Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Big Sur  (Read 1588 times)

Shakyphoto (Slim)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 256
    • Shakyphoto
Big Sur
« on: April 27, 2014, 12:22:57 pm »

Tripod Hole Locations in Big Sur.  The first two are 30 second exposures using Zeiss 21 and 35mm taken near Sundown.  The last is a 2 second exposure.
  
Bridging the Old and; New by shakyphoto, on Flickr

McWay for Water, Light and Time by shakyphoto, on Flickr

Froth by shakyphoto, on Flickr
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 02:15:30 pm by Slim »
Logged
Wandering the World, Watching for Wonders
http://www.shakyphoto.com
http://www.fb.com/Shakyphoto

Dave Pluimer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
    • Dave Pluimer Photography
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2014, 01:29:30 pm »

I like #1 more than #2. Nice composition and colors. I do think the water/foam is either overcooked or needs some work. I see some green tint that catches my attention.

In #2, I think the exposure looks to be a bit too long. The water/foam has gone a bit too far to nearly blown out and distracting. Lovely scene, though, in both images.
Logged

Shakyphoto (Slim)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 256
    • Shakyphoto
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2014, 02:20:26 pm »

I like #1 more than #2. Nice composition and colors. I do think the water/foam is either overcooked or needs some work. I see some green tint that catches my attention.

In #2, I think the exposure looks to be a bit too long. The water/foam has gone a bit too far to nearly blown out and distracting. Lovely scene, though, in both images.

Thanks of the f/b.
I took care of the green tint which I did not catch in processing in the 1st.  Using my 10ND filter puts a bluish green cast which I have to compensate for in processing.  I'm not too concerned about the foam in this one.  Trying to deemphasize the water anyway.

WRT to the long exposure, I just uploaded a 2 sec exposure of the same scene done at f2.0.  Also on the 30 sec exposure turned down the highlights to get a little bit more definition.
Logged
Wandering the World, Watching for Wonders
http://www.shakyphoto.com
http://www.fb.com/Shakyphoto

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13791
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2014, 04:11:55 am »

I like #1 very much and the cloudy sky helps a lot. Long exposure works very well here. I prefer #3 to #2, I'm with Dave on the exposure length, it's just a bit too much and I prefer the third image for that reason.
Logged
Francois

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7395
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2014, 06:32:52 am »

Wonderful locations.

#1 why is the sky and water so greyish, desaturated looking?

In the other I find the palm tree on the upper left a bit distracting, and kind of blocking the view.

Shakyphoto (Slim)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 256
    • Shakyphoto
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2014, 11:39:46 pm »

Wonderful locations.

#1 why is the sky and water so greyish, desaturated looking?

In the other I find the palm tree on the upper left a bit distracting, and kind of blocking the view.

I desaturated the ocean and sky to a black and white so that the light emphasized the coast line.
Logged
Wandering the World, Watching for Wonders
http://www.shakyphoto.com
http://www.fb.com/Shakyphoto

IcelandAurora

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
  • Driven by a passion for Landscape Photography
    • Iceland Aurora photo tours
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #6 on: May 01, 2014, 06:45:32 am »

They are all pretty good compositions, I prefer #3 for the reasons discussed above... also I love the colours.

I am wondering if the blurred palm leaves in the foreground are due to shutter speed or DOF?  I wonder if those being sharp(er) would improve the image?
Logged
Driven by a passion for landscape photography and Iceland
http://icelandaurora.com/tours/

MartinSpence

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
    • Martin Spence Photography
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #7 on: May 01, 2014, 09:17:08 am »

I prefer #3, the colours work for me whereas #1 they don't have the same appeal.

Shakyphoto (Slim)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 256
    • Shakyphoto
Re: Big Sur
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2014, 11:22:42 am »

They are all pretty good compositions, I prefer #3 for the reasons discussed above... also I love the colours.

I am wondering if the blurred palm leaves in the foreground are due to shutter speed or DOF?  I wonder if those being sharp(er) would improve the image?

The palm tree leaves were moving and so it was due to shutter speed.  DOF wasn't an issue.
Logged
Wandering the World, Watching for Wonders
http://www.shakyphoto.com
http://www.fb.com/Shakyphoto
Pages: [1]   Go Up