Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: PhillyPhotographer on January 14, 2009, 07:42:17 pm

Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on January 14, 2009, 07:42:17 pm
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/3191043873_b046bd7562_o.jpg)
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: John R on January 14, 2009, 08:25:38 pm
[quote name='PhillyPhotographer' post='252177' date='Jan 14 2009, 07:42 PM'[/quote]
Is Camden an area or type of camera? The sky looks somewhat diluted when I blow up your image. Is that backlighting?

John R
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on January 14, 2009, 08:40:28 pm
Quote from: John R
[quote name='PhillyPhotographer' post='252177' date='Jan 14 2009, 07:42 PM'
Is Camden an area or type of camera? The sky looks somewhat diluted when I blow up your image. Is that backlighting?

John R

That's a storm coming in.

Camden is the city to the left and Philadelphia to the right. Camden is always ranked the first or second most dangerous city in America.
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: deeyas on January 14, 2009, 09:32:07 pm
As always, outstanding work! You had mentioned the plugin used for the B&W images; was it photokit or silver efex? Regardless, an excellent job!
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: John R on January 14, 2009, 10:02:54 pm
Quote from: PhillyPhotographer
That's a storm coming in.

Camden is the city to the left and Philadelphia to the right. Camden is always ranked the first or second most dangerous city in America.
So that explains why I see some areas in deep shadow and the far right and left in more even overcast lighting. And you had to control that band of very strong light in the middle. At first I thought it was HDR (somehing new to me) but it looks like you did as before, dodge and burn. Well done. And thanks for the info on the Camden.

John R
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on January 14, 2009, 10:28:26 pm
Quote from: John R
So that explains why I see some areas in deep shadow and the far right and left in more even overcast lighting. And you had to control that band of very strong light in the middle. At first I thought it was HDR (somehing new to me) but it looks like you did as before, dodge and burn. Well done. And thanks for the info on the Camden.

John R

This photo is three years old and shot before I knew what an HDR was   It was done with a Nikon d70 and it's a handheld 10 shot stitch.
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: Chairman Bill on January 15, 2009, 06:27:37 am
I thought it was going to be a comparative thing - Philly's skyline compared to that of the borough of Camden in London.
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: button on January 21, 2009, 11:32:31 am
Michael, I think I see where you're going with this shot- I see the "vs" theme, especially in the context of the brooding clouds: an imminent showdown!  Well done.

I have a couple of suggestions:

1)  I think the bridge line at the far left takes away from the shot.
2)  There is quite a bit of water (I realize that your height on the bridge was fixed).  Could you possibly stretch the shot, from top to bottom (15-20%) and then recrop, eliminating some of the water, to make the cities more prominent and possibly more ominous?  Also, how about increasing the contrast of the water, with perhaps some dodging/burning to add more drama?

John
Title: Camden vs Philly Panorama
Post by: DanVH on January 26, 2009, 08:15:26 pm
Quote from: PhillyPhotographer
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/3191043873_b046bd7562_o.jpg)
Nice pano, I have looked at a number of your B/W images that you have posted and am always taken by the tonal quality. I think that I recall a platinum toner from my dark room days that had the same effect. Very nice work, the city fathers should commission your work!
Dan