FlyPenFly wrote:
I really like the transition between the left and right of this composition. The blacks seem about 15% too crushed but nothing too bad. Overall, I think an interesting shot worth examining printed larger.
Thanks for the comment. I had a lot of trouble with the PP on this shot. I exposed it too lightly, although not overexposed, and bringing back a nice balance is very hard. Either the colours are light and uninteresting or I hurt the shadows. It ended up with a harsh gritty feel, which I find interesting, although it isn't really what I wanted.
My comment on the chain link fence: it doesn't grab me in the first shot, and IMO works much better in the second shot. There is a bit much going on there, but the fence adds to it.
Good point, I thought I should do that while using Photomatix Pro, and completely forgot when I got back to LR. There is actually a slight green tinge to that wall, but not nearly as much as here. I have updated the photo, so you should now see the new version.
trumpet_guy wrote:
I'll put up two versions of shot I've already modified due to critique in the Landscape forum.
Comments about the processing are especially welcome.
5DmkII with C/Y Zeiss 28/2.8 Distagon
Looking at the first shot, I feel like I'm there.
With the second, I feel like I'm looking at a photograph.
carstenw wrote:
Okay, I am going to risk the wrath of the gods on this one, from the Zeiss Lens thread:
ZF.2 21/2.8 wide open, 9 shots (the darkest shot took 30 seconds; I had to focus with a flashlight):
Wrath...? Because of the HDR? It's not over the top. I feel with near-far compositions like this, having enough DOF helps context. It's too bad you couldn't stop down a little more. I wouldn't mind seeing a little more of what's down the hallway.
I actually also did an otherwise identical f/8 version, but there really isn't anything extra down there, it's just that the blurry things you see in this version are sharp in the other version, like the little windows up high. I could post it if you are interested, but for this shot I felt the mystery of the f/2.8 version won out. I would probably have needed f/16 or even f/22 to make the stuff at the end interesting. I am focused quite close.
I think the "plasticky look" and the "uninteresting light" are part of the same condition - flashed bug with wide open aperture and cropped to nearly 100%.
More DOF would have been nice! I was trying to use the flash as a fill with existing light and it was getting dark. Thus 1/10s. And I'm frightened of using higher ISOs - especially when trying to capture something detailed.
Strange BG is probably due to my crop. I thought I was isolating the subject.
One of the factors which played a roll in the cropping decision was my embarrassment of flash shadows. This was an evening I was caught without my diffuser.
carstenw wrote:
I actually also did an otherwise identical f/8 version, but there really isn't anything extra down there, it's just that the blurry things you see in this version are sharp in the other version, like the little windows up high. I could post it if you are interested, but for this shot I felt the mystery of the f/2.8 version won out. I would probably have needed f/16 or even f/22 to make the stuff at the end interesting. I am focused quite close.
You are the person behind the camera (and computer) - it's up to you to determine the vision. If this is what you were going for, then keep it as the winner.
Well, my sales are real, real low, so I am listening Actually, I don't have anything for sale, but I am planning to start some low-profile sales at some point, probably through 500px or one or two other similar sites. Who knows if anything will come of it, but if I don't try, I can't succeed. But yes, I am listening.
For this shot, front-to-back sharpness might have been interesting, but f/8 wasn't enough. I might go back another time, and could try again.
carstenw wrote:
Okay, I am going to risk the wrath of the gods on this one, from the Zeiss Lens thread:
ZF.2 21/2.8 wide open, 9 shots (the darkest shot took 30 seconds; I had to focus with a flashlight):
I like the composition quite a bit. I'm fascinated by urban decay, so it certainly has my attention. I don't know what the original lighting situation was like, and I may be missing the point entirely, but what draws my eye in is the wheelbarrow. And behind that is an out of focus but still well-defined pile of debris that's also well lit. Given the fact that you were shooting down the hallway from what appears to be a natural source of light, I assume that is a function of the HDR and I would try backing off of it a bit. The reflection in wheelbarrow also looks unnatural, but I don't know how to fix that without taking away what otherwise looks good on your subject.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Posting this series of 2 on the same theme.
I'm not sure if shooting through wire fences is hackneyed or uninteresting or too distracting.
It's distracting to me in the first shot. That one would've been a good shot from the other side of the fence. But I like the second one. I would convert it to B&W, though. The blue shapes in the upper part of the frame are a little distracting, and you might want to level it, but it's an excellent shot.
Carsten, like the shot, and my eye moves freely through it, especially like the yellow light bottom left.
Only trouble I am having is that the center gray metal bar is blurrier than both the wall behind it and the objects closer to the camera. Did you selectively blur it? If so, I would back off.
freaklikeme wrote:
I like the composition quite a bit. I'm fascinated by urban decay, so it certainly has my attention. I don't know what the original lighting situation was like, and I may be missing the point entirely, but what draws my eye in is the wheelbarrow. And behind that is an out of focus but still well-defined pile of debris that's also well lit. Given the fact that you were shooting down the hallway from what appears to be a natural source of light, I assume that is a function of the HDR and I would try backing off of it a bit. The reflection in wheelbarrow also looks unnatural, but I don't know how to fix that without taking away what otherwise looks good on your subject....Show more →
Thanks a lot for the feedback.
Yes, the place was nearly dark, and I used a flashlight to focus on the wheelbarrow. I couldn't even see the rest, including the pile. I can't back off on the controls which light the pile without deepening the shadows quite a lot, and losing the entire back end except for the windows, so I would have to go to more invasive editing, i.e. manually darkening/defocusing the pile. I could try that later on today and see how it goes. I am not an expert in such work, normally working more with what I have, but it would be interesting to see what it would do for the photo. I could also try to slightly darken the reflection, that might make it more believable.
Grenache wrote:
Carsten, like the shot, and my eye moves freely through it, especially like the yellow light bottom left.
Only trouble I am having is that the center gray metal bar is blurrier than both the wall behind it and the objects closer to the camera. Did you selectively blur it? If so, I would back off.
Thanks for the comment. I didn't do any local operations in this photo. Which bar do you mean? The tube behind the wheelbarrow, leaning against the wall?
