|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Thanks for the suggestion Stephen, I really appreciate it. |
Nov 29th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Good Morning David!
I agree that having the image more in-focus throughout would probably strengthen it. In looking at back it, I definitely could have dropped the aperture f/13 (I'll occasionally hit f/16) too, but tend to not push it much beyond that.
There's a decent drop in clarity when you start pushing aperture too far (I've noticed anyway) and I think it would be particularly evident in a close-up shot like this.
Thanks for chiming - always very much appreciated :) & Happy Holidays!! |
Nov 26th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Hi Alan
Thanks for the recommendation and offer to help. Whenever I get around to getting a bit more serious about it, I'll explore those and may take you up on the offer to help.
Thanks again!
Josh |
Nov 25th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Good morning Alan. Thanks for the thoughtful reply, and I agree, this image would be improved by focus stacking. I hadn't dabbled in it until after recently buying a macro lens but it can definitely be effective (albeit somewhat time consuming), as you point out - in the right circumstance.
Like lots of things in photography, I'll do my best to keep this in mind next time I come across the opportunity.
Happy Holidays! |
Nov 24th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Thanks Dicky! |
Nov 15th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Comment |
Hi Dicky
Cool image! I really like the combination of the support lines on the bridge and the giant round sun. The sharpness you've achieved is excellent too, and enables seeing some very cool detail - like that drone!
My eye does get a little distracted by the treatment the bus has received, but not the other vehicles. The sun is the star of the show here, for me anyway, so I'm conflicted by having my eye pulled towards the bus that's been so brightly colored.
Fun image, and thanks for sharing! |
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Comment |
Hi David
This is one of those images, that for me, is kind of transportive - it just takes me there. I like how you've framed it, and I find the water and clouds a very effective way of presenting the image. You've got the iconic Scottish coastal fog on the top and nice dark gray water at the bottom. I also appreciate the clean lines between the water, foreground hills, awesome dark background hills, and clouds.
I understand what Owen's saying about cropping, to accentuate the lonely feeling of the house you mentioned, but I think I'd first play with removing any items you decide are extraneous, rather than cropping them out. As the image is presented now, it provides a great scale between the nice little white house and the big world around it, something you start to lose when you crop.
Regardless of what you do it, if anything, I love it. I'm a total sucker for the ocean shots - thanks for sharing. |
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Comment |
Hi Jo-Ann
We have a few folks in my camera club that dabble with these otherworldly looking finishes on images and I'm often at a bit of a loss when asked to provide feedback on them. My brain objects that it doesn't look realistic!! Well, that's the whole point - which objectively speaking, I can wrap my head around, but it does leave me in a bit of a conundrum in situations like this.
Anyway, here's a what I got. If possible, share a little larger version of your image. Looks like this little guy's only 200 kb, so you had the option of uploading a larger version for us to take-in, which is helpful in circumstances like this.
All that said, I do find the filter that you applied to this image interesting. I like that you uploaded the original, because it helped gives some perspective as to where you started and possibly why you wanted to modify the overall effect. I think it made the sky more interesting too.
I agree with Craig on the haloing around the tree and bush, I find that distracting in both instances. I'm not sure what you were trying to achieve (if you were modifying the sky or tree/bush), but Lightroom and Photoshop both have excellent automatic sky selection technology now built-in, and perhaps that would help you better achieve what you're trying to accomplish. |
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Comment |
Hi Craig
Nice shot. The 400mm really throws the background out of focus and enables the eye to focus on the subject. Also, I quite like your crop. It doesn't feel tight at all, and you've left adequate room off Fred's beak to feel comfortable.
Two thoughts to consider. Bring the exposure up just a bit (bumping the "Exposure" and/or "Shadows" both helped). You've got some incredible color and detail here!
The feathers between Fred's eyes appear sharper to me than the eyes themselves. Play with bringing up the sharpness a bit on those and/or possibly reducing the sharpness of the head feathers just a bit.
Obviously, a creative decision for you to make, but my eyes keep jumping to between his eyes as a result of the sharpness. |
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Thanks for taking a look Stephen, and the invitation to the jumbler-shooters club! :) |
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Hi Owen
Thanks for asking about the settings, it seems like these conversations rarely get that geeky, but I love it! I took this image some time ago, but will do the best I can to come up with why I would have chosen what I did.
The 8-seconds / f/8.0 / 100 ISO combination would have been chosen for a few reasons. The 100 ISO to reduce noise, the lower the ISO, the cleaner the image (typically). Whenever I'm shooting something still, like this or a landscape, I'll use a tripod and keep the ISO as low as possible.
The f/8.0 was me pushing myself actually. I'm a huge fan of really fast aperture, like f/2.8 (which you're spot-on, would reduce my shutter speed), but in images like this, I've found that the depth of field created by a lower aperture leaves me wanting to see a bit more detail, more clearly. With the shallower DOF created by the wider aperture, less is thrown into focus. I'm a bit of a sharpness junky too, and have discovered (ya' I know, not the first) that each lens has a sweet spot aperture that seems to yield the most sharpness. In my experience, once I go beyond round f/13 or f/16, I see a dropoff in clarity/sharpness.
Finally, the 8-seconds. This is just the last setting that I adjust to achieve a decent exposure, based on whatever my ISO and f-stop is. Hopefully I'm answering your questions and not telling you a bunch of information you already know, but please let me know if I can clarify anything. |
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Hi Craig
This is a light roast (https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B00QMG5984?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details) and amazing BTW, so maybe that accounts for the lightness? The exposure looks about right on my side, and I actually calibrated my displays last week. I'd be curious if it looks dark on anyone else's screen.
|
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Comment |
Hi Owen
This is really nice. The crop you've chosen works excellently and really accentuates the multiple different components of symmetry! The warm sky is great too, nicely handled and not blown out, but still bright - maintaining the mood of the image.
I played with bringing the shadows up a little bit and it absolutely lit the image up with all those incredible colors - you might consider playing with that. On the more nitpicky side of things, there's a single bird above the right side of the monument and a few little bug, or small fish, splashes you could clone out. Nothing major though, great work.
|
Nov 13th |
| 49 |
Nov 22 |
Reply |
Wow, that's really kind of you - thanks!! |
Nov 10th |
5 comments - 9 replies for Group 49
|
5 comments - 9 replies Total
|
