Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Rob’s edit makes the seal more of a “hero” for the photo. I like it too.
Thanks everyone!
Thanks for the comments. Yeah, Robert, couldn’t get lower, was standing on top of bluff shooting across an expanse of water to get this.
I agree with Erik. Most of the people who think Photoshop is blasphemy are shocked to learn that Ansel Adams had a darkroom, wrote books on processing technique. Pay them no mind.
Easiest way: Select the area you want darkened. Create a Curves adjustment layer. The area you had selected will show white on the mask, the rest will be black, and therefore protected. Drag down the curve as much as you want. Totally non-destructive. You can darken different areas differently by making multiple adjustment layers, but each of those masks will add to your image size (they can be combined at the end of the process).
Hi Lenny. My problem in looking at this is that I don’t immediately recognize what it is that it is. I see an underexposed woman dancing on a beach, wearing what might be a crepe dress. I respect that you don’t want to violate this woman’s privacy or too blatantly exploit her poverty, but I don’t see how your project is going to work unless you accost people and ask permission for a shot. The faces are such a big part of the story. I find that difficult to do, which is why I take pictures of landscapes and kitchen knives. And birds.
As for this shot, one approach might be to lighten the “dress” while leaving the face in the dark. I changed the crop to give woman/dress more prominence. Not sure about the gull…
I rather like what you’ve done with the foreground here, especially the prominent syringe. The background, particularly the bright ceiling, tends to draw my eye away. I wonder if darkening it a bit, or a vignette, wouldn’t improve things.
Thanks for the comments and kind words, everyone. I like the first one as well, but most of my non-photographer friends seemed to prefer the second. This had me doubting my own judgement, so I’m glad to have it confirmed here.
@mistyisle: portrait mode is exactly how I intend to display the print. Turned it on its side for the sharks so it would be bigger on screen.
@jasenkag: I will try to brighten it before printing the final. I usually proof my metal prints with metallic paper (cheap alternative), so I’ll see how things come out, keeping the cheek of the blade obscured.Thanks!
Jasenka, I have the D600 as well. Sensor dirt was an early complaint, but Nikon modified the design several years ago. I think this resulted in the D610. My dealer upgraded me for free, and I really haven’t had much of a problem since.
Thank you for your comment, Anne. I am fascinated by the complexity of the rocks that make up these tidal flats.
BTW, my name is Allen, not Paul.
Thank you for taking the time to comment. Our air quality is all the way up to “Unpleasant” this evening, so maybe I can go out and shoot!
The three leaves on the left are a distraction. Darken and/or blur.
This might be caused by pinot noir. Try switching over to a semillon blanc for a week or two, and I’m sure it’ll clear up. Dog’ll feel better in the morning, too.
I like your composition, and you’re right, my first thought was it must be clouds and mountains. It’s a nice, wispy effect on the surf, but the rest of the inshore water looks dark, like there’s a cloud over. Also, the rocks are very dark. My eye wants to fix on the big one on the right, but it’s dark and there’s nothing to see. Scenes like this are great for blending exposures, one with and one without the ND.
Nice image. I like how the vintage truck accents it. Makes the viewer ask questions. I can read the license plate, so I think it’s focused well enough.
IMHO, your exposure is about right. Your sky is very soft and not very light, and I think the soft bottom shadows fit it.
You could increase the apparent sharpness in the bottom by burning the blacks to add contrast. When you push up the brightness in a dark area, everything comes up and you lose your blacks. The best way to get them back is to burn them through a luminance mask. There are some free sets available on the net (google Greg Benz). You could even do it by hand along the ridgelines on a soft image like this – dodge one side and burn the other.
You certainly have a knack for finding interesting looking people. But she is way underexposed. Try bringing her up a full stop, even if you blow out the sky a little.
I really like the zebra, the way the branches rear left echo the stripes.
I see a refurbished (by Nikon) SB700 with 90 day warranty offered for US$219, or about 160£, at BH. The warranty isn’t that useful, as these units don’t often go bad. I have the SB800, and I would say that these are among the best speedlights available.
The f number of your lens is the ratio of the aperture (diameter) to the focal length. The longer lens needs a wider aperture if it is to shoot at the same speed. That’s why the big telephotos used by sports photogs have such huge lenses. They want bokeh from shooting at f1.4 or so, so the lens needs to be almost as wide as it is long
Do you have the color version? Selecting the hair might be easier if there’s a color difference to capitalize on.
Here’s a peachy tutorial: https://photoshoptrainingchannel.com/advanced-hair-masking/
