Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Great processing Toad – these are lovely boats, all that varnished mahogany is a dream.
I really like that you have chosen black and white for this shot – it is a refreshing change. Nice toning too! Not sure there is anything that I have to suggest though. I might have been a bit sad to lose the top of the display, but I don’t think it detracts overly from the shot. A small extra amount of light on the water, and thus a but more detail in the spectators might improve the shot, though I am thinking such a small amount that maybe it won’t actually make a difference.
I thought this thread would be about something else, but it raises an idea you might want to explore: adapting old wide angle glass for your camera.
For instance I have a 40 year old Nikkor-N Auto 24mm/f2.8 lens that I use on my Canon 5Dii. It is a great lens though not nearly as wide as you seem interested in. It was relatively cheap, and required a simple modification and adapter to make it work. The mod was to cut off a flange that sticks into the camera and would have damage the mirror. I taped up the rear lens and around the flange to keep stuff out of the camera and protect the glass, then I cut off the flange with tin snips and filed it down with small spark plug file. Lots of care taken to keep filings out of the lens. I bought an adapter with a chip which gives me focus confirm and provides some exif data too (not aperture). I needed to adjust the focus point as per the adapters instructions, then I was ready to use it. And I have used it a lot – one of my favourite lenses.
I am not sure if you can find a really wide and old lens cheaply, but it might be worth looking into, but keep in mind some lenses won’t adapt to your camera because the rear element sticks in too close to your sensor (though with the adapters you are speaking of, maybe this would not be a problem).
I am in the middle of a series that started with getting a small half-frame Olympus Pen in a junk store (does anyone else around here use half frame cameras – searches turn up nothing).
The half-frame images (two images per usual 35mm negative size) naturally suggest that combining adjacent images to make in-camera diptychs and panoramas could be interesting. So, my series is of these multiple images that are adjacent to one another on a film strip, scanned as a single image. It is fun, and shooting film again has slowed me down, made me think more carefully before I press the shutter, learn the Sunny 16 rule (no light meter in the camera) and think ahead more than one shot at a time. It is also leading me towards more abstract shots as well.
Here are some examples, but you can find more at this link:
http://burntembers.com/tag/multitych/
Horizons by Ehpem on Light Stalking
Shadow Triptych by Ehpem on Light Stalking
Barriers by Ehpem on Light Stalking@fidlito @admin I see that the way the image displays here that it is further cropped. If you click on it you will find the full image, as newly cropped. And, I should have said that I think these cropping suggestions worked out well.
If someone wants to add a shark and throw a revised version back into this ‘shark tank’ thread, then feel free. Although perhaps an invisible shark, lurking behind the reflection of clouds, is even more correctly post-modern than an in-you-face fin, or row of teeth, would be. 🙂
@fidelito – thanks for the suggestions. I have tried all of them. The only fail was getting a shark in the tank – I tried a circling dorsal fin along the edge of the tank just with a bit of dodging (my most sophisticated editing tool is LR4, so options are limited), but it was not convincing. I think your suggested crops were useful. I could not get much out of the face as the version I am working with has little left in the shadows.
@admin Thanks for the comment. This is perhaps where the nostalgia over rides the good photography. For me the view out and in are equally important in my memories – the setting of working in a place like this with a view like that. But, I think you are right.
@fidelto has cropping suggestions that might satisfy your comment to some degree, I am going to try to upload a new one in response to him.I don’t know why that did not load larger – my first upload to Lightstalking. A larger version can be seen here: http://burntembers.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/img_4136-edit.jpg?w=1308&h=872
I don’t find the grain a problem unless viewed at 100%, which there is no need to do. At full screen, it works well, like an older black and white negative. I think I would try pulling the white wall brightness down a bit, but I am not sure it needs – I would want to see before and after. I like the way it balances the blackness of the door to the right and am not sure that door open to the kitchen would do that job on its own. Great shot though, not much to offer on this one.
I agree with the technical aspects above. The problem for me, and this is less about the photo than it is about one viewer, is that the sentiment of the photograph does nothing for me. There is nothing you can do about that with this shot, at least not that I can think of.
