Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: sanfairyanne on October 12, 2011, 07:13:35 pm

Title: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 12, 2011, 07:13:35 pm
The first photograph I've attached was taken by a semi professional photographer, he's sold quite a few prints of this shot. His is the cloudless sky the first image. Mine was taken on a later year and I fully admit I copied his shot (I can't afford his work). I didn't set out to copy it but I was walking along saw the location and shot it the next day.

My shot with the clouds is the first hand processed HDR I've ever done. I've been studying Matt Kloskowski's book on Photoshop Layers.

Can I ask what you folks think of mine, I'm working on a poor quality laptop so can't be too sure if the colors are good or even if it's sharp. If it's ok I'd quite like to print it, this would make two firsts, my first hand HDR and my first print !

Incidentally the mountain is Cerro Fitz Roy in southern Patagonia, for me one of the most beautiful mountains in the world.


Thanks you.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on October 12, 2011, 11:09:40 pm
I like it. And I wouldn't have guessed that it was HDR. It works for me.

And IMHO yours with the clouds is more interesting than the blue sky one.

Eric
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on October 13, 2011, 03:20:29 am
I agree with Eric: yours is the more interesting shot, by far. I'm tempted to wonder why HDR was necessary, though: the scene doesn't immediately look as if it has greater dynamic range than a sensor could handle.

Jeremy
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 13, 2011, 06:08:57 am
Thank you both for taking the time to reply, I also thought mine was a better shot. I think I have slightly better foreground fall colors and yes the sky makes a more interesting image. It's just a shame I didn't see the composition myself. I think it did need HDR because of the range of light between snow and foreground.

I many have to get it printed now.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Dave (Isle of Skye) on October 13, 2011, 08:48:07 am
Being mister opposite as per usual, I prefer the first and original (semi-pro) image I am afraid, there is a lot more colour and higher degree of detail in the foreground trees and the mountains etc and as such, the image in general has far more depth to it and a feeling of being complete - yes I agree it would have been even better with something interesting happening in the sky, but none the less, the first image is definitely a more accomplished image in my opinion.

The second image (your image) isn't at all bad though and is a fair stab at what you were trying to achieve, so well done for that. I also suspect the first image was taken on either film or his res/hi spec digital camera, with a high spec lens etc, because the level of detail in the first image compared to your second image (good as it is) is substantially different and probably the main the reason I think the first image looks much the better of the two.

I wonder as you had the opportunity to take your image with clouds in the sky and I can only assume the other one didn't, that if you could have waited for the clouds to form into a more pleasing shape that replicated or accentuated the shape of the mountains better?

Dave (UK)
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 13, 2011, 09:45:26 am
Dave UK,

I met the photographer, he had an old series Canon DSLR, I can't remember which one I think it was a 1D, so pretty ancient. I used a Canon 5D2 with a 24-105 L lens. I hear what you say about waiting for the clouds to clear. I was at this location for three months. The first was spent finding locations, the second month (Feb) you couldn't see the mountain in all 30 days because it was covered in cloud. Even in March during the autumn the mountain was only visible a few day's in the month. The autumn colours that year died ever so quickly when a cold snap hit, in fact the day before I took this shot there was a lot of snow about. Shortly after taking this shot I literally ran to another location got a shot and then watched as the clouds enveloped the mountain. A few days later the colours were all gone.

Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: armand on October 13, 2011, 11:47:47 am
I think that the sharp edges/spikes of the mountains actually add a lot to the picture, and while clouds in the sky are often better than a clear sky, here it would have been helpful if they would replicate/accentuate those edges, as Dave said above, instead of hiding them.
I like them both, but prefer the one where you can see more of the mountains.

PS. one of explanations re the difference in colors might be the use of a polarizer ?
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 13, 2011, 12:37:01 pm
Yes I quite agree, I can't remember why I didn't use a polariser, I hope I didn't sound ungrateful Dave, your criticism is very much appreciated and I too feel my shot lacks the colour and detail. I don't  really know why, I shot it at the same time of year and the rising sun was not blanketed by haze so why don't I have that detail and colour. Is there something I could do in PP, I'm really a beginner with PP. As I explained this is my first stab at processing two images by hand in Layers. I shot this in RAW iso 100, f18 and bracketed three images.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 13, 2011, 12:55:05 pm
... why don't I have that detail and colour [?]...f18...

