Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

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

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2014 · Ready to show?

  
 
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Ready to show?


I would like to know if this image is ready to show or:

1. Needs some work.

2. Forget about it.

Taken mid day and processed a bit dark to compensate. Sure, a golden hour would probably be better, but this is in the style I am working on. I guess I am attempting to validate the style.

What would you do, lay it on.







May 16, 2014 at 09:45 AM
SargentRay
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Ready to show?


Hello Ben, first of all let me say i agree there is more ways to shoot a nice landscape than just at golden hour time.
Now this being said looking at your picture i immediately saw the spectacular potential of your take yet i felt a bit left on my appetite in regards to the details and contrast of the scene. It seems neither the clouds nor the rocky structure stand out albeit both parts of your composition are beautiful and should in my opinion pop out of the screen. Then i must say the whole image seems to be a bit noisy and suffer from a lack of overall sharpness. Quite surprising for a shot born from a MK III. I would really like to know how you process your images and how you go about your whole workflow.

No disrespect intended here but unless i am missing something it seems to me there should be really nice white zones in the clouds and more apparent details in the rocky structure. I couldn't help trying things on your image, but if you prefer folks not to modify your picture i will remove my rendition immediately.

I started by adding a gradient filter on the sky then i've enhanced overall details with a 2 step process i have developed and named Turbo compression of details, then lastly i have applied again in photoshop 2 curves selective layer masks in order to make lighter and darker zones pop out while still retain details as opposed to simply dodging and burning parts of the image.



I couldn't avoid creating serious color artefacts in the process with this low res file but you could do much much better with your originale file. So to answer your question i respectfully think you can improve this photo quite a bit with just a little more work in post processing

Before and after



May 16, 2014 at 11:18 AM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Ready to show?


SargentRay. Thanks for doing this, always good to have another take on this.

I have recently worked hard to avoid over processing especially in the areas of sharpening, saturation and clarity.

The way I worked this was to open in ACR and using auto to get a feel for what to adjust. This one wanted a 1.5 boost on exposure but I gave it .7 and some white boost (50) and black -3 and 11 contrast.

I do some capture sharpening there as well.

In Photoshop I went straight to LAB and masked the sky and did some work to darken and add contrast. I next used shadow highlight to build texture in the sky and contrast in the rocks.

Next I boosted the A and B channel 10 points in each corner and faded to about 70%

I sharpen in Lab with tow steps. One for micro contrast at 12,50,1 and one for sharpening at 300 .3,0

I went back to RGB and used Topaz Photo Pop at about 20%. Thats it.






sooc




May 16, 2014 at 12:06 PM
SargentRay
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Ready to show?


Ok i have a better feeling of everything now Ben after seing the original file, thanks for posting it. Reading your workflow, it seems quite sound to me, heck you do more stuff than i do showing a great attention to details no doubt here. The original file although a little under exposed shows absolutely no noise whatsoever (t least to my eyes).

Looking at everything again makes more sense i admit, perhaps i am the one seeking too much details and contrast. Besides it's really your view of the final image that counts. At best we can voice an opinion but it's just an opinion :-)

Good work sir ! :-)



May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM
beavens
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Ready to show?


Ray,

I prefer the look of your edit - has much more of a dramatic punch.

The rocks are a bit oversharpened, but Ben will probably have much more leeway with his RAW image.

Nice shot, Ben!

Cheers,

Jeff



May 16, 2014 at 01:04 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Ready to show?


SargentRay wrote:
Ok i have a better feeling of everything now Ben after seing the original file, thanks for posting it. Reading your workflow, it seems quite sound to me, heck you do more stuff than i do showing a great attention to details no doubt here. The original file although a little under exposed shows absolutely no noise whatsoever (t least to my eyes).

Looking at everything again makes more sense i admit, perhaps i am the one seeking too much details and contrast. Besides it's really your view of the final image that counts. At best we can voice an opinion
...Show more


No problem. I have a brighter one, but I wanted was shooting to compensate for mid day, although it was slightly cloudy.

What I did not do and could have was to stretch the white and black out, I am going to try than now.





Histogram stretched




May 16, 2014 at 01:05 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Ready to show?


beavens wrote:
Ray,

I prefer the look of your edit - has much more of a dramatic punch.

The rocks are a bit oversharpened, but Ben will probably have much more leeway with his RAW image.

Nice shot, Ben!

Cheers,

Jeff


Thanks for the feedback.



May 16, 2014 at 01:12 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Ready to show?


Testing some independent/selective tweaks (i.e. playin').







May 16, 2014 at 05:34 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Ready to show?


