Thanks Sasha. 4 is a testament to the 135L's quick focus. Barely had lifted the camera to my face before I had to grab that shot. On a "lousy" 5D2 no less
Brilliant stuff, photos like these is an inspiration to leave my flat and try and get images as great as yours! You've caught London in a way us who live here rarely see it.
Thanks guys. The only photos that I actually boosted the saturation were 1, 10, and 11, where I boosted the blues. The rest of the photos have relatively untouched saturation, but look nicely vivid because of the contrast and clarity that I bumped up quite a bit. I've found that after doing that, I generally don't really need to add any saturation.
Clarity tends to increase contrast a little due to the large radius applied, and contrast does also clean up a little of the colors, so they have a good effect on perceived saturation (i.e. reducing flatness) without touching the actual sat values. I also find that vibrance is more often useful than saturation since it tries to do the same thing, but with some built-in intelligence to avoid oversaturation.
Great eye you've got there, Mike. Not about the camera or the gear here, just great photography. Meant to be enjoyed and viewed, not nitpicked for technical perfection and precision... so I won't bother even mentioning the one or two nits I might have picked. Just happy to see it, and enjoy it... thanks.
And thanks Rodolfo, great explanations. I always have a hard time putting visual thoughts and outcomes into words. You've done it quite well. I'm a fan of the vibrance slider myself
While I've definitely posted these for everyone's for viewing enjoyment, feel free to nit pick if you want! If I can take shots that are visually enjoyable AND [closer to] technically perfect, so much the better! Glad you enjoyed them
I'll only mention one which I think will be subconsciously important to viewers: in #13, the horizon appears not to be perfectly level, and Big Ben is slightly tilted. Being such an important part of the composition and with the bridge lines leading to it to well, it stood out to me. Tiny bit of clockwise rotation could benefit here.
As for everything else, I refuse to nitpick this time. The most important part of this series was that it reminded me to get out and shoot more, so I'll take that message to heart without reverting back to dry critique.
You've got some definite winners here. I really like #4 and 11.
However, I'm going to go out on a limb and say the processing is a bit heavy handed. #2 is the worst offender, and excessive clarity seems to be the issue. The effect (sort of the opposite of a halo) shows up particularly where buildings meet the sky, and gives an almost out of place, pasted-in quality to the skyline.
Really a minor problem, though. Just something you may want to consider if you don't want to give the subtle impression that the images are photoshopped.
Didn't even notice the horizon Rodolfo! Thanks for pointing that out.
And J Baker, I'm aware I tend to walk on the dangerous side of over processing. Haha. I know what you mean about the crazy clarity effect and I can see how some folks aren't a fan of it. For now, I'm diggin' it, but who knows... Maybe in a couple months I'll look back and think, "man that looks terrible!" Haha. On a side note, nice to see a fellow AZ peep from Chandler. That's where I live (normally, haha).
