't get to my other lenses. So i took a few shots handheld at iso 1600 and the light disappeared. By the way I was really amazed at how nice iso 1600 is with the 5D M2. Your crop looks and feels much better. I was thinking too much about using the fence, when it reality what drew me to the scene was the light.
I agree that the high ISO of the new cameras is incredible. So few landscape photographers use anything past 400
A little noise wont hurt! There has always been a laundry list of reasons why not to take a picture, especially landscapes. It is the anal retentive mind that wins in such cases. The problem with this self imposed list of restrictions becomes evident when we are confronted with rare opportunities in brief moments. What do we do? Hand hold or dig for the tripod, set up the cable release and reprogram the camera for optimal low noise settings?
I have learned over the years that priorities in a time warp should be second nature. Making a sound decision on subject and composition out ways many technical aspects IMO
I think you understand what was unusual about this scene, the light not the fence
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Your two images are sure interesting, I hope you try the baths again, as that has much potential. If you do, use the lowest ISO on the best camera you can get your hands on.
Cheers
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
The colors work well, nice warm tree trunk, white rocks complemented by the blue sky.
Exposure and Processing looks good, nice detail in the distant back-lit mountain and good sunstar.
I would prefer if the sunspots were cloned out, or simply cloned out the "color" This can be done in PS by changing the clone tool prefs to "color"
You are sooooo close with this image
However, I believe no Cigar:cry
I want to see more of the trunk.
By including more of the FG or trunk, the emphasis on the white and less interesting rocks would be decreased. The sun has become your subject, sort of! leaving nothing else to WOW me. You have captured an image at the perfect time with great light, all in a wonderful location, but forgot to compose a subject.
I broke the image down into its four sections by dividing them with red lines. Here you see how the sun is the only element interacting with the other sections. I think your main subject should take charge of the composition and interact with the rest of the scene, something the branches of this tree could have possibly done.
BTW, I am not necessarily recommending a wider angle lens. Simply moving back and around would most likely done the trick.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
All points well taken, with this trip I was trying to create an original composition of a well known place, of course a likable one as well. This was taken at the very peak of the Patriarch Grove on the south end. After getting to the top, the only tree up there was this one and the shape didn't seem too interesting so my thought was for the sun to be the subject (as the brightest part of the photo)projecting the light and exposing the texture of the worn tree. I liked the idea of creating the layers of sky, shadows, white rocks as a kind of visual pattern as a secondary subject. After reading your comments I can see that I did not have a single strong subject from the start.
Here is the tree from another angle (unprocessed jpeg). Thanks for the photoshop tip as well, your processing knowledge is incredible. Thanks again for this service.
I agree with this, and think had there been more trunk it would have helped to make it the background design it should be. Looks like you were prepared for everything but the last tree
I cant tell you how many times I have hiked over a hill, around a corner, into another canyon, behind yet another tree in the search of the perfect tree, to only find, well, nothing
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
I like what you did in post but feel the light is still too smokey.
However, I choose this image because of its composition
I copped it down to get the flares out as well take away the distant hazy cliffs.
Although, I believe it is missing the dynamic bands of lighter granite on the cliffs to the right. This is a unusual quality of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison which you included so well in your original comp. Looks to me like you found a great shot and therefore NEED to go back no matter the cost:D in better light
Just remember to hold your hand out in front of the lens to block the light. Most think that you must block the entire front element of the lens but.......... Often, when my hand gets in the field of view when attempting to shade the lens, I hold it so my hand only blocks the middle of the front element on the lens. This will cut much of the nasty haze and flares.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
I had a chance to revisit this site a bit earlier and hunted about to try to get a better composition with improved angles. I pulled out my iPhone and looked up this post to try to guide me in the reshoot (this thread is invaluable
I hope I hit most of the critiques posted above.
E
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
I like a bit of color behind the buildings. However, if you like the sky darker you could always mask and darken it.
I think you have done a great job composing the shot. The only part I like better on the first image is the blue cast on the sidewalk. However, I believe what you have done here is fantastic
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Thank you Marc
Greatly appreciate the comments. I'm only bothered by the fewer lights on in the buildings and the concurrent drop in reflected colors. I plan to revisit this and my other Muench University shot at least a few more times to try to perfect them.
I was able to take your advice on another Muench Univ shot and use it 'in the field' when shooting Nubble light in Maine. Just wanted to thank you for the invaluable advice you offer as it helps push me as a photographer.
E
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
Exposure looks good
Color balance looks good
Depth of field looks good
Composition is great
I am soooo glad the shutter speed is fast enough to freeze the water covering the rock turning it into what appears like gel. This is the best part of the image
The problem with this image is that there is too much contrast in certain areas. It looks as though the scene has a very high dynamic range, but also the post processing method induced even more contrast.
The simplest way to correct this file would be to lower the contrast overall.
Because the contrast is good in certain areas such as the water in the center of the image, that could be added later.
The very best way to handle this scene would be to have taken a several separate exposure for the highlights and shadows. Because the water is moving, I would use some manual masking of the bracketed exposures to compile the best exposures in certain regions.
