Just got back from a trip to Washington. Beautiful State!
I recently took photography back up as a hobby and don't want to get into the same mistakes as before (I left the hobby due to family and kids, but when I left HDR and over cooking was all the craze).
What are your thoughts on these two?
Any advice on PP or something different to try?
Monorail
Sony A7V
37mm
f/8
ISO 200
1/80
Mount Rainier
Sony A7V
28mm
f/13
ISO 1000
1/80
(as I'm typing this out I realize I could've lowered my iso and prolonged my exposure, not sure what I was doing there or if I forgot to double check some settings)
This is how I see them. The first image is dominated by the foreground monorail under a striking, arched glass roof that helps guiding the eye down to the train as a focal point within the unique architecture of a monorail station. I like the presence of the people as it makes the image more alive rather than an abandoned place.
I like the interplay of light and shadow creating highlights and reflections on the train's windows, while the station platform recedes into shadows. However, I feel as if those shadows are creating a sort of disconnect, so I would consider lifting a bit the shadows around the train's base and the track area to reveal more detail. I am thinking that this way you can better integrate the train with the station architecture.
I also find the reflections on the train windows to be quite bright, potentially distracting. You might want to try to soften these highlights to allow the interior details of the train and the surrounding environment to show more clearly.
Very good job on this first shot. Well seen
The second image is a classic, majestic landscape scene of a mountain landscape reflected in still water.
I like the composition with its near-perfect horizontal division between the mountain/forest and its reflection with the trees acting as a grounding element. The light looks soft and diffused, illuminating the mountain's peak, providing a warm focal point, while the darker tones of the forest and the water create a sense of depth and a serene mood.
Where I see some improvements are in the foreground water area, with its scattered debris, feels somewhat confusing. Try to bring more detail or clarity to that foreground, (clean up a bit the water?), so the viewer can feel more "present" and "invited" to come in into the scene.
Another element to consider is the reflection. Even though is beautifully rendered, I believe you should try to enhance the separation between the different elements of the reflection. Try to increase the contrast or the localized clarity IOT further define the mountain and tree line in the water.
Very good job on this second one as well. I really like the image's peaceful and majestic mood
The days of trying for the lowest possible ISO are long gone and the settings used seem to be very acceptable.
I don't see any issues requiring some sort of PP enhancements.
Socrate pointed out these are completely different images.. well, yes but... Both have appeal that is highly dependent on our love and sense of symmetry. Symmetry draws our attention and in addition the differences that break perfect symmetry draw our attention even further and all but require that we compare the symmetrical and nonsymmetrical elements of the image. In addition the first image compels us to look at the repeating vertical lines in the windows. The second image not only has strong horitzonal symmetry but also considerable vertical symmetry which again has innate appeal and requires us to compare the left and right portions of the image.
Beyond the technical aspects and compositions, these images are indeed very different. The first is much more chaotic with lots of minor elements and details. The second has a more classical mountain landscape with simpler elements and a strong sense of peace and majesty. Although it is strictly personal preference, I am attracted to the second image and quickly lose interest in the first image. I suspect other viewers could have completely difference interests and might choose the first as their favorite.
This is how I see them. The first image is dominated by the foreground monorail under a striking, arched glass roof that helps guiding the eye down to the train as a focal point within the unique architecture of a monorail station. I like the presence of the people as it makes the image more alive rather than an abandoned place.
I like the interplay of light and shadow creating highlights and reflections on the train's windows, while the station platform recedes into shadows. However, I feel as if those shadows are creating a sort of disconnect, so I would consider lifting a bit the shadows around the train's base and the track area to reveal more detail. I am thinking that this way you can better integrate the train with the station architecture.
I also find the reflections on the train windows to be quite bright, potentially distracting. You might want to try to soften these highlights to allow the interior details of the train and the surrounding environment to show more clearly.
Very good job on this first shot. Well seen
The second image is a classic, majestic landscape scene of a mountain landscape reflected in still water.
I like the composition with its near-perfect horizontal division between the mountain/forest and its reflection with the trees acting as a grounding element. The light looks soft and diffused, illuminating the mountain's peak, providing a warm focal point, while the darker tones of the forest and the water create a sense of depth and a serene mood.
Where I see some improvements are in the foreground water area, with its scattered debris, feels somewhat confusing. Try to bring more detail or clarity to that foreground, (clean up a bit the water?), so the viewer can feel more "present" and "invited" to come in into the scene.
Another element to consider is the reflection. Even though is beautifully rendered, I believe you should try to enhance the separation between the different elements of the reflection. Try to increase the contrast or the localized clarity IOT further define the mountain and tree line in the water.
Very good job on this second one as well. I really like the image's peaceful and majestic mood
Fair call out on the shadows on the monorail. I can peak them a little more underneath or maybe play with some masking a bit.
I was also worried about the reflection too, but it was so bright in person cause the sun was coming perfectly down through that area; so I didn't want to change the edit too much, but looking at it again now I can see that it is overly bright. I appreciate that feedback.
I wish I had a rake with me, so I could've cleared some of those weeds from that area. I will take this and maybe try some different editing. I am extremely hesitant to use regenerative AI to clean things up though. I know it serves its purpose and I understand the arguments for or against, but I wanted to keep it close to the original scene. I appreciate you taking the time.
Camperjim wrote:
I only have time for a couple of quick comments:
The days of trying for the lowest possible ISO are long gone and the settings used seem to be very acceptable.
I don't see any issues requiring some sort of PP enhancements.
Socrate pointed out these are completely different images.. well, yes but... Both have appeal that is highly dependent on our love and sense of symmetry. Symmetry draws our attention and in addition the differences that break perfect symmetry draw our attention even further and all but require that we compare the symmetrical and nonsymmetrical elements of the image. In addition the first image compels us to look at the repeating vertical lines in the windows. The second image not only has strong horitzonal symmetry but also considerable vertical symmetry which again has innate appeal and requires us to compare the left and right portions of the image.
Beyond the technical aspects and compositions, these images are indeed very different. The first is much more chaotic with lots of minor elements and details. The second has a more classical mountain landscape with simpler elements and a strong sense of peace and majesty. Although it is strictly personal preference, I am attracted to the second image and quickly lose interest in the first image. I suspect other viewers could have completely difference interests and might choose the first as their favorite. ...Show more →
I appreciate you taking the time to give that feedback. This is case in point why I love photography though, because each person's experience and preferences will change how they see the images. Like for me, I was ecstatic when the patch of clouds popped overhead so the sunlight wasn't as harsh and slightly filtered. I prefer image 1, but I also likely prefer it because I've seen Mount Rainier done numerous times, usually in this same spot, with a nice reflection. So while I still wanted to capture the show it wasn't as original as the monorail was for me.
I appreciate your kind words.
I'll add, you asked about PP, either clean your sensor or in post, remove the dust marks.
I see them as both being under the heading reflections of two entirely different types of Photography
Although your landscape capture is beautiful, always strive for a least boring blue sky.
I get it was a trip, and you'll take what mother nature supplies. I would do the same.
IndyFab wrote:
Welcome back to the hobby of Photography.
I'll add, you asked about PP, either clean your sensor or in post, remove the dust marks.
I see them as both being under the heading reflections of two entirely different types of Photography
Although your landscape capture is beautiful, always strive for a least boring blue sky.
I get it was a trip, and you'll take what mother nature supplies. I would do the same.
I have no idea how I missed those... I'll fix them now, thanks for calling that out.
