|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi everyone. I am not sure folks will see this, but I've done some further work on this image. I've mainly played with the colors to make it a bit colder and bleaker - perhaps a little more consistent with the mood I was trying to portray. I think it is a stronger version in any case. I'd appreciate comments if anyone has a moment or two. |
Oct 25th |
 |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi Bob. I don't think I have ever seen a Lensbaby used like this for a grand landscape shot. I think it is probably more effective at intimate landscapes (flowers, etc.) or portraits, as you point out. Of course I am not sure that anything it does in terms of "dreaminess" can't be done in photoshop after the fact. Very hard in contrast to reverse dreaminess in photoshop.
That said, I do like the idea of exploring grand landscapes that are not rendered perfectly (e.g., super sharp). Another example would be to deliberately introduce strong flare. For better or worse, I think Ansel Adams has put a few very strong notions in most people's heads as to what a landscape photograph should look like. So worth exploring and trying to push the creative norm.
|
Oct 16th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi Gloria. This is a very nice sunrise image. I agree with you that it does not look as crisp as you might expect, particularly given you are on a tripod. Couple of thoughts. First, you may be aware, but you want to turn camera stabilization off when you are on a tripod - if you don't sometimes it will actually work against you and blur the shot. I am not sure what the 80 D has for stabilization, so this might or might not be an issue. Second, you are at f18 which is likely beyond the sweet spot of the lens, and into the regime where diffraction may be robbing sharpness. Usually the sweet spot is f8 or maybe f11. As far as I can tell you don't have challenging depth of field here which would push you to smaller apertures. Finally, it might be just your sharpening in Lightroom. I might play with the sharpening options and see if things improve. I did that in the version below - quick adjustment I think improved things significantly. |
Oct 16th |
 |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi Cheryl. I like the blurred clouds, and do think they bring in the time element. I don't think the contrast is as strong though as in your image last month. It had a single building which came across as large and monolithic - which emphasized static for the building (in contrast to the moving clouds). This one has a lot of detail in the static portion, so I feel like a little bit of that static feeling and contrast is lost.
I do agree with others that the exciting part of the sky is on the left, and moving left - so the right side of the image feels a little left out. I also feel like you might back off on the saturation a little bit. But these are small things - it is a very nice image. |
Oct 16th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi Dan. Another really beautiful shot. If you could bottle your ability to nail compositions down to taking care of the finest detail, you could make a fortune. I'd only have the same comment as Haru regarding the sky, which currently draws my eye to the upper left - but easily corrected. I again am guessing at the title and have no idea unless it is related to your comments about listening.
On that, I will have to more consciously pay attention to my other senses when shooting. I think for me, the sounds, smells, touches of rock or sand, etc. don't register on their own, but add up to a specific feeling. Sometimes it is difficult to put words to that feeling - maybe if I paid more attention to the individual senses contributing, I would be better able to articulate the subtly of what I'm feeling. Of course many other things - like what mood I am in that day - contribute as well.
Likewise when viewing the image someone else has produced, I think I jump more directly to how it makes me feel, and skip or get stuck on that vs. thinking about individual sensory responses. In this image, my feelings are most attracted to the power of the clouds. Prompted by your question, if I were to think about the senses the image conveys that I might feel standing (or perching from what you say) on the rocks, I think I feel the wind in my face more than I hear the ocean. The concept of what a landscape image conveys beyond its superficial beauty - the feeling, story, or senses - is one I think I will spend the rest of my life trying to decipher. |
Oct 16th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Reply |
Thanks Dan. I definitely had a lot of feelings that day, but I think bottom line, the image really doesn't express them well. A different composition that made the paintbrush feel more isolated, might have helped. Of course, I am not sure what that leaves me to do with this one. I think I need to figure out what I like about it - what story it has, since it doesn't seem to be the one that was in my head that day.
|
Oct 15th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Reply |
Thanks Haru. The tension of storm expected vs peaceful flowers is I think what I am going for, although there is also an element of the flowers being alone and isolated in the landscape. I went back and forth on more drama in the sky vs. not and landed here. I agree that greater drama helps the story, but I think to me just doesn't look as good. In the end, I think the story that I was after just isn't well supported by the image. I might hunt for a different story. Or maybe put differently, I still don't know exactly what I was feeling and need to sort that out. |
Oct 15th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Reply |
Thanks. Yes, what I felt was more "isolated" and alone than morose. But I think this is a case that my feeling is a lot stronger than what I've managed to capture. |
Oct 15th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Reply |
Haru, that is much, much better. It still does not hold my interest for that long. As I think about that, I realize that the fern and the brighter ground cover are dueling for attention. I keep sort of going back and forth between them. But by doing that, I don't look deeper into the interesting detail of the ground cover, which for me was the most interesting part. But that's just me - others may have a very different view. |
Oct 15th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi Haru. I love the repetition of the ground cover vegetation, with the softly changing light from leaf to leaf. But I find the "background" behind everything distracting. I am not sure if cloning out the larger tree trunks would be enough - there is just a lot of clutter.
It seems like the composition you would want would be one shooting about straight down (like from a drone). If one did that, there might be (hard to tell) an interesting framing of both the fern and ground cover. But you'd need a drone (or magic ability to fly). I do sort of like just a crop of your current image that includes only the front center ground cover (no fern). There is enough tonality variation there to be interesting (and I'd do B&W as I think it would be about tonality not the color). But such an intimate landscape would need sharp detail and there is not enough there in the crop of the 1200 pixel version to do that justice. Just some thoughts. |
Oct 10th |
| 96 |
Oct 22 |
Comment |
Hi Kate, and welcome to the Group. Wow, I don't think you could get me to go that close to a gorilla to get that kind of shot with a 63mm lens. It must have amazing and yet unnerving at the same time. It is a beautiful animal and a very compelling shot.
My first reaction was similar to Dan that it is unfortunate that the Silverback is looking out of the frame left from the left side. But I think that is less of an issue if you crop in tighter. I took a shot at that below. I also felt like the color was not adding much and it could be a much more powerfully emotional portrait in B&W. Other than that I ran it through a sharpening algorithm (Topaz AI, but probably others would work), and played with the contrast a bit, overall and locally (to try to get the eyes to pop a little more). Just some thoughts to play around with. It is an amazing image. |
Oct 10th |
 |
7 comments - 4 replies for Group 96
|
7 comments - 4 replies Total
|
