Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Double Arch  (Read 2730 times)

noknok

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Double Arch
« on: December 19, 2015, 05:45:30 pm »

Any advice on how to improve is appreciated
« Last Edit: December 19, 2015, 06:05:58 pm by noknok »
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Tower bridge
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2015, 05:59:05 pm »

No image. How are you trying to display it?

noknok

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2015, 06:08:17 pm »

I was trying to host from flickr. I changed it to photobucket and it appears to be working now.
Logged

sarrasani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 471
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2015, 06:20:17 pm »

spectacular scene and well captured.
Only, IMHO, those leaves (especially on the right) are a little distracting.
All the best,
sandro
Logged
Film cameras (13X18, 2,4X3,6), digital-foveon and digital-mosaic cameras.
Only manual focus lenses.

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4690
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #4 on: December 19, 2015, 06:45:03 pm »

Disagree on the leaves.  They balance the foliage on the left.  A little green complements the sandstone.

Great image. Where is this?
Logged

noknok

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2015, 06:46:37 pm »

It is Double Arch in Arches National Park, Moab, Utah
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2015, 06:21:40 pm »

Any advice on how to improve is appreciated...

The image appears over-processed. Looks like a HDR, where highlights ended up muddy and dull and shadows opened too much, losing natural mid-day contrast. White balance appears too warm as well.

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2015, 06:33:08 pm »

The image appears over-processed. Looks like a HDR, where highlights ended up muddy and dull and shadows opened too much, losing natural mid-day contrast. White balance appears too warm as well.
I think Sobodan has raised several good points.
The white balance really is far too warm.
I would also try increasing the contrast.
I would not edit out any of the foliage - the green complements the orange rock very well.

Baseline composition and exposure appear fine.

Tony Jay
Logged

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2798
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2015, 08:54:53 pm »

There are a lot of things working in this photograph - well captured. Compositionally, I have trouble with the main focus - the arches - being so centrally placed. The natural eye movement is through the arches but my eye doesn't feel compelled to through and around the whole photograph, except for the leaves along the mid-right that are coming out of nowhere. The bottom leaves on the right are fine and are needed for balance, but not the ones halfway up.

I think Slobodan and Tony have  already addressed the post-capture processing issues. In addition, consider where you are and when you're there... Given the time & location, there should be a greater feeling of harshness and definitely a colder tone overall. One might argue the colour of the rocks, being so warm, will cause a colour shift, but not in the sky which is clearly not a cold blue, but warmer as if at sunset, yet the shadows do not mirror that time of day.
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8961
    • site
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #9 on: December 21, 2015, 03:23:41 am »

Try monochrome?

Jeremy
Logged

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
    • advantica blog
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #10 on: December 21, 2015, 04:59:52 am »

Run it through Topaz Clarity

With your permission, I did:
« Last Edit: December 21, 2015, 05:05:58 am by LesPalenik »
Logged

Jens Peermann

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 273
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #11 on: December 21, 2015, 07:05:18 am »

Judging from the pinkish clouds there is an obvious white balance issue, which can be addresses in post processing. The lack of contrast has already mentioned, although Les' correction is quite a bit too strong. Subtle micro contrast would be more suited. I also agree with Terry's remarks regarding subject placement.
Logged

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2798
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2015, 02:33:46 pm »

Run it through Topaz Clarity

With your permission, I did:

Can't say this is any "better"; with the vibrancy turned up, it is akin to those paintings on black velvet. But that might be my "push-button art" prejudice showing through.
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com

sdwilsonsct

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3296
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2015, 07:26:29 pm »

To me, the desert sky seems dull and the greens too bright. The shadows could be darker. No disagreements with the earlier comments.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2015, 07:39:22 pm »

Run it through Topaz Clarity...

That would be like trying to make bread from an already baked cake :)

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
    • advantica blog
Re: Double Arch
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2015, 12:19:37 am »

Can't say this is any "better"; with the vibrancy turned up, it is akin to those paintings on black velvet. But that might be my "push-button art" prejudice showing through.

Quote
That would be like trying to make bread from an already baked cake :)

Push button or one click is the correct description. I did it just to point out an easy way out (however using a medium Topaz Clarity rather than their more drastic Adjust), and after all, as Slobodan mentions, I had to start with an already baked JPG. Now, I am also humble enough not to request hanging my rendition in a gallery.

In the end, we all apply our preferred kind and amount of processing. If you are fortunate to have your last name ending with "er", you could call those vivid renditions your "last name"+"izing", (i.e. Tender => tenderizing), but no such luck in my case. Perhaps it is also my slowly fading eyesight that keeps me pumping up those colors and contrast much more than I used to, and at the same time I find many other pictures too subtle and timid. In other words, I gravitate towards the Lik look.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2015, 12:49:49 am by LesPalenik »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up