Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sorry, somehow I posted the image twice, and can’t figure out how to get rid of one. Here are the settings I used for the image:
Taken with Canon Mark 5D II and EF24-105mm lens. Focal length of 58mm, shutter speed of 1/10, aperture of 7.1 and ISO 2000. I would like feedback on the composition.
I like the cropped and enhanced version, although there is a blue cast to the stones on the second and third windows now. I also have to say this is a very lovely shot. It would be interesting to see it in black and white. Love the angle and the slits of light showing on the ground and wall. It is a beautiful church. There really isn’t anything negative to say about the image.
I think you could have captured more of the mood if you were closer to the abandoned house and we saw a lot less sky and grass. You could try cropping the image to get rid of some of the foreground, which just makes the abandoned building, which is the main focus, look much smaller and insignificant. There is a lot of neutral gray in the image. I would like to see larger areas of contrast between dark and light. It would be really interesting to see a shot of the sky through one of the windows of the house.
I agree with the other comments in that the log in the foreground is distracting. I find myself wanting to see more of the water and less of the log. What settings did you use for this image?
I just recently started using Nik plug-ins and really love them. I would highly recommend them if you can afford the $150 price tag.
I love this image, especially the clarity and tonal range. I would like to see the same image with the right side of the church closer to the right edge of the image so more of the hedge on the left would be visible. It might make for a more interesting composition. But overall, great job!
Hi @fagopher,
I would like to see the shot from a vantage point that allows the yellow bridge on the bottom right to take center stage. It creates a nice contrast the the blue-gray of the rest of the image. I agree that a neutral density filter would help to brighten up the sky. It’s tough to pull off this shot on a dreary day because there isn’t any light bouncing off any of the buildings or water, so everything takes on a gray cast. I think you have the right idea in adding a foreground element to anchor the image, but I think the foreground has more going on that the image itself and therefore becomes a distraction.
Hi @jmidjr,
I haven’t tried focus stacking yet, but am intrigued by the process since I shoot a lot of Macro shots. It looks like you did a pretty good job on the stacking. I agree with @redman as far as the settings and the color adjustments. The shot would be a lot more effective if that Zinnia was popping, and the spider would show up better. As it is, it’s kind of hard to spot the spider on the flower. I have a checklist that I carry with me in my camera bag that reminds me what to check before each shot, like the ISO and the white balance.
Hi @jimeuph1,
I like this image and would not have guessed that it was taken in the middle of the day, which is a good thing. I love the detail and the juxtaposition of the smooth green pastures in the middle section against the longer grass in the foreground. The detail in the sky is lovely, and the composition is pleasing. I shoot landscapes, but do not generally shoot in the middle of the day, so I don’t have any suggestions for you. It looks like you are doing a pretty good job. Is there something in particular that you like about shooting landscapes in the middle of the day, or is it just a challenge that you have taken on in your photography?
Hi @bxfoto,
I think this is a lovely image and love the painterly feel of the mountains and sky. I have only utilized HDR on occasion, but like the process and think it can garner some great images, such as yours. What I like about your image is that you weren’t too heavy-handed with the HDR so the image still looks natural, vibrant and rich.
Hi @ jonathantimar,
I struggle with crowding my nature images, so I appreciate your comments about my crop and agree.
Hi @penmar. I shot this Hibiscus outside. I was below the flower shooting up toward the sky, so the white in the background is actually the sky blown out. I’m not sure what I could do, if anything, to change that. Do you have any suggestions? Maybe I could have held a diffuser panel over the flower? I shot the image with a shutter speed of 1/160 and an aperture of f/18, but because my lens was only about six inches away from the flower, I only had a total depth of field of .02 inches.
Thanks so much for taking the time to comment on my image and offer your suggestions.
Hi @fidelito,
Thanks again for your helpful suggestions and comments. I didn’t even notice those two tiny leaf elements, but now that you have mentioned it, they are distracting. Yes, I used my 100mm Macro lens, with a shutter speed of 1/160 and an aperture of f/18. When I added a levels adjustment layer in Photoshop to set the white and black points, when I set the black point, it really darkened the stalk and just underneath the flower. Maybe I should not have added a levels adjustment layer? What do you think? Here is the image without the levels adjustment layer.
My settings were ISO 400, shutter speed 1/1000, and aperture f/2.8. I shot the image handheld, so maybe that explains the “fuzziness?” although it is probably the shallow depth of field. My lens was very close to the flower, so I probably only had about an inch of depth of field in total. I was focused on the center of the flower, so the petals are a little soft as a result.
Thanks for the suggestions on the retouching as well. For the first version, I used a levels adjustment layer to find the white and black points, so that is why the first image was brighter and the whites more dramatic. Thanks again for taking the time to critique my image.
Thanks so much for taking the time to comment on my image and offer your critiques @cgram43.
Thanks for your comments @Fidelito. I shot this image at a shutter speed of 1/800 and an aperture of f/4.5, so that is why the petals are not as sharp as the center of the flower. Using an aperture of 4.5 with as close as my lens was to the plant, I only got an inch or so of depth of field. My ISO was at 800 because it was an overcast day.
Thanks for the suggestion on the retouching. I never know how far to go with it, so opinions are helpful. Thank you again for the critique
Thank you very much for your suggestions @cgram43. I cropped the flower tight, so I can go back and add more space around it. I tend to crop tight, and I’m not sure why, but other people have mentioned to me before that I could use a little more room around my flowers. I went back into Lightroom and reworked the image. I was not able to add any more room at the bottom of the flower, but I did add some more at the top. I also adjusted the exposure slightly. What do you think?
If you want to try an entirely new concept, photograph the plant frozen over a light box. Place the plant in a square pan with just enough water to cover the plant. Let it freeze. Remove the frozen plant and place it on top of a light box and photograph it. It will look lovely. Another suggestion would be to place it on a scanner or directly on a light box to photograph it. Did you try a black background with a light shining on the plant? Just some ideas off the top of my head.
Oops, here is the image with the grid overlay…
Hi @esotericvision,
I agree with @tombeecroft in that the figures are too small for a “subject in context” shot. They get lost in the image and don’t provide any value. I cropped the image, converted it to black and white, increased the contrast, and overlaid a grid so you could see where the people fall in relation to the rule of thirds. Even with the tighter crop, the people are lost. My eyes tend to go to the waterfall first because it is a much larger element in the image than the people. Hope this helps.