There you go... that is most likely the answer.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: RSL on October 13, 2011, 01:39:14 pm
Also, HDR doesn't help with sharpness, and tone mapping in HDR affects colors. But Slobodan may be able to fix it, Fairyanne. He's really good at that.

Slobodan, Haven't yet taken time out from packing for Florida to tell you: After an hour or so's work with the adjustment brush, grads, Photoshop enhancements, and a couple Viveza mods I finally got a PSD from the DNG at least as good, and maybe even better than the silk purse you made out of that sow's ear JPEG. It's been a long time since I worked that long with a shot, but it's also been a long time since I did a serious landscape. You saw the shortcomings right away, and after you made the changes I saw them too. I made a 13 x 19 on Hot Press Bright with my 3880 that's stunning. Thanks for the pointers.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Chairman Bill on October 13, 2011, 01:41:00 pm
A bit of cloud would add interest to the first shot, but even so, I prefer that one to your's - the light is simply better
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: fotometria gr on October 13, 2011, 02:39:50 pm
The first photograph I've attached was taken by a semi professional photographer, he's sold quite a few prints of this shot. His is the cloudless sky the first image. Mine was taken on a later year and I fully admit I copied his shot (I can't afford his work). I didn't set out to copy it but I was walking along saw the location and shot it the next day.

My shot with the clouds is the first hand processed HDR I've ever done. I've been studying Matt Kloskowski's book on Photoshop Layers.

Can I ask what you folks think of mine, I'm working on a poor quality laptop so can't be too sure if the colors are good or even if it's sharp. If it's ok I'd quite like to print it, this would make two firsts, my first hand HDR and my first print !

Incidentally the mountain is Cerro Fitz Roy in southern Patagonia, for me one of the most beautiful mountains in the world.


Thanks you.
The first one has much better perspective being shot with a telephoto and it has better control of perspective by being shot from higher up, it keeps the mountain in contact with the forest and thus it "communicates" the place better to the potential visitor, it relates them! The second one its been shot with a wider lens, from a lower level and thus increases the distance of the mountain from the forest, it differentiates them! The second one, tries to take advantage of the happening... but the foreground is distractive, ....too much info. It should have been shot past the forest and only concentrate to the mountain. Nothing that strikes me from an artistic point of view in both of them, but the first one, being technically correct, could be used as a good promotional photo professionally. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 14, 2011, 07:32:06 am
I've gone through my files and found one series of shots at f13 I'll play with that and see if the detail and colour improve but to be honest I can't tell any difference.

All the images were shot at 70mm. I didn't use a wide angle lens as Theodoros suggests. Theodoros my image looks only slightly lower, I was aware of the height issue at the time but I couldn't get further back because there's a river. I went to the opposite bank but the angle is all wrong. Even stood in the river it's wrong because the banks drop down too much. So I must have shot it from the same spot therefore with the same focal length (more or less). I have a Feisol tripod with a 59'' height, that's pretty high, but yes the other shot does show ever so slightly more mountain than foreground.

And to RSL, this isn't strictly speaking an HDR, there's no tone mapping I just blended the best attributes from two exposures in Layers.
I'm pretty disappointed with my photography, even attempting to copy someone's work (pretty low I know) I still get crap shots. Although as Theodoros points out there's nothing that strikes him in an artistic point of view from either image.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Dave (Isle of Skye) on October 14, 2011, 08:57:22 am
Yes I quite agree, I can't remember why I didn't use a polariser, I hope I didn't sound ungrateful Dave, your criticism is very much appreciated

Don't worry and no you don't sound ungrateful at all.

Using a polariser might well have worked to bump up the colours and darkened down the sky, but a word of warning - I find using polarisers can kill just as many images as they enhance, so for me, if I have to use one and I prefer not to, then I always try to dial it back to about half its maximum strength, or at least until I can see through the viewfinder, that the sky is as equally dark/light right across the frame as it can be. I really do not like the dark blue left or right corners I see in some images, where the photographer has simply stuck on a polariser, whacked it up to the max and fired off a shot – but maybe that’s just me. Also as I do quite a lot of pano stitching these days, then trying to stitch a sequence of incorrectly polarised images can be a total nightmare and lead to major disappointments.