Hi Kent, a different take than prior comments.

The subject has I believe a shape and color and light along with some blue sky and white clouds. Many ways to interpret this.

I should point out the intended posting for this is as usual the landscape forum. Such a diverse forum has an audience of varied taste of course. But I would say that fidelity to the scene goes over better than otherwise with the key players.

Of course great drama is always good so long as it is not added but is native to the original.

So what did you do here?




May 16, 2014 at 07:50 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Ready to show?


Mostly I applied selective edits at different planes/elements.

A little tweak on the WB (BP also) for the formation (diff @ top vs. side), but not for the sky. Different saturation for the top vs. the side (playing a bit to top lighting). Never really tried to mix selective WB and selective saturation before, along with selective sharpening cues.

Looked like a "smidgeon" of magenta, so I pulled back on it ... although, unsure @ sand colored vs. red rock for actual ... I went more toward the sand the side, reddish @ the top.



May 16, 2014 at 08:49 PM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Ready to show?


or BW?

Scott







May 16, 2014 at 09:27 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Ready to show?


Nicely done Scott


May 16, 2014 at 09:54 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Ready to show?


sbeme wrote:
or BW?

Scott


Thanks Scott. I always need somebody else to do my B&W conversions.



May 16, 2014 at 10:16 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Ready to show?


RustyBug wrote:
Mostly I applied selective edits at different planes/elements.

A little tweak on the WB (BP also) for the formation (diff @ top vs. side), but not for the sky. Different saturation for the top vs. the side (playing a bit to top lighting). Never really tried to mix selective WB and selective saturation before, along with selective sharpening cues.

Looked like a "smidgeon" of magenta, so I pulled back on it ... although, unsure @ sand colored vs. red rock for actual ... I went more toward the sand the side, reddish @ the top.


Those rocks are pretty red, or what I call copper.

I suspect the real problem with this is that sufficient drama does not exist in the original for the intended audience.

We see three takes in this thread, drama heightened, an honest take (yours) and a B&W which is a good way to show mid day shots..



May 16, 2014 at 10:21 PM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Ready to show?


Thx Ben
For the harsher mid-day light I often prefer BW interpretations
Scott



May 17, 2014 at 11:59 AM
Mister Bean
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Ready to show?


ben egbert wrote:
No problem. I have a brighter one, but I wanted was shooting to compensate for mid day, although it was slightly cloudy.


The problem with mid-day isn't really the brightness. So better to keep exposure bright (just touching clipping) so that you capture as much data as possible.

The bigger problem with this to me is composition. It's just not very interesting to me. Two problems I see. It's a very even split between rocks and sky, and it's a sort of in-between composition. You can't see the context of the environment that it's in. But you're not close enough to get the details either.



May 17, 2014 at 08:26 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Ready to show?


Mister Bean wrote:
The problem with mid-day isn't really the brightness. So better to keep exposure bright (just touching clipping) so that you capture as much data as possible.

The bigger problem with this to me is composition. It's just not very interesting to me. Two problems I see. It's a very even split between rocks and sky, and it's a sort of in-between composition. You can't see the context of the environment that it's in. But you're not close enough to get the details either.



Thanks, and glad you mentioned it. This was taken on a hike and along the trail. If I ever go back, I will try to get there during golden hour and also see if there is another composition. I have a habit of composing the way I see rather than to get down on the ground. I did crop off some of the sky because it lacked interest. This made a 16x9 crop.

For this scene I thought a position that was more from the left side (like a hundred yards or more) that would have the cliff tapering toward infinity might work.



May 18, 2014 at 02:09 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Ready to show?


Where I think I am at this time.

You have seen my recent work so hopefully you can either validate my own self analysis or show me other areas.

1. I think my capture technique is ok.
2. Trying to substitute mid day for golden hour is wishful thinking.
3. Doing landscapes at the level I desire means I need to find the drama at the scene and not added by processing.
4. I think my processing is ok. It will evolve as it has for the last 10 years, but this is probably not what is holding me back.
5. Composition is probably my largest issue. I probably work too wide and have no skill at subject isolation.

Some of this is willful on my part. I generally don’t give a fig about subject isolation in landscapes, but others do. I generally just want to capture the widest shot possible that includes all the stuff I like and from a standing position looking straight ahead.

If I want others to like my work, I can’t do it my way. I have to decide about this.

A last question. I was advised to come to this forum to learn before I go back to posting at the landscape forum. But I am not sure that’s happening. Any advice here?



May 18, 2014 at 09:57 PM
Mister Bean
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Ready to show?