On the more constructive side, if I think of the shot without you on it, I don’t think the composition has much to offer- necessary for your concept perhaps, but ultimately the main thing in the frame of this photo is the camera and a different composition might have worked better. More negative space, a bit of an angle to the long axis of the lens, something like that.
As to the message – maybe with the figure standing at the end of the lens rather than on top – pointing away from the camera to the unseen, or riding the very top like a horse, or a rodeo bull rider. A message more about going forward into the wild unknown to take exciting pictures. Kissing an inanimate object suggests all that matters is to have good gear, not necessarily to take good pictures (the sentiment I was talking about).
I think f8 on 17mm lens would be more than enough depth of field if you focus on the right place. That would have given you 1/30th which should be enough for that lens. I see a bit of a greenish caste, which might be my monitor I suppose, but is a bit distracting. I think this photo needs a dog on a mission somewhere else, but I would probably have settled for the shadow of a person or even a cat at the far end, cast upon the wall. Something to add a little more interest. I too would have shot this location, and I probably would have done it just the way you did and regretted the lack of something more later on.
You might try a black and white conversion – it could bring out the textures and the light in a way that these colours might not allow.This is going to be a repeat of the above. I don’t mind the shed, I can barely see it. I think that side of the photo has enough detail. I would probably pull out a small amount of detail in the dare area on the right – perhaps just a few tree trunks, and if there a few points on the far side of the path on the right that can be brought up just enough to give it some depth there. The line of light on the path edge through the right of the photo is really important part, don’t diminish that with your adjustments.
“I don’t like it a lot” is certainly quotable:)I agree that this is a fine first attempt. The soft feel does not bother me. I really like the texture in the foreground and rather than cropping it I would be looking to emphasize it. I think maybe a lower point of view bringing out the texture of the beach surface and with this great background could make a striking photo. You would need more depth of field probably, but then you might find that the sand ripples, or a small pebble, or similar feature would give something for the eye to rest on.
@caimi, I am not sure you CAN separate the technical from the feeling and message of a photo, and how well such are communicated.
This image feels muddy and unclear due to the lack of brightness, and that detracts from the messages you are trying to deliver. (For other messages or in other contexts it might make a photo work).
I think the sky is too busy to feel really desolate – the wrong kind of clouds and too many of them. Something wispy and stretching thin into invisibility here and there might work better.
The distance does not look all that lonely; for me each of those clumps of trees represents a settlement or a building or other human activity, and there are lots of them.
I do like the way the crop lines and the road intersect towards the distance, but they are pretty hard to discern in this exposure/treatment and there effect is consequently muted. If more visible might contribute to the message you want to convey as they carry the viewer into the distance.
I have to agree with @fidelito that there is nothing in this photo that I have not seen before. I get more from your words than from the picture. However, you have what many photographers seem to lack, which is a pretty explicit idea that you want to convey. If you pursue that idea, and control the technical side, you could make some very interesting photographs.
Great shots of a favourite local landmark. Well done Toad. Nice processing, especially like that interior shot.
I like this shot, but I would try cropping it at or just above the brighter wood – lose the darker lattice and windows, that would keep my eye more on the fixture and less groping around up by the windows looking for something that is not there.
It looks to me like part of the light (the circle where it joins the wall) is off-centre, and the higher parts are better centered. This is a bit disorienting, makes me want to twist my head. I think a touch of straightening on the vertical might fix that problem.
Crop is much better. Looking at the hairs of the caterpillar that are against a darker or coloured background in the upper right where the really fines one are visible makes we wish for a coloured/dark background for the whole thing. Next time!
I too find the horizon distracting, if you can straighten out the distortion that would help a lot. I think I would have shot a longer exposure in this setting to get a smoother effect with the water, but you may have been wanting the water to look like this. Pretty nice shot though!
I have to agree with @fidelito, but also I would want more light/highlights on the right side of the photo
The water in front could have worked pretty well if the building were reflected in it and the black zone to the right were gone. I am thinking a reflective band of water with building in it, then a black band of land and building then a light band of sky. Kind of like a sideways Rorschach test.