If your colours are not popping as much as you would like and you would still prefer to "do it all in-camera”, then may I suggest you look towards buying a colour intensifying filter? I know Singh Ray sell these http://www.singh-ray.com/colorintens.html, but for the lens you mention, you will need the 77mm version and they are quite expensive, especially if you then have them shipped over to the UK from the States and add on the extra and punitive import duties, I know because I have done this, but I am sure that there must be a cheaper alternative out there somewhere by now.

Dave (UK)


Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 14, 2011, 12:00:47 pm
Dave,

I've made both those mistakes you mention. I've over polarised and I once left the polariser on when I did a pano, I ruined that pano', it had dark bands running down the image. I made 38 return visits attempting to get a nice sky like in the first pano' but never got the shot. I won't make that mistake again!

I didn't say anything about doing the work in camera. I alway shoot in RAW, the only thing I do in camera is the odd shot with a ND and a polariser and like you I back it off so as not to get that over dark sky.

I'm going to try to process the F13 soon and will post that.

Andy
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: louoates on October 14, 2011, 12:09:43 pm
I think the pro's shot would be more salable. The composition is near perfect, the colors saturated enough for the art show market, and the mountains are the clear focal point in their majesty. A bit postcardish but highly commercial. Your shot could be more interesting from a different perspective because the clouds are a great plus in that they occur infrequently.  But for me the foreground and the trees fight for attention and seem, on the monitor I have today, to be washed out.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 14, 2011, 12:21:33 pm
I agree the colours are pale. I just hope I can do something in PP to make my shot look more impressive. Obviously I didn't use a polariser so I can't change that but is there something I can do to make the colours pop?

At present I've just added a bit of saturation to the foreground with the Sponge tool in Photoshop. Then added a bit of sharpening. Please if anyone can suggest some magic I'd love to hear.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 14, 2011, 12:29:16 pm
I put this one together quickly, it was shot at f13 instead of f18. I blended a bit of light from the original shot onto this image then altered the hue in the colours of the foreground. I'm really just playing around, I'm a beginner in all aspects taking photographs and doing PP.

Again any advice would be hugely appreciated, you can have all the books in the world but they can never tell you what to do to a specific picture.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: louoates on October 14, 2011, 12:39:12 pm
For me you improved it. You'll get lots of other opinions on that. My best advice is to listen to all and then do what your eye and brain likes. Art is never a consensus thing.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Chairman Bill on October 14, 2011, 12:43:17 pm
Definitely an improvement
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 14, 2011, 12:52:52 pm
...
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 14, 2011, 12:55:31 pm
Thanks very much, I'll stop bothering everyone, I don't want to hog the forum. ;D
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on October 14, 2011, 01:57:18 pm
Yes, the new version's better.

And both of yours are better than the other guy's cloudless photo. His photo looks enough oversaturated to be unrealistic to me. I have spent a fair amount of time in mountainous situations and both of yours ring pretty true to me, whereas his still looks overcooked. I have never seen a sky that dark, even though skies are generally darker at high elevations (less atmosphere in the way).

I seem to be in a minority here, but I like my landscapes to look plausible.

Nice work. Keep it up, and don't bother with a polarizer above, say, 6000 feet elevation, IMHO.

Eric

P.S. I generally like the way Slobodan processes photos, but this time I think he overdid it. His version looks like overdone HDR to me. Sorry, Slobodan!
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: fotometria gr on October 14, 2011, 02:45:46 pm
I've gone through my files and found one series of shots at f13 I'll play with that and see if the detail and colour improve but to be honest I can't tell any difference.

All the images were shot at 70mm. I didn't use a wide angle lens as Theodoros suggests. Theodoros my image looks only slightly lower, I was aware of the height issue at the time but I couldn't get further back because there's a river. I went to the opposite bank but the angle is all wrong. Even stood in the river it's wrong because the banks drop down too much. So I must have shot it from the same spot therefore with the same focal length (more or less). I have a Feisol tripod with a 59'' height, that's pretty high, but yes the other shot does show ever so slightly more mountain than foreground.

