Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C
  
 
Oregon Gal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


I think these are pretty good but I am very open to suggestions. They are 1 shot images, not blended. I think that #1 is better compositionally speaking. Thanks in advance, Barbara












Jan 18, 2013 at 10:07 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


I prefer #1. That is such a lovely sky. Too bad most of the photo is filled with the rock, which is not nearly as interesting. I would have liked to see a horizontal with the rock on the left side to anchor the composition, but with that lovely sky being predominant.


Jan 18, 2013 at 10:33 PM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


I am torn.
I like the location of the background "rock" better in the first, but I lean towards the second. The foreground "rock" is less dominant, leads into the image, and the reflections in the water are nicer. In the first I would consider losing a bit of the sand.
Scott



Jan 18, 2013 at 10:41 PM
Oregon Gal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


Dmacmillan, I do have landscape versions as well but the sky is much warmer with lots of yellow tones and doesn't have quite the character of sky as in the first image. I composed the landscape version with the rock anchoring the left side as suggested. I might post that version later.

Scott, I can understand you being torn between the strengths of each image. I haven't finalized the crop yet and appreciate your input. The images are straightened with one being slightly cropped, shot with the 70-200.



Jan 19, 2013 at 01:01 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


Took a stab at the second one in color, first in mono. Might be a touch overcooked/oversharpened, but the crop and conversion to mono is the main gist.

Barb, I'm sure these were wonderful to experience. Maybe one day I'll get out there. Actually, I should be kinda close (relatively speaking) in a week or so, as I'm headed to WA if all goes as planned. Hope you're still keepin' the coffee warm.














Jan 19, 2013 at 01:18 AM
Oregon Gal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


Kent, I really like the B/W version. I never thought about B/W without all that wonderful color. Of course coffee is always on


Jan 19, 2013 at 06:33 AM
cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


Vertically cropped landscapes don't appeal to my eye or sensibilities, but of the two I find the first more pleasing to look at because of second outcropping in the foreground which adds a more horizontal leading line to counter-act the "up and out the top" line of ^ shape in the background.

Technically it a classic example of scene range > sensor. It situations like that you can't expand the range of detail the camera captures but you can fool the brain into thinking there is more by shifting all the tones in the middle and 3/4 tone between middle-gray and black lighter.

There are about a dozen ways to do that in ACR and Photoshop. The easiest and most intuitive is to move the middle slider in Levels to the left. Doing it instead in ACR with a combination of the brightness and fill sliders produces less noise in the shadows. But these sliders are "global", shifting all the similar pixel values everywhere in the image.

What I do with an image exposed for the highlights but exceeding sensor range is first do the "global" slider correction in ACR, but not all the way. I watch the darkest shadows for noise and end the ACR global slider correct why I see objectionable noise start to appear. That's usually not as light as I want it so after opening in PS I use an action I create three "Levels" adjustment layers, change their mode to screen, multiply, and soft light adjustment layers and switch the masks on the layers to black.

I don't move the slider on those Levels adjustment layers to make my corrections I take the eraser tool (with white background) or brush (with white foreground) and open the screen mask in areas I want to lighten more and multiply in areas I want darker, such as the edges of the frame or some distraction I couldn't crop out. Screen and Multiply with the mask work like the dodge / burn tools with benefits. I have better control of the selective edit with the size/sharpness/flow controls on the tool and if I open the mask too much I can paint it back in with a black brush and start over. Once I get the mask opened to lighten / darken areas selectively I can move the opacity sliders on the layers from 0 to 100% to see before and after and find the % in the middle that looks just "right" by eye.

The final result I go for is how a person would perceive the scene in person after focusing that center 2 -degree mental tunnel vision in the shadows and allowing the pupils to dilate. Eyes have a fixed range like a camera. We just perceive a scene has detail everywhere because the eyes scan to focal points and adapt.

By SELECTIVELY lightening some spots in the shadows of a photo like this you give the brain of the view a clue where to jump to and dwell on next in "connect the dots" fashion. So terms of telling a story by guiding the eye over context en route to a focal point I think it's better to selectively edit the tone in the shadows than to create a "sea of sameness" in the shadows with HDR.

I'll sometimes use HDR to record the full range of a back- or cross-lit scene like that with a blended pair of exposures for highlights and shadows to avoid the shadow noise of a single file with noisy shadow, then in Photoshop use same adjustment layers to DARKEN everything in the shadows I don't want to be a "hop-scotch" perceptual focal point. Those lighter spots in the shadows create the breadcrumb path I want the viewer to follow in the same way their adjusted eyes would jump from detail to detail in person.




Jan 19, 2013 at 01:17 PM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · A couple of Sunsets for C & C


Thanks Barb,

+1 @ global pp + "draw the eye" selectively vs. global pp only
+1 @ leaving some headroom in global pp to allow for selective pp to "draw the eye", then finishing with smaller global refinements.

Hue, saturation, luminance as well as degrees of sharpening/blur are available to help us push/pull the viewers eye where we would like it to go. Chuck's point at our eye/brain adaptive vision has us seeing/remembering the scene differently than our camera records it.

Somewhere between the raw recording and surreal cgi lies the image (and message) you want your viewer to see. Like so many things in PS, more than one way to skin a cat ... painting/erasing on screen/multiply layers is another way to garner such selective pp. Lately (exploring new methods), I've been using and modifying channel masks to generate selective pp. I'll have to give Chuck's approach a go sometime as well ... another tool in the toolbox.




Jan 19, 2013 at 02:58 PM





FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password