Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: The River Aare II - Artifacts  (Read 2404 times)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1577
The River Aare II - Artifacts
« on: January 19, 2019, 04:06:24 am »

In my picture of the Aare there were some flaws pointed out, among others the "halos" around the branches of the trees and the power lines nearby.

There were some solutions proposed (thank you very much) and I investigated (googled) a little about that problem myself
It seems that it happens now and then when merging pictures to HDR.
In the case of this picture I was just playing around with HDR and absolutely unaware of it.

I must confess that I didn't  notice the "hallowing" until told by members of LuLa. I had dismissed it as an optical illusion, sort of "moire"

The difference between the expert's hawk eyes and those of the newbie  ???
Still much to learn. Good so.


Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2019, 09:42:49 am »

That "problem" is a very minor technical issue that you now know how to overcome.
The important thing is: you have a good eye for scenes that attract you.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1577
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2019, 10:42:36 am »

That "problem" is a very minor technical issue that you now know how to overcome.
The important thing is: you have a good eye for scenes that attract you.

Nice words. Thank you  :)
Logged

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2798
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2019, 12:20:09 pm »

That "problem" is a very minor technical issue that you now know how to overcome.
The important thing is: you have a good eye for scenes that attract you.

+1

We’ve all been there. I clearly remember one of my first juried art shows. I submitted what to me was a beautiful black-and-white of animal footprints through snow and around cattails in a marsh. I was devastated when the juror pointed out the flaws. It was as if my photograph was accepted only to be criticized, but that was not the case at all. More importantly, I learned from the experience, as I do with each and every criticism (at least the ones I concur with!)  :)
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2019, 12:37:53 pm »

The way people get wrapped around the axle over minor technical flaws always cracks me up. Some of the greatest photographs in history have obvious technical flaws. Film was slow, resulting in unintended motion blur. Lenses were far from perfect, resulting in distortion and other lens difficulties. But it's what's in the picture that makes the picture, not minor technical problems.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1577
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2019, 03:12:05 pm »

Please don't take me wrong.
I have no problem with my minor problems. On the contrary, being pointed out is what makes things more interesting. There is always something to learn, something to do better.

And as far as I'm concerned, I always got good and friendly advice on almost anything I asked and am really grateful  :)


Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2019, 07:51:41 pm »

I'm glad to hear that, Rab. And I don't mean to knock criticism of technicalities. I just hate to see the technicalities overrule the basic rightness of the thing.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2019, 11:21:02 pm »

I'm glad to hear that, Rab. And I don't mean to knock criticism of technicalities. I just hate to see the technicalities overrule the basic rightness of the thing.
+1.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1103
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #8 on: January 20, 2019, 12:50:17 am »

The way people get wrapped around the axle over minor technical flaws always cracks me up. Some of the greatest photographs in history have obvious technical flaws. Film was slow, resulting in unintended motion blur. Lenses were far from perfect, resulting in distortion and other lens difficulties. But it's what's in the picture that makes the picture, not minor technical problems.

I agree, Russ.

Nothing wrong with trying to avoid the technical cavities as long it doesn’t overshadow what matters.
Logged

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1527
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #9 on: January 20, 2019, 03:43:17 am »

The way people get wrapped around the axle over minor technical flaws always cracks me up. Some of the greatest photographs in history have obvious technical flaws. Film was slow, resulting in unintended motion blur. Lenses were far from perfect, resulting in distortion and other lens difficulties. But it's what's in the picture that makes the picture, not minor technical problems.

Absolutely.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

John R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5248
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #10 on: January 20, 2019, 06:54:35 am »

I'm glad to hear that, Rab. And I don't mean to knock criticism of technicalities. I just hate to see the technicalities overrule the basic rightness of the thing.
All true. But in this age of digital photography, nobody in my club (or outside judges) would accept that technical flaws should appear in competition grade images. I found this out the hard way, coming from slides, where what you is what you get. I'm afraid we can never go back.

JR
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #11 on: January 20, 2019, 09:52:50 am »

All true. But in this age of digital photography, nobody in my club (or outside judges) would accept that technical flaws should appear in competition grade images. I found this out the hard way, coming from slides, where what you is what you get. I'm afraid we can never go back.

JR

Sorry to hear that, John. But did anyone explain what a "competition grade image" is? I guess they'd have thrown out nearly all of Erwitt's, or HCB's or Frank's. They wouldn't even have considered Winogrand's stuff because he didn't keep his horizons "straight."
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1527
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #12 on: January 20, 2019, 10:22:56 am »

People jump on the technical because it’s relatively easy. You can study, practice, spend money on good equipment and improve your skills. It is quantifiable, repeatable and can be fairly easily graded and scored. It’s an aspect of photography that attracts analytical thinkers, engineers and scientists. People with high levels of conscientiousness and also people that tend to be, although not always, more on the conservative side. People who like order and rules. Of course you get highly creative people in this segment. Great scientific theorists, brilliant engineers and so on but it’s rare.

Really great photography also needs above average levels of creativity. A personality trait usually accompanied by a more open personality, one less bothered by rules and following what others think. A less conservative personality, more open to different points of view.

And there is the problem with photography. It requires personality traits not commonly found in the same person. Not never, but seldom.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #13 on: January 20, 2019, 11:04:52 am »

I agree, Russ.

Nothing wrong with trying to avoid the technical cavities as long it doesn’t overshadow what matters.

Actually, Ivo, I suspect we agree on a lot of stuff. And yes, there's no reason to turn up one's nose at technical details. In landscape they're practically the whole thing. In street, where the action or the implication is the thing, they often shade into insignificance.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1103
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #14 on: January 20, 2019, 11:56:04 am »

Actually, Ivo, I suspect we agree on a lot of stuff. And yes, there's no reason to turn up one's nose at technical details. In landscape they're practically the whole thing. In street, where the action or the implication is the thing, they often shade into insignificance.

I have to agree again.









Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2019, 12:20:45 pm »

How about that?!!!
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1527
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2019, 12:21:46 pm »

Russ, Ivo, you guys are freaking me out. Stop it.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2019, 12:27:18 pm »

 8) ;D
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #18 on: January 20, 2019, 12:34:05 pm »

All true. But in this age of digital photography, nobody in my club (or outside judges) would accept that technical flaws should appear in competition grade images. I found this out the hard way, coming from slides, where what you is what you get. I'm afraid we can never go back.

JR

John, please, resign.

;-)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: The River Aare II - Artifacts
« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2019, 01:01:45 pm »

I was in a photo club once, and entered a still life shot with my aunt's Rollei. It was a delightful confection of a mandolin, a Chianti bottle and a third element that I have forgotten, except I know it was there (nothing to do with rule of thirds, by the way).

It was insulted for looking too professional... that was actually the kindest thing they could have told me, but it was enough for me to realise that camera clubs are for another sort of animal. As with my night school adventure, where the lecturer told me he'd pack in photography if, horrors, his pix resembled David Bailey's; in both cases, I never went back. I don't think we missed one another.

Rob
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up