And to RSL, this isn't strictly speaking an HDR, there's no tone mapping I just blended the best attributes from two exposures in Layers.
I'm pretty disappointed with my photography, even attempting to copy someone's work (pretty low I know) I still get crap shots. Although as Theodoros points out there's nothing that strikes him in an artistic point of view from either image.
I Didn't say a wide angle, I said a wider lens. The lens he has used is much more powerful than yours and the difference in height is not "slightly" its rather considerable, look at the perspective (or better "study" it) and you will realize that I am correct, I am not trying to judge you here, since you mentioned that you are a "starter", I am trying to help you so that you will advance earlier. Perspective control is a major aspect that you will have to master in your technique so that your photography will develop. My experience says that out there, there are many people that declare them selves as photographers but a few that are. You will have to reach a point where you vision the actual photo that you shoot, most people look through the viewfinder and think that what they see is the image, you 'll find (soon.... because I think I can see your passion to be a photographer) that when you will be able to vision the printed image when you look through the viewfinder,  ....you will have a new pair of eyes that will of course make your mind look better. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: fotometria gr on October 14, 2011, 02:58:28 pm
I've gone through my files and found one series of shots at f13 I'll play with that and see if the detail and colour improve but to be honest I can't tell any difference.

All the images were shot at 70mm. I didn't use a wide angle lens as Theodoros suggests. Theodoros my image looks only slightly lower, I was aware of the height issue at the time but I couldn't get further back because there's a river. I went to the opposite bank but the angle is all wrong. Even stood in the river it's wrong because the banks drop down too much. So I must have shot it from the same spot therefore with the same focal length (more or less). I have a Feisol tripod with a 59'' height, that's pretty high, but yes the other shot does show ever so slightly more mountain than foreground.

And to RSL, this isn't strictly speaking an HDR, there's no tone mapping I just blended the best attributes from two exposures in Layers.
I'm pretty disappointed with my photography, even attempting to copy someone's work (pretty low I know) I still get crap shots. Although as Theodoros points out there's nothing that strikes him in an artistic point of view from either image.
What I first quoted..., is exactly the same as what "louoates" quoted a few feedbacks later using only different words. So now you have two identical criticisms. It can't be an accident ...can it? Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 14, 2011, 03:14:28 pm
...

P.S. I generally like the way Slobodan processes photos, but this time I think he overdid it. His version looks like overdone HDR to me. Sorry, Slobodan!

Boooo!!!  ;D
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 14, 2011, 03:28:26 pm
Louoates say's the foreground and trees fight for attention, I can understand that, I guess at the time I liked their attention! Sorry to miss quote you Theodoros, you did indeed say a wider lens not a wide angle. Regarding the height, short of carrying a pair of step ladders (I've thought of it) there was no way I could get higher. I have studied both shots and yes the perspective appears higher in the pro shot. If you look very closely at the peaks, you have the largest to the right, then the next left (Cerro Poincenot) then another smaller one to the left and to the left of that a tiny peak. When I look at both shots that tiny peak seems the same. Is it possible the trees have grown in mine and are taking up more of the image. Also there is more snow in mine which may alter the perspective.

I'm going to go back one day and try again, if anyone has ever thought of going to Patagonia I can wholeheartedly recommend it. I stayed so long the locals thought I should have found a local girl and settled down. It will be coming into spring there now, a wonderful time to photograph the lakes as they begin to thaw. Can I suggest looking at Luis Franke's website, he has some wonderful images.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: fotometria gr on October 14, 2011, 04:05:28 pm
Louoates say's the foreground and trees fight for attention, I can understand that, I guess at the time I liked their attention! Sorry to miss quote you Theodoros, you did indeed say a wider lens not a wide angle. Regarding the height, short of carrying a pair of step ladders (I've thought of it) there was no way I could get higher. I have studied both shots and yes the perspective appears higher in the pro shot. If you look very closely at the peaks, you have the largest to the right, then the next left (Cerro Poincenot) then another smaller one to the left and to the left of that a tiny peak. When I look at both shots that tiny peak seems the same. Is it possible the trees have grown in mine and are taking up more of the image. Also there is more snow in mine which may alter the perspective.

