Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: New York City long exposure  (Read 5184 times)

Colorwave

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1006
    • Colorwave Imaging
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #20 on: June 29, 2013, 07:35:38 pm »

I think I'd prefer version 2.5, with processing somewhere between 2 and 3 (the duotone).  The black and white version is quite pleasing, as well.

Did you shoot any with a faster shutter speed?  Although I generally like silky water from long exposures, it might make for a stronger shot if the water to piling transition was more crisp, and mirrored the harder edges of the buildings against the sky.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 07:38:19 pm by Colorwave »
Logged
-Ron H.
[url=http://colorwaveimaging.com

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8915
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #21 on: June 29, 2013, 08:09:04 pm »

The nuclear pink is not exactly my cup of tea, but I am sure many might like it.

Ditto here, not my cup of tea.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8915
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #22 on: June 29, 2013, 08:15:10 pm »

Less colors focuses your attention on the composition and tonality more. I think this is good.  Put another way, the color wasn't reinforcing strength of the image in its echoing vertical lines.

Exactly, the colors are a distraction, like a cheap effect. The image doesn't deserve effects, certainly not cheap ones.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9024
    • site
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #23 on: June 30, 2013, 03:15:14 am »

Thanks! Here's a B&W conversion. How do you like it compared to the rest?

Best yet, I'd say.

Jeremy
Logged

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #24 on: June 30, 2013, 05:42:34 pm »

The original is better IMO. Nice shot.
Logged

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9024
    • site
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #25 on: July 01, 2013, 03:40:22 am »

I think we can reach a definite conclusion now. One of the four versions is better than the others; and which one depends on whose opinion is sought.  ;)

Jeremy
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: New York City long exposure
« Reply #26 on: July 01, 2013, 04:06:16 am »

I think we can reach a definite conclusion now. One of the four versions is better than the others; and which one depends on whose opinion is sought.  ;)

Jeremy

And there lies the problem. Not much reasoning to back up the opinions. What we DON'T want however is another Roger who could fill a page with his verbose, but something more than a one liner?
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up