Tranquility

[n3hle]

Went hiking in the mountians yesterday. What do you think of this shot?

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=3472501&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1

[Meerkat17]

I think I would have gone for less sky and concentrated on the main subject of the picture and its reflections in the water.

David

[ryuwulf]

I think I would have gone for less sky and concentrated on the main subject of the picture and its reflections in the water.

David

i kinda agree. The woods just clash too much. Reflections might be good.

How bout a B&W conversion. I you had a yellow filter on when you took that it might help??? just a suggestinon.

i do like the leaning tree.

cheers!!!

[n3hle]

Maybe this is better.
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=3474700&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1

[Meerkat17]

Much better for the upper half of the picture but how you going to add those reflections?

The reflections would need to be at least half as much again if not more.

By increasing the brightness its certainly brought out more detail which gives bottom two thirds a little more interest.

Nice try
David

[n3hle]

David, Is this what you ment? Thanks for the help. Rgrds, Kevin
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=3475379&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1

[Meerkat17]

Much better
Now if you darken it again slightly and then use a Unsharp Mask in PS with settings of about :

Amount = 40%
Radius = 7.0
Threshold = 0

You should get a nice sharp picture with a lot more interest than the first your submitted.
Cheers
David

[ecobo]

USM with Radius of 7.0??? Do you mean 0.7?
The max. USM Radius I've ever used was 6.0 pixels for a 4x3 meters billboard photo.
I recommend you to use these settings for a Web photo:
Amount: 75-125%
Radius: 0.4-0.8 pixels
Threshold: 2-3 levels

[Meerkat17]

USM with Radius of 7.0??? Do you mean 0.7?


A slight typo on my part, sorry