Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: armand on November 03, 2010, 01:17:04 pm
-
Arizona. I was browsing photos made there and trying to use my newly gained Lightroom knowledge ;D I wish I had the D90 at that time instead of the D50 as it's an amazing landscape to photograph.
I have few shots and I'm curious to see what you think, particularly if I can do a better job in LR.
-
Armand, #1 is a rather decent landscape photo, having several elements usually necessary for this type: dramatic sky, sun burst, leading lines, clear separation of foreground, middle ground and background, and (relatively) interesting foreground. The post-processing seems decent too. The only thing that I would try (to see if it works) is to slightly vignette (darken) the corners.
#2 has a dramatic sky, but a rather bland foreground… perhaps further cropping it out, into an even more panoramic format might help?
#3 is rather busy.
#4 has a potential, but I do not care much for the chosen colors (too blue, and sky too weak).
-
What precisely was your intent? I lived in Arizona for 25 years and revisited just 2 years ago. I know that colors can appear saturated in photos of that area, but these seem way over the top for my taste.
-
What precisely was your intent? I lived in Arizona for 25 years and revisited just 2 years ago. I know that colors can appear saturated in photos of that area, but these seem way over the top for my taste.
Are you referring to nr 3? In LR doesn't look that saturated as it looks in the browser but I know what you mean. I did increase the vibrance but didn't really touch the saturation. The lower part is oversaturated though, I'm not sure how it ended up this way, probably I'll start from the beginning again. It might be from the couple of graduated filters that I used. Anyway in my browser all the photos look oversaturated because it doesn't know how to deal with a high-gammut monitor.
On the others I didn't touch the saturation at all, and vibrance is somewhere from 20-40. I did use the camera landscape colors.
#1 is a rather decent landscape photo, having several elements usually necessary for this type: dramatic sky, sun burst, leading lines, clear separation of foreground, middle ground and background, and (relatively) interesting foreground. The post-processing seems decent too. The only thing that I would try (to see if it works) is to slightly vignette (darken) the corners.
One of the few photos where I had decent light. I actually stopped on the side of the road and had to work quite fast so I didn't realized my D50 was set on ISO800 which is usually good just for snapshots.
On the second the foreground is bland, and is already cropped. I was trying to keep a balance (following the rule of the thirds). Maybe I just just give up the fill light and let it darker.
On the 4th I kind of like that feeling of blue. It's more about the temperature setting. The one chosen by the camera makes it much bluer, the auto in LR takes the much of the blue out. My chosen temperature is quite close to the LR suggestion, I'll post another version that way.
-
the 4th shot, with WB auto as per LR (at 7500K) and 0 extra saturation or vibrance. 2 neutral graduated density filters at the top and at the bottom.
-
Are you referring to nr 3? In LR doesn't look that saturated as it looks in the browser but I know what you mean. I did increase the vibrance but didn't really touch the saturation. The lower part is oversaturated though, I'm not sure how it ended up this way, probably I'll start from the beginning again. It might be from the couple of graduated filters that I used. Anyway in my browser all the photos look oversaturated because it doesn't know how to deal with a high-gammut monitor.
On the others I didn't touch the saturation at all, and vibrance is somewhere from 20-40. I did use the camera landscape colors.
No, actually I was referring to #1,2 and 4. #3 looks like a Sedona photo that I've taken myself. I've stood in that part of the country, and #3 is the only one where the color rendition approaches reality. I just don't care for the colors on the others.
About using the landscape setting in camera: I did that on a few of mine and intensely disliked the result. Just my preference.
-
Armand,
#1 is the best of the four. I would lighten the vegetation to avoid the dark area on the horizon and below (probably caused by your ND filter). #4 is just too blue for my taste but it won't be easy to correct (shift blue hue? tone down blue sat? I don't know).
-
I had some time this weekend so I desaturated a little the 4th shot, here are 2 results.
-
Very much prefer the black and white for #4.
-
Very much prefer the black and white for #4.
Me too.
Eric
-
An older shot that I initially disregarded but after some minor touch up in LR I like it more, not a masterpiece but could do much worse. Does it look ok at least? Or it's a child only a father can love? ;D
-
i would consider keeping only the first cloud layer - i found my focus more on the foreground after blocking half the sky. The lightness distracts my focus on the rock and foreground.
Frank
-
Pretty decent.
I would darken the sky and foreground a bit, via vignetting perhaps, and open the middle ground a bit. The operative word is "a bit".
-
really like the perspective on number 1
-
It certainly has potential but my first thought was that I wanted to warm up the colour balance a bit. I realize it's early morning and the desert can be cold at night, but it looks 'too blue' to my eye.
Mike.
-
Pretty decent.
I would darken the sky and foreground a bit, via vignetting perhaps, and open the middle ground a bit. The operative word is "a bit".
Thanks for the input. The sky is a little darkened with a graduated filter, and there is some recovery on (at around 40%, beyond that it gives artifacts). I actually tried hard to brighten the foreground a little more, particularly as I plan to print it and so far the print version seem to be slightly darker than on my monitor (both calibrated).
It certainly has potential but my first thought was that I wanted to warm up the colour balance a bit. I realize it's early morning and the desert can be cold at night, but it looks 'too blue' to my eye.
Mike.
It's funny how powerful the WB can be. It's actually sunset. I think I'm just a cooler WB guy.
i would consider keeping only the first cloud layer - i found my focus more on the foreground after blocking half the sky. The lightness distracts my focus on the rock and foreground.
Frank
I didn't think about it, I'll give it a try. Or maybe darken the sky further (see above quote).
-
Here is a modified version
-
looks nice ! i would be tempted to buy a print :)
-
looks nice ! i would be tempted to buy a print :)
You actually made print one ;D On Hahnemuhle Bamboo so it's even warmer. Not the greatest amount of detail but in ~7.5x10" it's better than I expected (considering it's coming from a D50 and the aperture I used then was not optimal)