I'm going to go back one day and try again, if anyone has ever thought of going to Patagonia I can wholeheartedly recommend it. I stayed so long the locals thought I should have found a local girl and settled down. It will be coming into spring there now, a wonderful time to photograph the lakes as they begin to thaw. Can I suggest looking at Luis Franke's website, he has some wonderful images.
I insist it wasn't shot from where you was standing, it was shot at more than double your distance from the trees (perhaps triple) and if you used a 70mm, then he used something like a 200 or so... He is considerably higher than you as well, next time you'll be there look behind you past the river and higher up. That's where he was. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 14, 2011, 09:45:38 pm
At Andrew's (sanfairyanne) request, I will provide the steps I took in getting to my version of his image. But before the how, I usually like to explain the why.

I agree with Lou's and Armand's comments. I also prefer the semi-pro's version for the similar reasons they do. The crucial differences are: 1. better light 2. use of a polarizer 3. different focal length and/or different standpoint 4. rule of thirds composition

It all boils down to the foreground in Andrew's image dominating it, instead of the mountains. The slight difference in perspective, coupled with positioning of the tree line roughly in the middle (instead into the lower third), HDR's color/contrast-mudding and a too bright foreground all contributed to the mountains playing the background to the foreground (pardon the pun), instead of being the center of interest.

The use of a polarizer: nothing wrong with using it full-strength on tele lenses. The uneven sky is typically a problem with ultra-wide lenses, i.e., wider than 28mm. Nothing wrong with a deep, dark, almost black sky, especially at those altitudes. One thing often overlooked when using a polarizer is that it acts as a natural fill-light (i.e., opens shadows). Hence using it kills two birds with one stone: you get a dramatic sky and a natural-looking shadows (no need for the dreaded HDR).

So, in light of the above, I did the following in Lightroom (no HDR though):

- cropped the bottom a bit to make the foreground less dominant and more within the lower third
- darkened the foreground with a graduated filter to further visually diminish its influence (minus 1.25 f/stop)
- used Recovery to prevent snowy highlights from blowing out
- opened up shadows just a bit (+10)
- used Punch preset (Clarity +50, Vibrance +25)
- used Vignette to frame and focus attention (-25/25, Amount/Midpoint)
- the most dramatic change is in the HSL panel, with the Blue +20/+40/-100 (Hue/Saturation/Luminance), done to mimic the use of a polarizer
- this turned the clouds a bit more bluish than desired, so I used a White Balance eyedropper to bring the clouds more toward neutral

Again, given that I was playing with a small jpeg, the numeric values and impact will likely be different when working with RAW, and the final result undoubtably better.

Did I go too far? Perhaps. Apart from the obvious that I did not want to spend too much time on someone else's photograph, my main idea was to demonstrate the possibilities, rather than seek perfection or universal approval. When/if Andrew decides to play with his RAW files, he will ultimately decide how far he is ready to go.
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 15, 2011, 02:23:26 am
Slobodan, Thanks very much for that reply, sorry I can't even read it right now as I'm about to jump on a plane to France. Will look into it thoroughly ASAP.

Regards Andrew
Title: Re: Please give your criticism
Post by: sanfairyanne on October 15, 2011, 02:22:51 pm
Slobodan, as I mentioned I'm pretty new to PP but I'm learning day by day, I understand what you did I'm just not quite competent to do all those things myself. Of course I realise I shouldn't necessarily try to replicate you're PP as others have said we all have a differing opinion of how a photograph should look. Eric for instance doesn't like the polarised look.

Theodoros you have made some very valuable comments regarding the compositon of the shot, the pro shot is more compressed, the distance between the mountain and the trees is significantly compressed. I did try shooting it across the river and couldn't find that angle. I guess once I'd convinced myself I was stood in the right place I just blindly accepted it. When I go back to Patagonia I'll definitely check it out. By the way thank you also for saying you think you can see my passion for being a photographer, I do have a passion for it and am learning more and more each shoot and each chapter of a PP book.

Thanks again to everyone, I'm shooting in the U.S next year but will be back in Patagonia in 2013.


Andy