Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Wind  (Read 1620 times)

maddogmurph

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1117
    • Maddog's Photography
Wind
« on: March 24, 2016, 08:29:36 pm »

Critique, Pref'd? Two shot blend for highlight recovery. Added the Alien Head since they are basically similar.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2016, 08:58:52 pm by maddogmurph »
Logged
Maddog Murph
www.depictionsofbeauty.com
Mostly here for constructive feedback.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Wind
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2016, 08:35:12 pm »

Looks artificial, sorry :(

maddogmurph

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1117
    • Maddog's Photography
Re: Wind
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2016, 08:57:55 pm »

Looks artificial, sorry :(
Oh well I'm glad I posted. Both of them? Hmm.
Logged
Maddog Murph
www.depictionsofbeauty.com
Mostly here for constructive feedback.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Wind
« Reply #3 on: March 25, 2016, 12:28:20 am »

I like Alien Head, but not the title.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

mlewis

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
Re: Wind
« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2016, 04:09:38 am »

Both the Wind images look wrong to me.  That beam of light looks bad and fake.  The Alien Head image is great.
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Wind
« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2016, 04:56:26 am »

I think you need clipped blacks for this to work? The lack of contrast is obvious.

maddogmurph

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1117
    • Maddog's Photography
Re: Wind
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2016, 05:42:36 am »

I think you need clipped blacks for this to work? The lack of contrast is obvious.
I'm not following. Here are the uncombined files. Nothing has been done to these files except raw processing.

Logged
Maddog Murph
www.depictionsofbeauty.com
Mostly here for constructive feedback.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Wind
« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2016, 07:26:47 am »

Because your raw files didn't have clipped blacks it doesn't mean that your final output shouldn't have them? Having said that this is obviously a matter of taste. Others have pointed out the artificial/fake appearance and my suggestion might change what you have presented?

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2798
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: Wind
« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2016, 03:30:18 pm »

I like the textures in the "wind" portion of the B&W version (and the background rock), but not the reverse haloing (dark haloing) around the spotlit section in the lower left - that's the part that, to me, makes it look artificial. Overall, the B&W works better than the colour - it certainly makes one stop, take a second look and wonder what one is looking at.
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Wind
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2016, 04:19:55 pm »

Your Wind3 looks almost right.

In your two OP photos, however, you've committed a crime against image rights. Not copyright, but an image's rights to be treated humanly and torture-free (you vote for Trump, by any chance?) :)

You took Wind3, which has the light shaft almost right, and lightened the background, while darkening the light, making it look like a paper cutout collage, and totally opposite of what brain expects to see (i.e., that light is, well, light, and non-lit objects are darker).

Processing artifacts (I suspect Clarity or excessive sharpening) do not help either the collage effect (the dark lines along the shaft):

the_marshall_101

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
Re: Wind
« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2016, 05:55:03 pm »

Wind3 looks pretty nicely exposed just as it is, with the exception of where the light shaft hits.  Not sure what you can do about that, it's just massive dynamic range difference.  The attempt to merge exposures hasn't really worked for me.  Would it look weird cropped out entirely?
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up