1. I think my capture technique is ok.
* For the most part, I would say this is true.

2. Trying to substitute mid day for golden hour is wishful thinking.
* For what it seems you're trying to accomplish, yes.

3. Doing landscapes at the level I desire means I need to find the drama at the scene and not added by processing.
* Yes, but I wouldn't limit this statement to landscape photography. You have to have the right foundation to build on.

4. I think my processing is ok. It will evolve as it has for the last 10 years, but this is probably not what is holding me back.
* Yes.

5. Composition is probably my largest issue. I probably work too wide and have no skill at subject isolation.
* On composition, very much so, though I wouldn't necessarily generalize and say that it has to do with shooting wide or subject isolation. I've been watching your photography in here for some time now, though perhaps not as much as others. The impression I get is that of an engineer trying to build photos with a slide rule. You get bogged down in the technical details of capture and post-processing, and resist addressing the composition/art of photography.

If you're interested, I have a few ideas about some exercises that could potentially help.

a. Take a drawing class. All of the fundamentals that you learn in drawing translate in photography. It may sound like a stretch, but I've taken several drawing classes, and I can't think of any lesson from those that didn't apply to photography in some way. It will change the way you look at the world.

b. Spend time looking at art that you really love. I don't mean just looking casually, look at how they're composed, how your eye moves around them, try to figure out what the artist was trying to express, and how they were doing it, etc. It's probably best to do this with someone else so that you can get their interpretation as well. I wouldn't limit this to photography, again, most of the same principals apply in photography, drawing and painting. Visit museums.

c. Try a month (better six months or a year) of black and white photography. Ideally this would be with film so that you basically get what you develop, no futzing around with the post processing. But you're invested in digital, so that's fine to use also. The idea here is that you focus on seeing photographs, looking at light and composition, etc. Not everyone agrees, but I thought that Mike Johnston at the Online Photographer had a rather brilliant suggestion of using a Leica with a single lens, and a single type of black and white film for a year. You can read about it here - http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html This is a project I've wanted to try for some time now, but have never gotten to it.

d. Try doing some non-landscape photography. Learning to make interesting photos in other styles will almost certainly help with your landscape photography.

As for learning in this forum. Per above, I think you're biggest problem is related to the art/composition side of things. It also seems to be something you're very resistant to learning. Perhaps because it's less concrete a concept? An additional problem, at least from my perspective, is that this forum can ge a little stuck on the processing, and doesn't get into what makes a great photo. Actually, it's not really this forum. This has been the case on most forums I've visted. I think it's probably just the nature of the internet.

So I guess if I were to sum everything up, spend less time worrying about the technical stuff, and learn more about art.



May 19, 2014 at 12:31 AM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Ready to show?


Thanks Mr Bean. Just the sort of feedback I was looking for. And I think you are correct in what my problem is.

I do spend much time in galleries, and for landscapes, some of this leads to just going to the same places and shooting the same scenes. Breaking away is the hard part.

I am not so much resistant to learning as I am resistant to having a brain transplant. Its about taste, which is personal and ought not to be tampered with. Thats why I don't do B&W or other stuff besides landscapes.

I do of course take thousands of family stuff and I used to do birds, in fact birds used to be half my interest. But I sold my gear after moving to Utah.

I did oil painting back in the 50's, gave it up because I had trouble getting colors right. In fact, color casts has been the biggest complaint on my work at the Landscape forum, so maybe my PP skills do need work. One of the underlying reasons to get away from golden hour was that the recovery process is hard to do without introducing casts, which I am not able to see.

But I am going to see if there is a way to work on the art part. I think I need to shoot one for myself and then a bunch of different ones for show.

The way I do it now is I roam around until a I see something that catches my eye, usually shape or color or light and hopefully all three. I then try to find a place to stand that catches what I saw. I then decide on a lens (almost always a zoom these days) and then I frame it by isolating ugly stuff and including all that I like. The whole of the clouds, all the canyon, all the mountain etc. I may point up or down (or shift if I have my TSE) in an effort to un center the horizon which is dead center most times as it ought to be. I won't tilt a lens very far however because I dislike distortion. I sometimes get low to the ground and hope I will be able to get back up afterward. It seldom changes much.

I always want everything in focus and work at that for a while. I avoid deep shadow, intruding trees or other stuff from the edges.

I do look for leading lines but for me the entire scene is the subject and I really want the eye to roam. Unlike with birds where I usually isolated the bird from its background.

But you are right, this is where I either need to work or make a decision that my photos are never going to be for others.













May 19, 2014 at 09:49 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.