I do like this image because of the very well timed exposure capturing the foam covering the rocks with just a bit of the rock exposed. The composition appears carefully chosen with the round boulder in the FG.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
EDIT: as an aside the reason I darkened the rocks in the background was I thought it would give a better sense of depth and draw more attention to the rock lower right and water over the rock lower left as that was the main subject of the comp. I can see that the contrast was a bit much. I am interested to hear if the newer version works for you. Thanks!
Crescent City Prints
Facebook Fan Page
Blog
I agree with the decision to crop. However, there is one spot still bothering me. I would like to see the wave the same luminosity from FG to BG and the FG should be as bright as the BG.
Regarding your reasoning for darkening the distant rocks, I agree that you want the FG rock to be the main subject but, what was not working is more contrast in the distance than the FG. That always wins the war of compromises in my book. Contrast always attracts our attention, so reducing it is just a powerful as adding it, when it comes to guiding the viewers eye.
Great job
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Crescent City Prints
Facebook Fan Page
Blog
Great work Chris
When your in this situation in the future just remember to shoot one more exposure for the highlights. In this composition it would have been fairly simple to combine the sky manually.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
What a cool image
Well exposed
Well composed
Fun post processing
Was there steam rising from the snow causing the suns rays, or was that added in post?
Because this is obviously a digitally generated effect, the sky is the limit with regards to moving pixels. I would have removed the picnic tables, leaving the viewer with a bit more mystery.
However, I am all ears if you have a good reason for combining this tree with the effect and the tables.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
I am drawn into this image. Great composition and interesting light.
I do believe there are several things that would improve it even more.
First crop some sky out and darken what is left. Everyone knows what sky looks like and the stone fences below appear more interesting to me anyway. Maybe you took another with more base?
Darken the entire scene. I believe this will add some drama and help guide the viewer to the lake. However, what you might have to do is NOT darken the distant mountain as much as the rest of the image.
Wonderfully composed
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Nice soft sun light.
Good colors.
Post processing looks accurate.
However, the composition is a bit tight and split down the middle.
I do like the way you filled the frame. What may have helped this composition is some element linking the two halves together. It could have been a tree, dead branch, or even grass if you placed the camera much lower
I also think some more space on the right would have provided additional depth.
Is this the full frame?
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Marc,
<o:p> </o:p>
Thank you for the critique. The photo is full frame. I did not think about it at the time, but I understand what you mean when you say the composition is tight and split down the middle. Obviously, I am very much an amateur and, on that occasion, I was using a wide-angle lens for the first time. It was a rented lens and I was trying to see what it could do.
<o:p> </o:p>
There was no tree or branch in the immediate area, but in the future I’ll remember to try a lower position of the camera relative to the to the ground in order to make the composition work. I am typically attracted to subjects because of color and often I am attracted to buildings in decline. I’ll be back in the area of that barn in a few weeks. Although the time of year will be different, I’ll try to use what you suggest and see if I can get a better shot. I enjoy viewing the photos of others and I am learning much from what you suggest.
The stacked ridges and pink clouds are nice.
The light is soft making the mood a bit somber and dark.
I noticed your other posts in the gallery and would like to make a few suggestions based on all three of the images.
Here are the other two images
1, your going to some great locations.
2, your exposures are accurate.
3, the colors look accurate.
4, the crops look good, and/or your composing well.
However, even though you are doing all these things well, something is missing!
Consider three things before turning on the camera. What is your subject. What should the light be. How will you compose the subject in the light.
You seam to have enough technical ability to focus on these elements now.
If you cant pre-visualize a subject, then skip that step for now and concentrate on light. Directional light will help shape the natural contours of the landscape. Shadows are your friend
In my opinion your ability to compose looks good, spend some time looking at the same subject in different light, even if the subject is a simple tree. The objective is to only study the light and how it changes the shape, feel and mood of the tree.
Thank you for posting your images
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Thanks much for your time and critique. Your comments are spot on to what I suspected. I am encouraged that I have managed to learn some of the technicalities of the "process". Unfortunately, all of my submissions were taken while on group tours. Your comments may have pushed me more toward spending time in one locale as opposed to seeing how many places I can visit in a limited amount of time. Thanks to sites such as Digital Grin and some others, I have more desire to grow photographically and less desire to fill pages in my passport. Again, thanks for your insights.
Oh what a nice subject
And this is telling, at least in my mind
The composition is great.
The focal length is good.
The long exposure helps by softening much of the composition.
The sky is too light.
What I mean by "telling" is, the natural story of this coast is revealed in this image. I wont go into the natural story in great lengths as you can find it here.But, I will say that what sets this coast apart from others I have visited is the geometric granite slabs that break off and through time are tumbled into perfect little bowling balls and left in certain bays. This phenomena is IN YOUR FACE in this image.
I would like to see the sky a bit darker but otherwise great job
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
I really appreciate your critique and will work on darkening the sky this weekend. When I saw this boulder, it was amazing to imagine how long it had been rolled around in its shoreline rock tumbler. Thanks for the link on the geological specifics.
It was such a pleasure to get a taste of your instruction while on the Digital Grin Shootout. I'd recommend anyone interested in landscape photography sign up for one of your trips.
I attempted the shot one more time, but the light and conditions were totally different. Basically, the area was a mud hole with a major pit with water where I stood a few months ago. I attempted to get more depth in the photo, but I realize the shot has compositional problems.