Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: louoates on April 16, 2012, 07:38:21 pm
-
This is one of my favorites from last week. Very overcast day. I chose b/w for this one. Your opinions are appreciated.
-
Impressive image!
I just wish I had been there to get a feel for the mood of the place.
Regards
Tony Jay
-
Works for me. Great processing.
-
Love the way the shape of the water body complements the rock.
-
I think you nailed it, both technically and compositionally. The B&W tonality is quite beautiful.
-
I was so disappointed when I arrived at the ocean that day. After driving 750 miles to get there I was thinking I had wasted my time. Lots of cloud cover and no real color that jumped out at me. And the constant threat of rain arguing for me to get off the beach and back into the car. This was not your post card picture-perfect day. But the ocean is a strangely powerful place to be. As I waited for the occasional rays of light to peek through, lots of potential compositions began to take shape. Maybe the sound of the surf drowns out the distractions and demands you concentrate only on what's in front of you. I spent about two hours at this spot and got two shots that were well worth my time getting there. We should pray for crappy weather more often. Here's the other one that I count as a keeper from that day.
-
Both of them are excellent.
-
Both of them are excellent.
+1
You're doing very well if you can get two keepers from one landscape shoot. I can't tell you how many times I've dragged my gear out to the middle of nowhere and had nothing to show for it at the end of the day.
-
They're both very good indeed. B&W is without doubt a superb way of getting keepers from an overcast day.
Jeremy
-
Very nice, I really like both shots but the second one is defintely a keeper. The B&W conversion really works well and adds to their appeal and I also agree that low light is good light.
These images have a nice ultra wide angle feel to them, can I ask what lens?
Dave
-
The lens is Canon EF zoom 16-35. Both shots are at 16mm. Both are stitched from 2 shots each.
-
The lens is Canon EF zoom 16-35. Both shots are at 16mm. Both are stitched from 2 shots each.
Ah. I have one of those also and have not used it as much as I ought to and I must admit I have never thought of using it for stitching, but I certainly will be doing now.
Thanks.
Dave
-
Dave, you've got to get real creative when using 16mm for stitching. I use the content aware fill with great abandon to fill or create image where the stitching software leaves things blank. I also will distort the horizon back to level if need be. Thanks to Photoshop, the drama the 16mm offers can be maintained without the usual tell-tale distortions the wide lens creates.
-
With all due respect, I feel that both images are way over-processed - at least that's how they look to me. Within 1/2 millisecond my brain said "Photoshop." Nothing wrong with PS, of course, but when overdone it takes the image too far from reality. The subject matter and composition are fine, but the tonality just looks phony and overdone.
-
I like your first picture very much. Because of the curves in the foreground the composition is much more dynamic than your 2nd picture. I also think your treatment of the tonal range produces excitement and shows off the turmoil in the sky and water. The coarse textures in the land add to the interest. The only thing that suggests overprocessing to me is the graininess noticeable most in the sky, which I get sometimes in Silver Efex Pro when I try for more structure (local contrast) than the exposure wants.